Illinois Targeting Glock Handguns in Its Latest Gun Grab
Illinois Democrats will stop at nothing until the state government bans all guns.
You give them an inch…they’ll go a mile.
Illinois Democrats will stop at nothing until the state government bans all guns. The Illinois Supreme Court already upheld the ban on phantom “assault weapons” and large capacity magazines.
Chicago has already started the push to ban Glocks in the city.
State legislators want to do the same thing at the state level. Cam Edwards at Bearing Arms explains:
HB 4045 and its companion bill in the Senate would allow anyone who knowingly manufactures, sells, offers to sell, purchases, receives, manufactures, imports, or transfers a “convertible pistol” to be charged with unlawful possession of a weapon; a class 4 felony in the state punishable by a minimum of one year in prison and up to three years behind bars and a $25,000 fine. If the bill becomes law, gun dealers in Illinois could still sell Glocks to law enforcement and the military (as well as private security protecting nuclear sites), but selling some of the most popular pistols in the country to we the people would be a criminal offense.
I hate my home state so much.
“Switches make handguns significantly more dangerous and it’s far beyond time we directly address the carnage they cause in our communities,” said State Representative Justin Slaughter, sponsor of HB 4045. “This legislation has two aims: keep our communities safe and incentivize the gun industry to produce safer products. We are excited to introduce this legislation to our colleagues in Springfield.”
Cam pointed out that the possession of a switch is already against the law at the state and federal levels.
Plus, the Supreme Court ruled that banning handguns is unconstitutional.
Again, criminals do not care about laws. That’s why they’re criminals.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
How does this garbage not run a foul of the Bruin decision?
It does bear scrutiny. /ducking
🙂 🙂 🙂
That was supposed to be an uptick.
It likely does, but the left doesn’t care about the law.
They’re calling them “convertible firearms” and claiming they are dangerous and unusual.
Convertible? You can fire them with the top down?
Only if one is really limp wristed.
If the most popular handgun in the country, perhaps the world is unusual then what is usual? As for dangerous, it wouldn’t be much good if it wasn’t.
It’s the playbook.
What rifle are they trying to ban?
The most popular rifle in the country.
Banning just one model breaches the tent for the entire camel.
“Even though the modification to the handgun converting it to a fully automatic weapon is already illegal we’re going to ban the handgun to make it Double+ illegal…”
Which is pretty much akin to “We’re going to ban gasoline powered cars because you can use them to do donuts on our pride crosswalks.” Yes, there’s a LOT of things I could do to use legal products and tools in nefarious ways. You’d have to walk me all the way back to sticks and rocks to get even close to stopping me. (And it wouldn’t. I’m an engineer.)
If they want to save lives they could ban a lot of other things.
Hammers
Knives
Buffets
Maybe install a.version of those amusement park signs ‘you must be this tall to ride’ at the buffet except there’d be a cut out to walk through and if you didn’t fit, then just like an oversize carryon bag you ain’t walking in b/c y’all are already ‘too beaucoup’. Diabetes and obesity have killed more folks than the Vietnam War…and many other wars.
Never go Full UK
5 gallon buckets.
I am pretty certain that “spoon” will be listed on Rosie’s death certificate.
“You’d have to walk me all the way back to sticks and rocks to get even close to stopping me.”
But they wouldn’t ban sticks or rocks. You know, Gaia and all that.
Totally nefarious stuff you can do with rocks and sticks. I saw 2001 A Space Odyssey, that guy grabbed a femur and had a weapon of mass destruction
Look what john wick can do with a pencil.
That’s because Justin Slaughter is a double naught spy!
Next ban any ammunition that could be used in an automatic firearm.
Illinois dealers should refuse to sell glocks to police and security. If the populace can’t have it neither should the bodyguard for the so0called elites. Let them go elsewhere to get them.
Wanna bet that fat tub of lard has bodyguards with glocks?
Police and law enforcement agencies buy directly from Glock.
Didn’t know that. Glock should refuse to deliver them to Illinois to make a point. They won’t though unfortunately.
I’m trying to remember, I think it was Barrett that refused to sell a 50 caliber rifles to the state of California because they wouldn’t allow their citizens to have them.
It was but as I recall they refused to sell the rifles to any law enforcement agency in the state, not just to the state itself.
Not exclusively, many departments purchase guns and other equipment from LE distributers. Body armor, ammunition, uniforms etc.
