Posted: 12/18/2006 6:31:49 PM EDT
|
HI Folks, Long time lurker, new poster. I come to this site to keep updated on ILL regulatory activities so I know when and who to call. I don't own an evil black rifle, but I do own a nice Evil Brown Rifle (Inland M1 carbine). I would also like to own a nice AR15 build and was about to get an FN/FAL worked up before the last election disaster. Then came the enhanced ban. I sent an e-mail to ISRA to try to get some guidance on the issue and received the following response from Mike Weisman.. I though I would pass it along: _________________________________________________________ Home Rule: If a town or village (Buffalo Grove in my case) has an ordinance regulating the sale of firearms, does it still override the county ban even if it is not as restrictive or if it fails to address these so called assault weapons directly? Is there any listing of towns where it does or doesn't apply (this would be a valuable member service). Home Rule: I'm unsure, we'll have to get legal opinion. Which version of the regulation passed? Is it the latter one without the M1 Carbine on the banned list? Which version: This one, 06-O-50 in this document: http://www.cookctyclerk.com/html/111406orddoc.htm I don;t see the M1 Carbine specifically listed. Why wasn't an alert posted before the vote? Suffredin and his backers swept it through. It was not on the published agenda for the Nov 14 board meeting. Not much but a start. I responded encouraging more info on the home rule part. My "understanding" like with many others, is that any regulation preempts the ban. But I would really hate to find out the hard way that I was wrong. |
Welcome!  I hope you brought more beer. (We need to drink ourselves into a stupor to forget about the bullshit we have to put up with in this state.)The M1 Carbine was removed from the banned list as a concession by Suffredin, I think suggested by the outgoing Commissioner Hanson. Regarding the home rule pre-emption thing, we debated this in the other thread (down to the legal mumbo jumbo) and we didn't have an answer. It's a grey area, that will only be determined and flushed out unfortunately through a legal challenge from somebody getting charged in a home rule municipality. Woe to the guinea pig, unless he's got good $$ for lawyers. |
) |
I live in Des Plaines, Illinois. I contacted our City Attorney's Office for clarification. The City Attorney told me that Des Plaines is a home rule city. Therefore, the Cook County AWB does not apply, since Des Plaines follows state firearm laws. HOWEVER... unincorporated areas are subject to county laws. So, home rule does allow the city to say the will or will not follow the AWB. But if you are unincorporated, the AWB applies to you. |
|
Check this out: www.celdf.org/HomeRule/DoesmyStatehaveHomeRule/IllinoisHomeRuleandMunicipalGovernment/NewHomeRuleCommunitiesinIllinois/tabid/290/Default.aspx New Home Rule Communities in Illinois New Home Rule Communities March 23, 2006 http://www.iml.org/npps/story.cfm?ID=725 Citizens in at least four Illinois communities voted to adopt home rule in Tuesday's primary election. Voters in Hazel Crest, Markham, Phoenix and West Frankfort adopted home rule which shifts greater responsibility for local government decision-making from the state to the local level. Hazel Crest voters supported a home rule question with 1,440 voters approving the change to home rule and 1,167 opposing it. The village plans to use home rule to generate revenue through sources such as liquor and cigarette taxes to support programs for seniors and youths. Hazel Crest voters rejected home rule by 46 votes in 2003. Home rule was approved in Markham by a 926 to 766 vote. City officials plan to use home rule powers to generate taxes to pay for repairs, create incentives to encourage development and to establish a municipal court. The community had sought home rule in 2002, but the measure was defeated by 200 votes. In Phoenix, home rule was approved by a 266 to 136 vote. The village plans to use home