IL - Anti-gun Illinois legislator wants to re-define parts of the English language

[Dial 1911 for Help]

Back in October last year, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled (http://www.examiner.com/x-17034-Chicago-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m10d8-IL-Supreme-Court-affirms-that-IL-residents-may-transport-firearms-in-vehicle-consoles) that a vehicle's glove compartment or center console must be considered a "case," for purposes of Illinois gun law. This is significant (http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-17034-Chicago-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m10d7-Illinois-gun-owners-wait-for-tomorrows-Illinois-Supreme-Court-decision-on-guns-in-vehicles) because by Illinois law, not only does a firearm have to be unloaded when transporting it, it must also be "completely enclosed" in a "case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container." (http://www.isp.state.il.us/docs/1-154.pdf)

The Illinois Supreme Court ruled, in other words, that carrying an unloaded firearm in the glove compartment or center console is legal (provided that the person thus transporting the gun met all the other requirements for having a gun in the first place). Prior to that ruling, being "caught" with an unloaded firearm in the glove compartment would be enough to get one charged with a felony (and thus deprived of gun rights for life).

One might think that this is pretty small potatoes. The gun, after all, must be unloaded, and the person transporting it must have a valid Firearm Owners ID (FOID), meaning he has passed a criminal background check. Those thinking that these restrictions would reassure the nervous types, though, forget that this is Illinois we're talking about here. A CBS2 Chicago story, "Police Decry High Court Ruling On Guns In Cars", (http://cbs2chicago.com/politics/guns.in.cars.2.1304326.html) from shortly after the ruling, gives an amusing idea of the kind of hysteria generated in some circles. Rather than taking the time to go into that here, I'll just refer readers to a blog post of mine about it (http://armedandsafe.blogspot.com/2009/11/hysteria-about-il-supreme-court-guns-in.html).

The 3-minute video segment is funny enough to be worth a look. http://www.youtube.com/v/ub0CaAXfi08

Anyway--that's all background. The new news is that rabidly anti-gun Illinois Representative Linda Chapa LaVia (D-83rd District) (http://ilga.gov/house/Rep.asp?MemberID=1447) has introduced Illinois House Bill 5172 (http://ilga.gov/legislation/billstatus.asp?DocNum=5172&GAID=10&GA=96&DocTypeID=HB&LegID=50114&SessionID=76), to re-define glove compartments and center consoles as not being "cases."

Amends the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act and the Criminal Code of 1961. Provides that for the purposes of the exemptions from prosecution for the unlawful use of weapons, "enclosed in a case" or "enclosed in a suitable case" does not include the storage or transportation of a firearm in a glove box or center console of a motor vehicle.
In this, Representative Chapa LaVia would seem to be in disagreement with Merriam-Webster (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/case), since it would be difficult to argue that a glove compartment or center console is not "a box or receptacle for holding something.

"Re-defining words to suit their agenda is, of course, not a new trick for forcible citizen disarmament advocates. For years, we were told that "the people" meant "the National Guard," and that "shall not be infringed" means, well . . . nothing, really. Next to those examples, I suppose changing the definition of "case" is a small matter.

Here's a phrase that has kept the same meaning it held when King Leonidas I said it nearly 2500 years ago: Molon Labe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molon_labe). -- St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner

Link to Article (http://www.examiner.com/x-2581-St-Louis-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2010m2d2-Antigun-Illinois-legislator-wants-to-redefine-parts-of-the-English-language)

[Aguila Blanca]

Laws that refer to specific things often run into problems when the thing or things to which they refer are not defined in the law. Personally, as a professional writer and editor, I would not consider a vehicle's center console or glove box to be a "case," unless a law referring to case specifically defined it as such. "Receptacle," doubtful. "Container," ... possibly. "Compartment," certainly. "Case" ... not even close.

I don't see anything wrong with a law maker trying to tighten up the meaning of a law by providing a definition that has been shown to be lacking.

[Dial 1911 for Help]

Maybe before there was a ruling on it. Since the court ruled, it's not ambiguous any more.

[Patriotic]

Isn’t it all a matter of “intent”? If the matter of intent is to prevent the driver from ready access to the firearm then why would it be OK to have the firearm locked in a case that could be sitting on the front seat? Wouldn’t it be more meaningful to restrict having a firearm in the passenger compartment? In doing so, aren’t they taking away the ability of the driver to defend themselves? The entire thing is asinine.

[Aguila Blanca]

Maybe before there was a ruling on it. Since the court ruled, it's not ambiguous any more.
True, but if a court rules that what a law actually says is not what the legislature intended, it is not unusual for the legislature to then revise the law so it says what they intended it to say. I'm not saying I agree with any of Illinois' gun laws, but the legislator is following the accepted procedure for "fixing" what he considers a defect in the law.

Isn’t it all a matter of “intent”? If the matter of intent is to prevent the driver from ready access to the firearm then why would it be OK to have the firearm locked in a case that could be sitting on the front seat? Wouldn’t it be more meaningful to restrict having a firearm in the passenger compartment? In doing so, aren’t they taking away the ability of the driver to defend themselves? The entire thing is asinine.
Certainly the crux of the issue is the legislative intent. It seems clear that the intent is to prevent ready access to a firearm by a driver. But even the Federal government (in the FOPA) recognizes that not all personal vehicles have a trunk that's separate from the passenger compartment. The language of the FOPA (to which I don't have ready access at the moment, but you can look it up) calls for firearms being transported interstate to be unloaded and secured in the vehicle's trunk or, if the vehicle has not trunk, in a locked case.

Overall, it seems to me that the people of Illinois shouldn't waste effort arguing the semantics of whether or not a car's center console or glove box is a "case," and get busy repealing the more unconstitutional laws they have as well as unelecting some of the rabidly anti-gun legislators.