judge gavel
Previous Post
Next Post

Things just got very real for the gun-grabbers behind the Illinois Firearm Ban Act. Last Monday the Illinois Gun Rights Alliance filed for a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the new gun ban in the Land of Lincoln. On Monday, the US District Court judge issued an order that sets up the Illinois Attorney General for an epic failure.

We got an early Valentine’s Day gift. I say “we” because Guns Save Life where I serve as Executive Director stands as a named plaintiff in the FFL-IL lawsuit. As for the gift, US District Court Judge Stephen McGlynn issued an order requiring the state to provide illustrative examples of each and every item banned under the Illinois Firearm Ban Act.

24 – Feb 13, 2023 – ORDER: Within the response to 16 Motion for Preliminary Injunction, Defendants shall provide illustrative examples of each and every item banned under 720 ILCS 5/24-1.9. Signed by Judge Stephen P. McGlynn on 2/13/2023. (jce)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED. (Entered: 02/13/2023)

Here’s the first of many problems for AG Kwame Raoul: there are so many variations in the guns listed in the ban law that identifying every forbidden firearm will prove, well, difficult at best. After all, there are so many makes, models and variations of America’s favorite rifle that providing illustrative examples of “each and every item” is damn-near impossible.

But wait, there’s more!

The new law also has more general “features” provisions that include far more makes and models of commonly sold firearms used for personal defense. Obviously this will prove to be a challenging endeavor for the guns alone.

And then there’s the entire issue of guns that are prohibited in other sections of the law as well. We’re not even sure the brain trust who drafted the bill understood just how broad the language they used was.

For example, there are the countless guns that can be “readily converted” to illegal configurations and therefore have become illegal to purchase or transfer under the new law. For example, popular shotguns like the Remington 870, the Winchester 1300, the Remington 11XX series and Mossberg 590s have all now become prohibited guns under the law.

That’s correct…many of the most popular pump-action shotguns ever made are now forbidden in Illinois.

Judge McGlynn’s order indicated he wants to see everything that will be banned under the law…including magazines. So…the AG will have to identify examples of every sort of standard and enhanced capacity magazine? The state’s response will look like a catalogue the size of a stack of ten phone books (remember those?).

What’s more, there are also all of the (now illegal) parts that can be used to make these guns “readily convertible” into scary, newly prohibited configurations. This includes parts like springs, pins, parts kits, trigger assemblies, bolt carrier groups, uppers, stocks, flash suppressors, even items like adjustable stocks.

The state’s catalog will look more like the Encyclopedia Britannica (remember those?).

Are you getting the picture yet? It’s doubtful that the state’s response will even begin to scratch the surface of everything that’s covered in the Illinois law. The fun part will be when we hammer their filing and point out dozens (hundreds?) of items they missed.

Here’s Todd Vandermyde’s delightful video on the news. Vandermyde worked as the NRA-ILA’s contract lobbyist in the Land of Lincoln for almost twenty years. Note that big, feces-eating grin on his face.

Tactically speaking, the best thing Gov. JB Pritzker and the Illinois General Assembly could do would be to repeal the “assault weapons” ban law and moot the case. But that would mean eating a huge crow sandwich in front of the establishment media, constituents, and the legislative leaders who ran this bill. To say nothing of killing one of Pritzker’s signature campaign pieces in any future run for President.

If the state doesn’t repeal the law, then the plaintiffs have a good chance of establishing the right to keep and bear America’s favorite rifles and countless other commonly-used firearms for self-defense. We could also establish a precedent protecting magazines, magazine parts, gun parts, transportation issues, and a whole lot more including homemade guns (cough ghost guns cough), and much more.

All because the gun-grabbers wanted to strike a blow against the gun culture in Illinois.



Previous Post
Next Post


    • Maybe the state will present an evidence photo of a pop tart gun? After all they had a cow over those too.
      Actually it says a lot when the judge has to tell the state to present evidence they already should have presented. Obviously the knee jerk hate based evidence the state used to pass their Gun Control rot didn’t fly in McGlynn’s court.

    • I’ll argue that it’s very necessary, as it points out their utter incompetence at crafting legislation.

      And if they do drop a mountain of paperwork on the judge’s desk, the judge can then point out in the ‘Heller’ decision’s “in common use” phrase used to describe what guns are expressly protected by the 2A.

      This judge is one sharp cookie, and has introduced a new weapon to fight those bastards… 🙂

      • in the sense that the legislation will eventually be neutered. not having passed the bill would, aside from new precedence, have had the same outcome.

        • The politicians pushing this will still look good to their constituents. They’ll blame the failure on the crazy gun nut culture and gun lobby. They’ll pretend like every high profile shooting henceforth could have been prevented with their legislation, while ignoring the urban body count.

        • Dude you are correct on the appeal to the masses despite the failure however being exposed as functionally retarded is both embarrassing to the control seekers and emboldening to others to attack them wherever possible.