rule to allow for an easier process to demolish vacated properties and give the village leverage to create tax incentives for prospective businesses. West Franfort voters approved a measure to adopt home rule by a total of 907 to532. There are now 180 Illinois communities with home rule authority. Home Rule Municipalities www.iml.org/dbs/imllegal/dyncat.cfm?catid=77 As of 1/04/06 there were 176 Home Rule Municipalities in Illinois Addison Alsip Alton Arlington Heights Aurora Barrington Hills Bartlett Bartonville Bedford Park Belleville Bellwood Benton Berkeley Berwyn Bloomingdale Bloomington Bolingbrook Bridgeview Bryant Buffalo Grove Burbank Burnham Cahokia Calumet City Calumet Park Carbondale Carlock Carol Stream Carpentersville Carterville Champaign Channahon Chicago Chicago Heights Chicago Ridge Christopher Cicero Collinsville Country Club Hills Countryside Crainville Crystal Lake Danville Darien Decatur Deerfield DeKalb Des Plaines Dolton Downers Grove DuQuoin East Dundee East Hazel Crest East St. Louis Elgin Elk Grove Village Elmhurst Elmwood Park Elwood Evanston Evergreen Park Fairview Heights Flora Forest View Freeport Galesburg Glen Ellyn Glendale Heights Glenview Glenwood Golf Granite City Gurnee Hanover Park Harvey Harwood Heights Herrin Highland Park Hillside Hodgkins Hoffman Estates Hopkins Park Inverness Jacksonville Joliet Kankakee Lake Barrington Lansing Lincolnshire Lincolnwood Manhattan Marion Mascoutah Maywood McCook Mettawa Moline Monee Monmouth Morton Grove Mound City Mount Prospect Mount Vernon Muddy Mundelein Murphysboro Naperville Naples Nauvoo Niles Normal Norridge North Chicago Northbrook Northlake Oak Forest Oak Lawn Oak Park Oakbrook Terrace Old Mill Creek Onarga Orland Park Palatine Park City Park Forest Park Ridge Pekin Peoria Peoria Heights Peru Posen Prairie Grove Quincy Rantoul Robbins Rock Island Rockdale Rolling Meadows Romeoville Rosemont Round Lake Beach Saint Charles Sauget Schaumburg Schiller Park Sesser Sherman Skokie South Barrington South Holland Springfield Standard Stickney Stone Park Streamwood Sycamore Thornton Tilton Tinley Park Tuscola University Park Urbana Valmeyer Warrenville Washington Watseka Waukegan West Chicago West Dundee Wheaton Wheeling Wilmette Winnetka Woodridge |
| Still waiting on Hoffman Estate's final response on the issue. Last I spoke to the PD, they had the village attorney looking into it. Hopefully they make the same determination that Des Plaines did. If not, I'm hoping they'll change the local laws to overide it, as they do seem concerned with Cabelas setting up shop in town next year. Lots of tax dollars there. |
What was Hoffman Estate's gun laws prior to the AWB? Did they follow state laws? If so, since they are home rule, they will more than likely keep their laws as is. Good luck. |
Hoffman has a few firearms related laws, but nothing specifically pertaining to assault weapons. They already loosened their ordinances earlier in the year to get Cabelas to come out. My guess is that if they determine it applies here, they'll adjust the laws again so Cabelas doesn't back out. Can't imagine they'd be happy being told they can't sell hicap mags and such. |
|
The following is from one of the anti-gun legal websites (lcav.org) regarding "assault weapon" bans: "Aurora (§ 29-49), Chicago (§§ 8-24-025, 8-24-026), Cicero (§§ 62-260 and 62-261), Cook County (Ord. 93-0-46 and Ord. 99-0-27), Niles (§ 66-235; sales ban only) and Oak Park (§§ 27-1-2 and 27-2-1) have generally banned the transfer or possession of assault weapons. [Note: Berwyn (§ 838.03(c)), Calumet City (§ 54-702), Franklin Park (§ 3-13G-3) and Riverdale (§ 5.120.190), have provisions purporting to ban the sale and possession of assault weapons, but the term actually is defined to mean "machine guns," the sale and possession of which are already largely prohibited under state and federal law." I think that municipalities should follow the Berwyn, Franklin Park, etc. and define "assault weapons" the same way the military does: a selective fire weapon. |