Was it Barrett who refused to sell its rifles to law enforcement in California after that state banned their private ownership?
So glad I left the socialist utopia of the People’s Republic of Illinois many, many years ago. I am even ashamed to acknowledge I was born there.
There’s the real Illinois, and then there’s Chicago/Crook County. The two are not the same.
True.
But the democrat machine of Cook County rules with an iron fist. The only recourse for those Illinois residents fed up with the tyranny of the majority is to flee to a “freedom” state.
The sooner, the better.
“The sooner, the better.”
ISWYDT
Me too…the ashamed part as well.
Marxists grabbing guns and wiping out the 2nd Amendment
Democrats don’t care about the Constitution. That’s why they’re Democrats.
In your second paragraph, Mary, “large capacity” should also be in scare quotes.
What do they define as large? More than 10 or less than that?
More than ten is common. Some states, more than seven.
It’s a Democrap-shoot.
Same as “how many people make a mass shooting,” “how many years into adulthood can we still deny you your adult rights,” and “how old can a gunshot victim be and still be a ‘child?'”
They’d like to limit it to one. I don’t know how many times I’ve had people who know nothing about firearms tell me one bullet should be enough.
Yes, these people don’t even think beyond “lethal weapon.” It’s categorical – bullets out of guns kill people, so shoot him once and they’re dead. They really can’t live in a reality that has limitations and fuzzy edges.
There they go size shaming again.
The should ban buffets while they are at. Pritzker at a buffet definitely qualified as a weapon of mass destruction.
Please don’t look in a mirror. I say this for your own safety.
Shut up, you idiot.
I suspect your head is fatter than any part of me but sadly empty except for the “Trump” echoing inside it.
Switches make handguns significantly more dangerous
Well, I actually agree with this. A Glock on full-auto is typically uncontrollable, so you certainly can’t be safe shooting it. At least not in a situation where you need to be discriminate in hitting your target and only your target. Of course, that’s not what he means. He means they make the gun scarier.
could still sell Glocks to law enforcement and the military
Nope, no, and he** no. If civilians can’t have it, then neither can the police. And the active duty military would be out of their jurisdiction as to procurement. If they mean the State Guard units, then we’re back to that “the National Guard is the militia now” and that actually bolsters my argument for civilians.
BTW, this wouldn’t affect just Glocks, assuming they haven’t actually written a bill of attainder. Do y’all know they built fully automatic 1911s back in the day? They worked, but nobody wanted one because (same as for Glocks) they mostly just wasted ammo. Heck, with enough work, I think you could make some revolvers full-auto (but it would take some work).
And, of course, once again, it’s not the full-auto Glocks that are the problem. It’s the gang-bangers who use them that are the problem. If you didn’t have gang members running around Chicago in cars, shooting willy-nilly at people on the street (or other gang members) then them using full-auto vs semi-auto wouldn’t be a thing. Nor would your slander of “ghost guns” or any other magical talisman that makes them worrisome to you.
“If civilians can’t have it, then neither can the police.”
That’s called Ronny Barretting the state.
But only a few companies have the stones to do this.
Glock has already proven they’re too greedy to pursue this policy. Don’t expect them to stand up for your rights.
You can’t buy a full auto Glock.
The POLICE can, you idiot. Ever heard of the G18? Or is your gun knowledge as deep as your alleged legal knowledge?
Had you actually read his post, you’d have noted his one salient point: “If civilians can’t have it, then neither can the police.”
Which is the REAL point here.
I want the police to be able to win confrontations. The way to oppose the police is in court, not in a firefight.
If the courts won’t keep the cops under control, then that’s a problem in our legal system, and we have many. But cops’ job is to win any confrontation, while minimizing confrontations and completing their missions.
I’d say we have generally the opposite problem in our legal system: they handcuff the police. They have made cops afraid to do their jobs, and that will be very difficult to reverse. A cop can probably do his 20 years to pension without much personal legal risk, but in this environment it means he’ll be increasing the risk to the community because he’ll back off, maybe get an internal reprimand, and keep putting in the years til retirement.
Nowhere in my comment did I say that the correct way to oppose police is through a firefight.
What I DID do was quote the original poster.
Let me see if I can rephrase the OP’s comment so that you can understand it better….
“If the police have it, then citizens should have it too.”