    • maybe they figure they’re ultimately going to lose so they’re going all in to create multiple lawsuits to tie things up in court well into the foreseeable future…then it becomes a battle of the pocketbooks…

    • Yeah good newz. I guess. A local ILL gunshop(I bought a gat there) is loudly trumpeting “anyone who’s part of our lawsuit can buy whatever they want from us”! And hope they don’t get busted by an ILLANNOY State Po-leece jerk…so I can’t even get a Maverick88 Boch???

  1. “Here’s the first of many problems for AG Kwame Raoul: there are so many variations in the guns listed in the ban law that identifying every forbidden firearm will prove, well, difficult at best. After all, there are so many makes, models and variations of America’s favorite rifle that providing illustrative examples of “each and every item” is damn-near impossible.

    Judge McGlynn’s order indicated he wants to see everything that will be banned under the law…including magazines.

    Don’t get too excited about riding your expressed joy train yet. The order said “illustrative examples of each and every item banned under 720 ILCS 5/24-1.9.”

    an “illustrative example” only needs to illustrate an example or explanation of a ‘thing’ or ‘concept’ or ‘idea’. It does not need to be “illustrative” of an actual thing for every one of those things that exists. For example, showing any rifle with, say, a folding stock would illustrate a rifle, by example, with a folding stock and there would be no need to show all the different rifles with folding stocks that are banned.

      • you don’t get around it, no need to. You just show an an “illustrative example” that represents an example or explanation of “each and every”.

        For example, showing any rifle with, say, a folding stock would illustrate a rifle, by example, with a folding stock and there would be no need to actually show “each and every” different rifle with folding stocks that are banned. Its only asking for an “illustrative example” of each and every, not each and every actual item as an example.

        • I was thinking the same thing. This is the way all “features” bans that are extant in ban states work. If you have this feature or combination of features, then it is an “assault weapon” and banned. Some states you have to have two banned features, others only one. But if you remove the banned features and build a “featureless gun” you are good to go. The first bans listed specific firearms, but that was easily evaded, and thus features bans were the method to close that loop hole. To some extent anyway. There were still well engineered work-arounds.

        • Don’t believe that will pass muster with this judge. At last count the law would effectively ban 170 separate firearms as well as numerous magazines of different manufacturers. Many who do not make firearms. What the judge is basically asking for is a picture of each piece of evidence this law would affect.

      • A guy who wants to pretend he’s in touch with his roots, without having to actually relocate to his ancestral homeland and live like his cousins do. Sort of another “Pocahontas.”

        • 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
          Short, Sweet, to the Point and 100% True.
          Be like me changing my name to Tèarlach Colqraìbhne to get in touch with my Scots Gaelic roots.
          I can picture the announcer at both my High School and College graduations turning that into a complete pronunciation Fustercluck.

  2. …For example, there are the countless guns that can be “readily converted” to illegal configurations…

    …just about any longarm can be ‘readily converted’ to an SBR via vigorous application of a hacksaw. You say the Judge has ordered them “to provide illustrative examples of each and every item…”?

    Rollin’ on the floor, here. Does the judge realize this? I can’t decide if it’s funnier if he does, or doesn’t.

    • Unless it is specifically defined in the law (which I doubt since the ATF can’t seem to settle on a definition either, but admittedly I have not read the law), I think the judge is of the opinion that “easily converted to” is ambiguous and could conceivably be interpreted to apply to any firearm that with little effort could be made an illegal firearm, and thus constituted a total firearms ban. Moreover, there is no way that owners of current firearms could reasonable determine which of their guns are now banned, potentially turning all gun owners in the state into felons.

    • rosignol,

      And I imagine Illinois’ new law would also apply to all (or almost all) Glock handguns since it is easy to install auto-sears, correct?

  3. “Vandermyde worked as the NRA-ILA’s contract lobbyist in the Land of Lincoln for almost twenty years.”

    So he got paid for doing nothing? Nice gig. His testimony should be immediately discounted, since he’s not an expert at anything other than wasting time and money.

    (Am I getting this “oppose the NRA thing” right?)

      • But all the posters here from Illinoise (or any other state, really) tell me that

        “The NRA doesn’t do anything in my state!”

        So it would logically follow that a NRA lobbyist in Illinoise was paid for doing nothing.

        I’m just going by what I’ve been told.

        • Vandermyde bugged out when he got a better paying gig so I wouldn’t put much faith in him. That left Illinois with no representative from the NRA in Illinois. That I can confirm.

          My understanding is he is making money from his YouTube channel and selling gun parts. Someone from Illinois Carry said he is a serious alcoholic but I cannot confirm any of that.

          I’m pretty sure his only dog in this fight is his YouTube channel and the amount of hits he gets. From the look of the guy, he appears to be a drunk to me. This is going to piss Boch off but that’s my take on him.

  4. Ok we know the shooter is black. What race were the victims? That piece of the puzzle is left unstated because it most likely doesn’t fit into the left’s narrative that only white men are racist.
    If all the victims are white it is very suggestive of a targeted hate crime! He hit the admin building and the Student Union. As anyone knows who ever went to college the student Union is where all races, creeds and nationalities crowd for whatever reason. If the victims were all white the lame stream media will never say a word about motive leaving it as completely unknown!!

