Second Amendment

My Family's Peashooter Is Now an Illegal 'Assault Weapon' in This Illinois Town

Deerfield would fine residents up to $1,000 for owning one of a dizzying array of firearms.

|

.22 rifle
David Coleman/Dreamstime.com

Though my parents were hardly gun nuts, our family did keep on hand an old semi-automatic .22 rifle with a fixed 14-round capacity magazine.

A magazine that size added convenience to the two or three days a year that we would go target shooting, as it reduced the number of times one would have to pause and reload—a laborious process that required rounds to be fed individually into the rifle's tubular magazine.

What was a convenient target shooter for us is a now deadly assault weapon in Deerfield, Illinois.

This Monday, the Village of Deerfield—a suburban town some 30 miles north of Chicago—passed a sweeping ban on any semi-automatic weapons that come with a fixed magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds. Also banned are semi-automatic rifles that both accept "high capacity magazines" and feature an adjustable stock, muzzle brake, or pistol grip.

The bill specifically bans AR-15s and a number of pistols and shotguns. After June 13, anyone caught within the town limits with one of these prohibited weapons will face up to $1,000 in daily fines per violation until said violation is corrected.

From USA Today to CNN, most media reports on the bill describe it as an "assault weapon" ban, which is perhaps understandable given that is how the authors themselves describe it. Few bother to note the incredibly common weapons that Deerfield officials have chosen to lump into this category. Weapons like my parents' rifle.

The sweeping nature of the law is matched by the sweeping social change the bill's authors expect it to engender. The legislation's text confidently declares it "may increase the public's sense of safety by effecting a cultural change which communicates the normative value that assault weapons should have no role or purpose in civil society."

Its authors likewise assert that the weapons they ban are "not reasonably necessary to protect an individual's right of self-defense."

A lot of the weapons that this ordinance would affect are not so much unnecessary for defense purposes as wholly inadequate for them. That includes my family's old rifle, which thanks to the small rounds it fired and the time it took to load would be pretty useless in scaring off home invaders.

Those same things that make the rifle a poor tool for defense also make it a poor tool for offense. Prohibiting it is both petty and overreaching.

Richard Pearson, executive director of the Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA), made this point in response to the Deerfield ban, stating that "enacting bad public policy for the sake of 'doing something' is not the answer. Lawful citizens should not be forced to pay penance for the misdeeds of others."

The ISRA, in conjunction with the Second Amendment Foundation, filed a lawsuit against Deerfield yesterday, seeking to overturn its "assault weapons ban" as unconstitutional.

Should they succeed, the safety of Deerfield residents will not be diminished. But a few more families will be able to own an infrequently used sporting device without risking thousands of dollars in fines.

NEXT: Gawker Was Killed for Publishing Embarrassing Truths. That's Bad News.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “Assault weapon” means a gun that looks scary to the uninformed, but functions no different than other firearms.

    The Assault Weapons ban was born in deceit – in the words of gun control activist Josh Sugarmann on the pages of the Violence Policy Center, a gun ban group:

    Quote:
    Assault weapons – just like armor-piercing bullets, machine guns, and plastic firearms – are a new topic. The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons – anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun – can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.

    Link:

    Assault Weapons and Accessories in America (Violence Policy Center)

    It is amazing how many people have been taken in by this fraud.

    1. I remember the first time I heard of the VPC – it was coming across a paper they wrote on the (then) new SW .500 magnum and its revolver.

      They were against it because, according to the paper, criminals would be concealing this 9 pound, $3,000 dollar gun and then blowing through the body armor cops don’t wear anyway.

      1. Start making extra cash from home and get paid weekly… By completing freelance jobs you get online… I do this three hr every day, for five days weekly and I earn in this way an extra $2500 each week…

        Go this web and start your work.. Good luck… http://www.jobs63.com

      2. Start making extra cash from home and get paid weekly… By completing freelance jobs you get online… I do this three hr every day, for five days weekly and I earn in this way an extra $2500 each week… Go this web and start your work.. Good luck… http://www.jobs63.com

  2. So, this law admits to banning guns in common usage for self defense, on the grounds that they wish to change the culture?

