Deerfield (Illinois) Bans All Semiautomatic Weapons; Residents Must Surrender Them Or Face Steep Fin

[thackney]

The "ordinance" in it's descriptives and the lists of makes and manufacturers cover ALL semi autos of any kind.

That isn't true.  It is a stupid and oppressive ordinance made up by wanna-be tyrants.  But it does not ban all semi-autos.

It is bad enough as it is.  We should not repeat false claims trying to tear it down.  It only makes us look unbelievable.

[Axeslinger]

That isn't true.  It is a stupid and oppressive ordinance made up by wanna-be tyrants.  But it does not ban all semi-autos.

It is bad enough as it is.  We should not repeat false claims trying to tear it down.  It only makes us look unbelievable.

@thackney
I’ll grant you the pistol exception...it does not ban standard semi-auto handguns...

BUT...please show the class some examples of semi-auto rifles that it does NOT ban (tube-fed .22s don’t count)


And regardless, we can piss and moan about this verbiage or this nuance all we want...the fact remains that the intent is clear here. 

Now what are the people of Deerfield gonna do?  Personally I’d like to see the city council receive some visitors to show them the error of their ways.

[thackney]

@thackney
I’ll grant you the pistol exception...it does not ban standard semi-auto handguns...

BUT...please show the class some examples of semi-auto rifles that it does NOT ban (tube-fed .22s don’t count)

It does ban some semi-auto handguns, just not all of them.

As for rifles not banned:

Browning BAR MK 3
http://www.browning.com/products/firearms/rifles/bar/current-production/bar-mk3-stalker.html



Benelli R1 Big Game Rifle
https://www.benelliusa.com/r1-big-game-rifle



RUGER MINI-14 RANCH RIFLE
https://ruger.com/products/mini14RanchRifle/specSheets/5805.html



And of course lots and lots of older rifles, but these stupid tyrants don't understand that most hunting rifle new models have gone to the style they are banning.

[INVAR]

The title is also false.  They are not banning all semi-auto, pistol or rifle.  I linked the actual ordinance above.  It bans their made up description of "assault" rifles and pistols.  Still a stupid ordinance.

You can play semantics all you like.  All it will take is one neighbor with a beef to report another neighbor and when the home is surrounded by SWAT and cops go in to 'secure' and search for weapons - they are going to take ANY and ALL firearms in the residence. Because getting them back is where the homeowner will spend a whole lot of money in attorneys fees and court expenses to try and get their property back, and their arms will be locked up for years until such improbable time as a Cook County Judge who is not a liberal Democrat will gavel the property be returned to the homeowner.

You can pretend that reality up there is not the case.  But, I used to live up there and got to experience something similar when Mt. Prospect did a similar ordinance back in '96.

The intent is NO firearms whatsoever permitted in village limits - and it will be administered in that manner.

[Axeslinger]

@thackney

You better reread that law.   The mini14 is explicitly banned...which means those others you listed with similar actions, etc were oversights which will be remedied as soon as they realize it.

[thackney]

@thackney

You better reread that law.   The mini14 is explicitly banned...which means those others you listed with similar actions, etc were oversights which will be remedied as soon as they realize it.

I missed that.  You are correct.  The Ranch Rifle is only a 5 round rifle and I was thinking it was "okay".

I guess it is too scary looking for them.

[txradioguy]

"The new ordinance also provides for confiscation and destruction of such firearms and their original capacity magazines," he continued. "What is particularly outrageous about this new law is that it levies fines of up to $1,000 a day against anyone who refuses to turn in their gun and magazines or move them out of the village by the time the ordinance takes effect in June. This certainly puts the lie to claims by anti-gunners that ‘nobody is coming to take your guns.'"

Confiscation? Who will they have going door to door inspecting and confiscating guns??? I wouldn't want to be that guy if he shows up at my home.

[catfish1957]

 I wouldn't want to be that guy if he shows up at my home.

Here in Texas?  Not enough hazard pay under the sun for that job.

[Restored]

I missed that.  You are correct.  The Ranch Rifle is only a 5 round rifle and I was thinking it was "okay".

I guess it is too scary looking for them.

Any rifle that can take a magazine is banned.

[INVAR]

Confiscation? Who will they have going door to door inspecting and confiscating guns??? I wouldn't want to be that guy if he shows up at my home.

SWAT and IL State Police.  Likely based on whatever neighbor snitches on them.

Then again, if you are in an apartment or rental unit - the village can do 'inspections' in your home to make sure it is 'up to code'.

Any remodeling or work being done in your home requires a village permit - and before you get one, your home requires 'inspection'.

They have their ways.  Not to mention economic punishment being applied for refusing to comply with a village ordinance.  Speaking from personal experience on that note.