  5. For those keeping score…

    Last week a state appellate court upheld a restraining order against the Illinois law going into effect in a case filed by thousands of advocates and led by Accuracy Firearms, a dealer in Effingham, 101 miles (162 kilometers) northeast of St. Louis. A three-judge panel for the 5th District Appellate Court affirmed the restraining order issued Jan. 20 by a circuit judge in Effingham County.

    There have been three restraining orders issued against the Illinois law going into effect so far in the state.

    The latest restraining order was issued in Macon County on Wednesday.

    Last week, a judge in White County issued the second restraining order against the weapons ban, which applied to 1,690 citizens who filed the lawsuit.

    Last month, a judge in Effingham County issued the first restraining order, which affected 866 citizens.

    • There are currently 4 state level tros in place providing relief to approx 5000 IL FOID holders. There are also numerous FFLs covered by the 4 tros. Unfortunately for those not named or listed on the tro the legislation remains in effect.

    • Why are these being filed in state court and not in federal court so as to have state-wide effect? Do the federal trial courts have a history of antipathy to the Second Amendment? Is there any suggestion that those federal judges will not follow Bruen?

      • Why are these being filed in state court and not in federal court so as to have state-wide effect?

        A couple reasons. First filing in state court often provides quicker relief. 3 of the 4 cases were filed by the same attorney. The complaint argued violations of the Illinois state constitution. The tro was issued based on equal protection violations. The forth tro was issued on both equal protection and due process arguments. It is possible that the state case could be adjudicated through the Illinois Supreme Court in less than 1year. There are also some politics in play behind the state suits.

        There are also federal suits that have been filed and others in the works. Cases move much more slowly through the federal system.

        There is an argument that parallel state and federal litigation provides two bites at the apple.

  6. This is gonna be so good! I can’t wait for these people to realize how actually outnumbered they are and watch their support groups accomplish nothing. What happens when you alienate a group of people? I mean, they should know, with all their diversity training. So many people own these newly classified “assault weapons” – more than your old classification of them. Good fucken luck. Even if 1/10th of them is dumb enough to play ball you are still massively outnumbered. The funny part is though, some of the people that supported them in any way, maybe even unknowingly due to their fuddliness in support for “safer gun control laws”, are also a part of that group you have no alienated. That’s why I say 1/10th… because previously, you may have had about 1/7th the support. So by all mean, keep telling those judges on “your side” their hunting rifle, shotput shotgun or even handgun they keep in a locked box by their bed etc etc are now “assault weapons” and see where you end up with all these restrictions.

    Also, good luck with the “kia boys”. All it’s going to take is for these people to get their catalytic converter stolen or any type of confrontation by these groups for them to realize how defenseless they really are. Sad part to that is, there also exists the group that would blame someone else for not responding to help them fast enough. Especially when they capture it on video and realize police can’t do shit for more reasons than it’s even worth listing. At that point, the hopefulness lingers if they are ever even presented with some sort of investigation evidence and it STILL leaves them defenseless the whole time. Now you are on the police radar and criminals radar. And we all know how police just love to assume things are connected. Are you innocent? What if we say you are not, then what? What are you hiding?

    Good luck! You voted for it, you refuse to fight it, you stay there and tolerate it, you get what you deserve.

  7. Todd Vandermyde and John Boch are the two principal reasons that Illinois has a concealed carry law, the last State in the union to do so.
    To disparage either one of them in the fight for gun rights in Illinois is a gross display of total ignorance.

    • Having just escaped from Illinois to the free state of Arizona, and having worked in this space for a while, I agree. There is a reason that the MSR ban was only (until this legislation) in Cook County and that when the CCL law was passed it included preemption of local regulation of handguns, including magazines. The ISRA/NRA lobbyists worked long and hard to keep the Second Amendment alive in the rest of the state.

  8. Enough is enough. With a series of SCOTUS decisions with Bruen being the crown jewel, we need to get to the place where any politician who attempts to infringe on the Second Amendment needs to be held liable in a criminal court of law for willful opposition to the U.S. Constitution. These are not kids games they are playing, and they should be treated as the tyrannical adults they are.

    Murderers, armed robbers, rapists, and other violent criminals cause real harm to people, and we need the full exercise of our rights to repel them. And that liberty should never be touched!

  9. Upcoming on Commierado Legislature’s plate of Liberal wishes, is a bill to make carrying open or concealed on your own property illegal if County Board’s want to. Blatantly a challenge to Bruen, I so hope it gets s
    hoved up their collective Arses.
    The whole point of this Scheiße, is to bleed us and every advocacy group of money. Money spent in litigation. Part of the issue is I wouldn’t be surprised to see the State Courts uphold the Bill, meaning it’ll have to reach the Federal level to overturn it.

    • The one consolation of filing these cases as civil rights actions (which I’m sure they are) is that the prevailing plaintiff can be awarded attorneys fees, which in fact happened in a case in Illinois Federal court.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here