    Isn’t that the opposite of what Heller and McDonald permitted?

    1. I think it is.

      The optimist in me is looking forward to over-reaches like this getting slapped down by courts.

      1. Idk. This is so blatantly unconstitutional that I’m surprised they even dared. Kinda worrisome.

        1. Although it is in Corruptionois!

    2. Thank God for Heller and McDonald!

      1. both Heller and McDonald have been willfully ignored by the lower courts with the blessings of SCOTUS. There is very little to thank anyone for them unless some meaningful changes at the top level begin to happen.

        1. The Sixth Court(?) in Illinois has been pretty good on the 2nd. They’ve been slapping down many of the more egregious bullshit that Chicago has tried to get away with since the McDonald ruling. Also, the Washington, DC court has struck down similar semi-auto bans that DC tried to enact post-Heller. I think The Sixth will probably not take kindly to this ordinance.

          1. Seventh.

  3. The NRA should coordinate a mass conceal carry day there. Let them try to enforce it with their puny police force.

    1. You only need one arrest to show standing. More SCOTUS case law at this time only stands to establish more precedents against gun control.

    2. Open Carry Texas is having a mass OPEN carry rally in Olmos Park tomorrow at noon.

  4. Few bother to note the incredibly common weapons that Deerfield officials have chosen to lump into this category.

    Why would they? This is a victory for journalists everywhere. No way will it be sabotaged by actual reporting.

    1. I have noted in my arguments with gun controllers lately that hard facts like the caliber and action of a gun and how it is used are now irrelevant to the discussion: all guns are now cursed talismans of Death that can be readily used in mass shootings.

      Ignorance and emotionalism are now considered to be strengths when it comes the gun control debate.

      1. My favorite in debating gun-grabbers is when they assert the “weapons of war” trope. I kindly point out that a smooth-bore, flintlock musket is literally a “weapon of war” that was used in multiple wars for multiple centuries. Technology changes, rights do not. The end.

        1. I was in a debate a couple weeks ago with a lady about how we used to have guns at school. She stated “well those were shotguns, which aren’t used in the military anyhow.” She got rather pissed and began moving the goal posts when I pointed out that, yes, shotguns are used by the military and have been used in every war since the revolution. She then tried the old trope that 5.56 mm crrates a more damaging wound than shotguns or pistols or larger Calibre rifles. She based this on a single article from a “trauma” surgeon. I pointed out that Newton’s laws of physics don’t change, that my .270 wsm travels at around the same velocity as a 5.56 (actually a touch faster) and fires a round 2.5 times the mass. On top of it I used either Barnes X or Hornady SST rounds which are designed for maximum, controlled expansion (whereas I fire FMJ ball rounds in my AR) so they are designed to cause maximum damage and the largest wound channel possible. Oh, and I was a LPN and medic assigned to a Combat Support Hospital for ten years and was also an instructor, so understand trauma from GSW quite well.

          1. in my experience, progressives in general and hoplophobes in particular, are impervious to uncontested facts and rock-solid analysis. Their mind is made up; it’s crystallized; and nothing – absolutely nothing – can change it.

          2. I read a physician’s article on ER work after Parkland. It was comparing the .223 wounds to handgun wounds. Most ER physicians never work on rifle wounds, just handgun wounds, so any rifle would would seem devastating.

  5. I am amazed at the stupidity of those who support gun control. This morning my wife and I were having this discussion. My wife is not conservative by any means but she said she wants someone to explain to her exactly what is an “assault weapon” and what does ” common sense gun legislation” mean. Her point is simple and supported by this article. When you attempt to define something by using arbitrary standards, the result is never what was intended. Under this law, all 22 rifles are “assault weapons” because those with fixed magazines hold 14 rds. and the rest have a detachable magazine. I will be curious to see the crime stats for this town in 1yr and 5yrs now that criminals know they have little or no chance of being shot.

