Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Firearm Regulations-Chicago

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Firearm Regulations-Chicago

    As a police officer (CPD or suburban) do you have to register all your weapons with the city or just your duty weapons? Does Chicago have a ordinace with assault rifles? This is refering to an officer residing in the city, not civilians. Can civilians even own assault rifles? (As in assault rifle I am referring to a common 5.56 AR-15 type of weapon, or maybe even a 7.62).
    Last edited by MorseAve1134; 12-09-2008, 02:32 AM.

  • #2
    Originally posted by MorseAve1134 View Post
    As a police officer (CPD or suburban) do you have to register all your weapons with the city or just your duty weapons? Does Chicago have a ordinace with assault rifles? This is refering to an officer residing in the city, not civilians. Can civilians even own assault rifles? (As in assault rifle I am referring to a common 5.56 AR-15 type of weapon, or maybe even a 7.62).
    Yes
    Yes
    No

    8-20-030 Definitions.

    As used in this Title 8:
    (h) “Assault weapon” means any of the following weapons:
    (1) Assault Rifles
    AK 47 type
    AK 47S type
    AK 74 type
    AKS type
    AKM type
    AKMS type
    84S1 type
    Arm type
    84S1 type
    84S3 type
    HK91 type
    HK93 type
    HK94 type
    G3SA type
    K1 type
    K2 type
    AR100 type
    M24S type
    SIG 550SP type
    SIG 551SP type
    Australian Automatic Arms
    SAR type
    SKS type with detachable magazine
    Colt AR-15
    Springfield Armory SAR-48
    Springfield Armory BM-59
    Bushmaster Auto Rifle
    Auto-Ordinance Thompson M1
    Ruger Mini 14/5F
    Federal XC-900 and XC-450
    Feather AT-9 Auto Carbine
    Goncz High Tech Carbine
    Auto-Ordinance Thompson 1927A1
    Iver Johnson PM30 P Paratrooper
    86S type
    86S7 type
    87S type
    Galil type
    Type 56 type
    Type 565 type
    Valmet M76 type
    Valmet M78 type
    M76 counter sniper type
    FAL type
    L1A1A type
    SAR 48 type
    AUG type
    FNC type
    Uzi carbine
    Algimec AGMI type
    AR180 type
    MAS 223 type
    Beretta BM59 type
    Beretta AR70 type
    CIS SR88 type
    (2) Assault Pistols
    Uzi type
    Heckler & Koch Sp-89 type
    Australian Automatic Arms SAP type,
    Spectre Auto type,
    Sterling Mark 7 type

    And then
    8-20-050 Unregisterable firearms.

    No registration certificate shall be issued for any of the following types of firearms:

    (e) Assault weapons, as defined in Section 8-20-030, unless they are owned by a person who is entitled to own them under Section 8-24-025.

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks for the response. Reason number 999,999,999 to move out of the city. I really respect you guys that stick around here forever, just way too many bs rules for me. Does the state have any specific laws against who may or may not own assault weapons and what type of assault weapons are legal/illegal?

      Comment


      • #4
        The state does not have a specific assault weapons ban. The only limitations on who can own are the FOID limitations and any court imposed sanctions.

        Comment


        • #5
          WHat will happen with the NRA lawsuit?

          Comment


          • #6
            The Mayor said he will fight the handgun ban that the city has in place. I wish he would just give it up already. Illinois and one other state are the only two without some type of handgun carry law.

            Comment


            • #7
              King Daley knows whats best....lol
              Gov Blagojevich - "I'am the American dream...."

              Comment


              • #8
                I don't agree with carry for Chicago. The mentality in this city doesn't call for that. BUT, allowing us to have a small armory in our homes is. I'm leaving the city the second my lease is up and never coming back. If only Cook allowed assault rifles :/

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by MorseAve1134 View Post
                  I don't agree with carry for Chicago. The mentality in this city doesn't call for that. BUT, allowing us to have a small armory in our homes is. I'm leaving the city the second my lease is up and never coming back. If only Cook allowed assault rifles :/
                  Why are you anti carry? Im just wondering not trying to start a world war

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    In a large city, especially one like Chicago, I don't think that the general public has the type of mentality an armed individual should have. We are a very hostile city, like most large cities. Very stressed. It would add violence to bars, traffic, events like the taste, etc. Of course what is stopping someone who purchased a weapon legally to carry? Nothing. But what is stopping someone from purchasing a weapon legally and illegally keeping it in their Chicago residence? Nothing. But the general public still usually follows rules. We allow them to own guns, they'll buy guns. We allow them to carry guns, they'll carry guns. Why? Because they can and it makes them feel big. I trust myself to carry, but I also have a lot of experience with them and see them as a tool, not some cool gadget to show off. That is why I'm anti-carry in the Chicago Land area. Not in other smaller regions.