[goatprairie]

Hordes of "police officers" invading homes nationwide to search for weapons? I'll believe it when I see it. It might fly in some liberal suburbs. But even many Chicago suburbs are heavily Republican.  One of my lib sisters who lives in DuPage County bemoans the fact that she is usually the only Democrat at neighborhood parties. And her husband is a Republican.
I doubt it would go over well in many states with large Dem populations...like my state, Wisconsin. The dirty secret is that many Dem voters in Wisconsin (and probably other midwestern states where hunting is popular) like guns about as much as conservative Republicans.
I'd like to see the Dem pol who  urges gun confiscation, including house to house searches, in Wisconsin. Big support in Madison, not much or any support in the rest of the state.

[Smokin Joe]

Any rifle that can take a magazine is banned.

The Mini-14, M-1A, and M1 Garand all have essentially the same action, with the salient difference being that the Garand uses an 8 round en bloc clip instead of a detachable (box) magazine.I wonder if that difference will be considered? (Not that you can't do almost as much damage with the Garand as the M-1A, you just have to reload.)

[Smokin Joe]

SWAT and IL State Police.  Likely based on whatever neighbor snitches on them.

Then again, if you are in an apartment or rental unit - the village can do 'inspections' in your home to make sure it is 'up to code'.

Any remodeling or work being done in your home requires a village permit - and before you get one, your home requires 'inspection'.

They have their ways.  Not to mention economic punishment being applied for refusing to comply with a village ordinance.  Speaking from personal experience on that note.

It has crossed my mind that those Liberals who have tried their d@mndest to start a civil war in other venues along race lines, especially, might be trying a new gambit to create an incident they can point to.

Has anyone thought of taking the city council to court? 18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law comes to mind....

       Section 241 of Title 18 is the civil rights conspiracy statute. Section 241 makes it unlawful for two or more persons to agree together to injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the Unites States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same). Unlike most conspiracy statutes, Section 241 does not require that one of the conspirators commit an overt act prior to the conspiracy becoming a crime.

    The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.

https://www.justice.gov/crt/conspiracy-against-rights

After Heller, the RKBA has been adjudicated an individual (Civil) Right --not that it wasn't before, but it's been ruled on now. This could backfire if it is played right in the right courtroom.

[the_doc]

It has crossed my mind that those Liberals who have tried their d@mndest to start a civil war in other venues along race lines, especially, might be trying a new gambit to create an incident they can point to.

Has anyone thought of taking the city council to court? 18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law comes to mind....
 https://www.justice.gov/crt/conspiracy-against-rights

After Heller, the RKBA has been adjudicated an individual (Civil) Right --not that it wasn't before, but it's been ruled on now. This could backfire if it is played right in the right courtroom.

I would think the DOJ should at least sue them.  Criminal penalties against the city council would be better though.

[Smokin Joe]

I would think the DOJ should at least sue them.  Criminal penalties against the city council would be better though.

I believe Civil action AND criminal charges can be brought to bear.

[Free Vulcan]

It has crossed my mind that those Liberals who have tried their d@mndest to start a civil war in other venues along race lines, especially, might be trying a new gambit to create an incident they can point to.

Has anyone thought of taking the city council to court? 18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law comes to mind....
 https://www.justice.gov/crt/conspiracy-against-rights

After Heller, the RKBA has been adjudicated an individual (Civil) Right --not that it wasn't before, but it's been ruled on now. This could backfire if it is played right in the right courtroom.

I know the Second Amendment Foundation has filed suit.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

I would think the DOJ should at least sue them.  Criminal penalties against the city council would be better though.

Not the City Council as an Entity but the Individual Members.

Take it out of the Individual Members pockets, not the tax payers, and watch a whole bunch of this gun grabbing crime wave through illegal fiat stop.

[Smokin Joe]

Not the City Council as an Entity but the Individual Members.

Take it out of the Individual Members pockets, not the tax payers, and watch a whole bunch of this gun grabbing crime wave through illegal fiat stop.

It is the individual members, who, under color of law, are conspiring to interfere with a Civil Right, so that would be appropriate, INHO.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

It is the individual members, who, under color of law, are conspiring to interfere with a Civil Right, so that would be appropriate, INHO.

Accompany the Federal Criminal Civil Rights (US 18 Sec 241 & 242) prosecutions with a common cause/mass Citizens as plaintiffs Civil RICO action.

Civil RICO brought by Govt (on behalf of Govt) is limited to recovery of the dollar amount of damages.

Civil RICO brought by Citizens is limited to 3 Times the dollar amount of damages.

Could get real pricey right quick depending on how many guns these dirtbags steal and fines they impose.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

RE: Standing/Cause to bring legal action

14th Amendment:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Clause 1 of Sec 1 certifies that Citizens are Citizens of the United States FIRST, and the State wherein they reside SECOND.

IE: The Federal Constitution/Bill of Rights has supremacy over the Rights of the individual States.

That also places States Rights SECOND to FEDERALLY PROTECTED RIGHTS in the 2nd clause, 5 times.