    1. The utilitarian answer is to ban detachable magazines greater than 10 rounds.

      But the Parkland shooter supposedly used 10 round magazines (not googling to fact check at this time).

      However, if you point that out you get to “ban detachable magazines.”

      My fallback is that the whole point of the 2nd amendment is to kill tyrants, and to do that, I need effective weapons.

      In truth, I think the correct answer is that the 2nd amendment is designed to protect State militias from backdoor disarmament. So, the States have standing to challenge federal laws regarding “military” weapons and we don’t.

      Logically, the State could show that self defense usage is invariably less than 10 rounds whereas mass murders (or gang shootings) are the only events that use more. Therefore they are going to ban detachable magazines.

      However, this would have zero effect on the murder rate, because the murder rate is driven by the drug war.

      But, no one actually cares about that.

      1. I like to point it I can load my semi-automatic or pump shotgun without dismounting it from my shoulder.

      2. Maybe if we adopted Singapore’s methods, we could ein the drug war.

      3. The second amendment, like the rest of the bill of rights, and like the rest of the constitution, is to protect individual’s natural rights from government infringement. The second amendment in particular is not to protect the state’s anything. When the governor calls out the militia, the members of the militia (aka citizens) do not have to respond. The militia is made up of individuals, with their own weapons, and their own elected commanders, who volunteer service to a government (usually state of federal) for a specified time and/or place.

        1. Like Andrew Jackson put together a militia and took them to New Orleans against the British.

    2. .22s with a tubular magazine are exempt in this ordinance. The entire premise of the article is false. Page 6: http://www.deerfield.il.us/Doc…../View/1506

  6. Ironic how this passes a few weeks after people kept claiming it does not matter if gun control advocates get facts about guns wrong.

    1. It is amazing how huffy they get when you point out their mistakes or ask them a) define assault weapon and b) what are your “common-sense” controls.

      1. They get pissed when I point out that almost every so-called “assault weapon” can be simply and easily changed into a non-assault weapon because they are banning the cosmetic appearance. They get really pissed when I point out that semiautomatic firearms (pistol, rifle, & shotgun) have been produced by civilians for sale to civilians since ~1905 and are the most common type of firearm in usage today.

    2. They call it gunsplaining when you point out they are factually wrong, a play on mansplaining I suppose.

      There was the congresswoman who claimed that banning high capacity magazines would make assault weapons useless because once the bullets were shot out of the existing magazines, the guns would could not be fired because new magazines with bullets in them would no longer be available.

      When it was explained that the magazines could be reloaded with cartridges from a box of cartridges, the new claim was that the gun nuts had misquoted her. Of course she knew magazines could be reloaded with individual cartridges. It was the high capacity clips she meant: once the bullets were fired from the existing clips, the guns would be useless because new clips with bullets in them would be banned.

      Wow. Every second and third Saturday, March through September, I load cartridges into my old clips for my C96 Mauser and cartridges into the magazines for my M1 Carbine and M70AB2 and shoot in the matches at the gun club. I do the impossible. Gun control advocates don’t need no gunsplaining to write legislation, they just need an arrogant elitist self-righteous posture. It’ll be good because their intentions are good. And because their intentions are good, only the evil can contradict them.

    3. .22s with tubular magazines are an exception to this. It’s in the next section of the law. The author should have done his homework. I’m a pro-gun person, but facts matter, and the author missed the exception in the law. See the post by Corey Lynn to the actual law.

  7. How many murders involve more than 10 shots being fired by a single person?

    1. Pretty much all cop shootings

  8. “At least 2,623 bullets were fired by police in 435 shootings. In 235 of those incidents, officers struck at least one person; in another 200 shootings, officers missed entirely.”

    I think this is relevant data that suggests 2 things. Typical shootouts include a total of 6 shots fired (by one side). Cops have terrible aim.

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/…..story.html

    If gangsters have similar habits, then a 10 round magazine limit is not going to reduce the number of deaths.