                    Plus, the 2nd amendment was established to protect ourselves from an invading force or an oppressive government. It states nothing about allowing us to protect ourselves against the common thug. You know what will happen if someone is packing and they get their bag snatched? They're going to blow the guys head off while he's running away (or miss and kill a kid). As much as I would want to do the same thing (kill the bad guy, not the kid), it is not an equal or lesser punishment. I can't honestly say I would vote against it though, as crazy as everyone is I still am a better shot than them.
                    Last edited by MorseAve1134; 12-10-2008, 01:23 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by MorseAve1134 View Post
                      In a large city, especially one like Chicago, I don't think that the general public has the type of mentality an armed individual should have. We are a very hostile city, like most large cities. Very stressed. It would add violence to bars, traffic, events like the taste, etc. Of course what is stopping someone who purchased a weapon legally to carry? Nothing. But what is stopping someone from purchasing a weapon legally and illegally keeping it in their Chicago residence? Nothing. But the general public still usually follows rules. We allow them to own guns, they'll buy guns. We allow them to carry guns, they'll carry guns. Why? Because they can and it makes them feel big. I trust myself to carry, but I also have a lot of experience with them and see them as a tool, not some cool gadget to show off. That is why I'm anti-carry in the Chicago Land area. Not in other smaller regions.

                      Plus, the 2nd amendment was established to protect ourselves from an invading force or an oppressive government. It states nothing about allowing us to protect ourselves against the common thug. You know what will happen if someone is packing and they get their bag snatched? They're going to blow the guys head off while he's running away (or miss and kill a kid). As much as I would want to do the same thing (kill the bad guy, not the kid), it is not an equal or lesser punishment. I can't honestly say I would vote against it though, as crazy as everyone is I still am a better shot than them.
                      So its ok for you to carry, but not other everyday people? A little hypocritical, isn't it?

                      There are many large cities where people have the ability to lawfully carry a firearm. And there is no dramatic increase in crime but an actual decrease in violent crimes.

                      And the 2nd Amendment does say to the security of a free state, which would imply that you are secure in your own state. Not to mention that bear arms means carry arms.

                      I love the fact that you are a better shot than others, what does that mean? What about some of the NRA instructors, IDPA, IPPSCA, and other shooters? Are you better than them? Your post comes off as arrogant.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Chicago had the highest murder rate in the country this year. I know other states who allows their citizens to carry have less murder rates, but honestly if Chicago let people carry I can only see the crime rate going up instead of down. I could be completely wrong.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Oldskoolfan View Post
                          So its ok for you to carry, but not other everyday people? A little hypocritical, isn't it?
                          Seeing as how I'm trained and sound minded, I TRUST MYSELF over the general public. General public being everybody from the average college kid, to the girl working the tanning salon, to a school teacher, etc. I was an armed combatant and have been trained as such. Damn straight I trust myself over the general public, do you trust yourself over the general public?

                          Originally posted by Oldskoolfan View Post
                          There are many large cities where people have the ability to lawfully carry a firearm. And there is no dramatic increase in crime but an actual decrease in violent crimes.
                          While I haven't researched any case studies, I also don't have the desire to. IN MY OPINION, I don't trust most of the citizens in this city enough to carry a weapon anywhere they want. I think that there would be a decrease in burglary, robbery, assault, etc. but would be an increase in gun related crimes simply because people will think they are authorized to shoot when they aren't or because their temper gets the best of them.

                          Originally posted by Oldskoolfan View Post
                          And the 2nd Amendment does say to the security of a free state, which would imply that you are secure in your own state. Not to mention that bear arms means carry arms.
                          That is up for debate, and will lose in the supreme court. It is a plain word game.


                          Originally posted by Oldskoolfan View Post
                          I love the fact that you are a better shot than others, what does that mean? What about some of the NRA instructors, IDPA, IPPSCA, and other shooters? Are you better than them? Your post comes off as arrogant.
                          Of course I wasn't talking about professionals, I was talking about THE GENERAL PUBLIC. However it might come off, I don't care. I know damn well I'm a better shot than the general public. Are you a police officer? You better be a better shot too, and you better be confident in that. I am not an officer, but I do have Marine Corps training to back me up which I would say is more than the GENERAL PUBLIC.

                          My post was in response to another poster asking me why I believe what I believe. I'm not going to continue to argue my opinion, you can argue with the State of Illinois.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            The founding fathers believed in the INDIVIDUAL right to defend one's self. It was not just to defend against an invading army.

                            I don't trust most Chicagoans with vehicles, but I want them to have the right to use them after being properly trained.

                            It's all about freedom man. Take away one right and you're heading down a bad road. Let's keep taking away rights until we know we are all safe in our confining balls of laws and regulations.

                            I believe in common sense gun laws, but I believe I should have the right to own a handgun. (Certain people should not, just like some people can't have driver's licenses.)

                            On another note. I don't think people are buying more guns because they think Obama will outlaw them. I think they are buying them more because they are worried about increasing crime with the economy heading south. I could be wrong on that though. It's hard to tell what everyone is actually thinking.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I agree that people are most likely buying weapons because of the economy and social problems. As for what our founding fathers believed, that is just a matter of interpretation. Believe me when I say I am very pro-gun. I just don't think everyone should be walking around with guns nowadays. In their homes is another thing entirely though. We can agree to disagree, I'm not necessarily against carry, just don't think it's the best idea.

                              Comment

                              MR300x250 Tablet

                              Collapse

                              What's Going On

                              Collapse

                              There are currently 10852 users online. 368 members and 10484 guests.

                              Most users ever online was 19,482 at 12:44 PM on 09-29-2011.

                              Welcome Ad

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X