And civilians should NOT be able to win confrontations? We just have to suck it up and die? We don’t also have a right to “go home at the end of the day”?
I see where your problem is. Can you?
This is a good example of cops being afraid to act, and thus needlessly putting the public in danger. There is also a bit of a suggestion that some of the participants need to find a different career. And a valuable lesson about not using a cardboard box for cover.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5IeTbAkc2A
Just for the record, the police are civilians too. They just operate under a government entity. Of course once they get “all tactical n shit” in their duty rigs, they start to think that they are military.
I watch po po bodycams a lot and I can safely say that there is a significant fraction of the current police (remember when most of the good ones quit) who should not be allowed to touch guns, or for that matter, pointy sticks.
My buddy with the Oerlikon will be interested to hear this.
Law enforcement can buy Class III firearms including those manufactured after 1986. Years ago, California purchased REAL M-4s from the government. They put a tab between the pistol grip and receiver to block out the selector from full auto. It was still a true assault rifle and with a socket wrench and three minutes, back to full auto. Local and state police used them as “patrol rifles”. Note, all of these laws don’t apply to government associated people… THEIR people.
It simply astounds me all the s*t you don’t know anything about, that you’re nonetheless positive of.
Monkey see, monkey do.
They’re just aping California.
(If the zoological metaphors offend you, substitute a “bandwagon” one.
They’re all a big circus no matter how you cut it.)
So presumably the State of Illinois is totes fine with folks keeping and bearing (in public) their revolvers, lever action rifles, bolt action rifles, pump shotgun and so forth that can’t be easily converted? Surely there’s an amendment to the legislation confirming that these sorts of firearms are A -OK for everyday Citizens to carry….right? /S
Just a thought: Firearms and ammo manufacturers could simply refuse to sell to Illinois law enforcement agencies. I suspect that would quickly get Springfield’s attention.
as history shows
if no one gets together and stands up to them
they win
first thing is go after allllllll the gun charge/weapon violations that the courts have dropped when a criminal is in front of them
plenty po videos on utube ( or at least there were) with obamas sons firing their glocks into the air and those glocks were “fully auto”
yet thats not who they want to go after
Why in the hell would anyone want a fully automatic Glock? After the second bullet was fired, it would be shooting at the sky. Only a gangsta would want one and then hold it horizontally like all gangsta’s do while mowing down his own gang.
You know why they hold the gun sideways? “Cause that’s the way it come out da box!” The cretins running Illinois can’t figure out how all the black kids in Chitown are shooting each other every day, what with all the gun laws they have passed. New gun laws do nothing but penalize law abiding citizens.
Dude, you know that Gangsters Don’t buy their weapons at a store. They buy them off other criminals on the street.
Because I want one, that’s why. Full auto Glocks are controllable with practice. Short bursts and a ported barrel like the G18C help. I want a Beretta 93R and a Stetchkin APS too.
The only downside of moving out of Baltimore was not being able to hang out with Bob anymore. He defined the word “character.”
https://www.mdshooters.com/threads/fully-automatic-beretta-92fs-dealer-sample-demo-firing-in-both-modes.284945/
He did register (20) 92 frames as fully transferable. When he put them on the market at $5K a pop people gasp. Today it would be “who do I make the check out to?” This was back when NIB Mac11’s were $400, vs today at $15K the last I saw. Hmmm, need to dig up the vid where we installed the Mac11 OS on an old fatMac SE.
What happens? Does it kick up on firing?
Any gun with a barrel over its center of gravity recoils upward.
To recoil downward, you’d need the opposite.
Theres a gun line called the Chiappa Rhino that doesn’t quite, but comes close.
Those are weird looking guns.
The present day gun control position is that anything beyond a single shot firearm…. barrel, receiver and trigger are “accoutrements” and not protected by 2A. That include sights…. not just scopes but little blade thingy up from and that notch in the back. Freedom of the press was not about reporters or news agencies…. it was about printing presses. There were attempts to register printing presses in the early 1800’s to control the dissemination of news and information. The Left’s model society looks much like the CCP… but that is just being redundant.
During the flu panic of 1917 Wilson’s government tried to control all information. They hired something like 100k people to do so and of course snitch on those not toting the government line. Sounds familiar? Progressives have to progress or something.
Since revolvers cannot be “switchable” to full automatic will they be removed from the assault weapon list and easily be available to IL residents who wish to exercise their SA right?