    1. Does it say how many times they hit a dog?

    2. I was gonna say that a 10 rnd mag limit would limit police mag dumps to 10 rnds but, smh, of course they would be exempt.

      1. Cops? Follow the law? Surely you jest.

      2. Cops? Follow the law? Surely you jest.

      3. This law also exempts fformer cops.

    3. My dad fought in Vietnam. He had uncountable rounds fired at him including mortars and large artillery. Didn’t get a scratch. Hitting your target with a handgun is not as easy as people think it is.

      1. A big part of the problem cops have is that police forces like the New York police replace the 5 pound pull triggers that Glocks come with with 12 pound pull triggers. In the name of safety the police forces make them inaccurate.

        1. 12 pound “safety” triggers assure that you will have pull the gun off target by the time it goes off. The intended target is safer, but bystanders are not.

          One of the gun supply houses advertized a New York trigger kit for Glock pistols. I suspect they are only sold to repair NYPD pistols for current or retired NYPD officers.

  9. While I appreciate and agree with Britshtzchsgzi’s stance on the issue, the reporting is a bit narrow. Deefield’s ban is based on Highland Park’s most recent ban, which was upheld by the 7th Circuit and was refused by SCOTUS. IANAL but my understanding is that, therefore, means ‘Constitutional’. In any event, more than half a dozen IL suburbs and Cook County have similar long-standing bans. So, Deerfield, as may be well understood, is just the most recently surfaced tip of a larger iceberg.

    Locally, the ban is being sold on its ‘reasonableness’. Plenty of modern firearms are still available. There’s a 60-70 day grace period to turn in your guns or move them. There will be no door-to-door searches to find them (Gee, thanks) and you won’t be arrested or fined. There will be a $250 or in some cases up to $1000 per diem ‘storage and holding fee’ until you can securely transfer the guns out of Deerfield.

    I don’t agree with any of it except as explicitly where stated. Just an added $0.02.

    1. Also of note, the most recent shooting I’ve heard of in/around Deerfield occurred on Deerfield Road when a Chicago Aviation Officer attacked two civilians ‘armed’ only with BB guns (in the trunk), injuring one.

    2. The ban is unreasonable on several fronts.
      It isn’t just a ban on new weapon purchases, it heavily fines people for guns they already own. “No one is going to confiscate your guns” they say. No, they just make it too expensive to conitnue to own them.
      How is this not an illegal taking? Does the Fifth Amendment not apply in Illinois? Aren’t citizens of this town being effectively deprived of property they legally acquired?
      Not to mention the points raised in the article, that non-scary non-assault weapons are included in the ban.

      1. Does the Fifth Amendment not apply in Illinois?

        Uh, no.
        Nor the first (stop interfering with the cop taking your gun)
        Nor the second (you cannot have an arm)
        Nor the fourth (asset forfeiture)
        Nor the eighth (excessive fines)
        Nor the ninth (use of arms for self defense in addition to being available to a militia)

    3. There will be no door-to-door searches to find them

      bullshit.

      1. I’ll let you know when those start.

    4. The Virginia 1924 Racial Integrity Act stood. Then a mixed race couple, Mildred and Richard Loving visited family in Virginia, Virginia refused to recognize their Maryland marriage certificate and jailed them 1 year, they went to court and the Act was declared unconstitutional in 1967. The state finally repealed the Act in 1974-1975. The Act was based on eugenics and evolution theory and stood for 50 years. The hypotheticals supporting most gun laws are thinner than that and just as wrong-headed. Constitutional does not change the stupid status of a stupid law. Eventually smarter minds will prevail.

  10. “Our family did keep on hand an old semiautomatic .22 rifle with a fixed 14- round capacity magazine”

    Come on britches, don’t be so coy; we’re all gun nerds here (excepting maybe Tony). It was a Marlin Model 60, wasn’t it?

    And don’t pretend it’s harmless, either: millions of rabbits have died in mass shootings involving Model 60s over the past half century.

    With this law, lagomorphs of all species will finally be able to feel safe in Deerfield.

    1. Note the assault specific telescopic sight – – – – – – –

    2. Looks like the Sears Ted Williams edition of the High Standard .22 semi-automatic rifle. Note the wooden panels on the forearm that extend over the receiver and connect with the buttstock. I am sure a dedicated antigunner could invent an evil connotation for that.

      It is not a Marlin Model 60. I have have an old Model 60 that is my truck gun and a backup new in the box Model 60 with 22 inch barrel but the short 14-shot magazine imposed by the New Jersey assault weapon ban. I seriously believe I ought to order the original 18 shot magazine inner and outer tubes from Gun Parts Corp and upgrade it just because of this nonsense.

  11. Prohibiting it is both petty and overreaching.

    You forgot “unconstitutional”.

    -jcr

  12. “not reasonably necessary to protect an individual’s right of self-defense.”

    I’ll decide what is “reasonably necessary” to defend myself with, thank you very much.

    1. When someone points a gun most people on the other end don’t know the caliber they just no not to f with it. A 22 can be just as scary as any other gun, especially if you know how to shoot it

  13. The Left: “Donald Trump is a goose-stepping fascist who will declare martial law and send us to concentration camps for forced Bible study”

    Also The Left: “Only the police and military should be allowed to own guns”

    1. Also, semi-automatic pistols are the most commonly used gun for self defense. And this ban applies to many of those also. I personally prefer revolvers, but that is just my preference. My wife prefers he XD-40 or if she needs a long arm, my XM-15. She finds it easier to use then my 12.

  14. I’m not a lawyer, but I’m fairly certain that .22’s are an exception to the rule?

    “Large capacity magazine means any ammunition feeding device with the capacity
    to accept more than ten rounds, but shall not be construed to include the following:
    (1) A feeding device that has been permanently altered so that it cannot
    accommodate more than ten rounds.
    (2) A 22 caliber tube ammunition feeding device.
    (3) A tubular magazine that is contained in a lever-action firearm.”

    Page 6 of the amendment, page 85 of the document.

    Not that I agree with this new law. I just believe in accuracy.

    1. “Not that I agree with this new law. I just believe in accuracy.”

      Well, there goes your future career in journalism.

      Looks as if the Model 60 is still okay. And the Garand and SKS. 10/22s would be okay with the standard stock.

      It looks like the 1994 ban the way DiFi originally intended. I don’t see it passing muster with the courts.

    2. Typical; we are banning what we say are scary black guns, but a magazine over 10 rounds is not a magazine over 10 rounds when we say it is not. (items 2 & 3)

  15. That includes my family’s old rifle, which thanks to the small rounds it fired and the time it took to load would be pretty useless in scaring off home invaders.

    Shot placement is everything. Elephants, whales and countless human lives have been taken with .22 rimfire

    1. Elephants would just glare at you.

    2. “Shot placement is everything. Elephants, whales and countless human lives have been taken with .22 rimfire”

      It is an established fact that, for instance, a hand is made up of more ‘space’ than ‘material’. Therefore hand placement should allow one hand to pass through the other.
      SIV proves to be full of shit once more.

  16. The upside to this is this shitburg will now generate a healthy legal bill, which when pointed out by a local gun guy at the next council meeting, might provoke several much needed recall petitions.

    1. Didn’t the magazine ban in Colorado result in successful recalls?

  17. We had an old family rifle much like the one described here, albeit pump-action instead of semi-auto.

    Not only did we have it… I would somewhat regularly shoot it in the backyard of our suburban neighborhood lot, unsupervised, using sub-sonic ammo (legal in city limits) to plink targets. The house behind us and one door over was the chief of police, too. Nobody ever complained. The most dangerous thing that ever happened while doing it is that a rotten limb fell off the tree I was sitting under and hit me on the head.

  18. I am surprised! I also wonder why they did not outlaw all auto-loading weapons and only allow revolver with a max 2 inch barrel to be legal.

    1. Oh no, that’s too short. Might conceal it in your pocket.

      1. To gun banners, pistols are too big (“assault pistols”) or too small (“saturday night specials”).
        Honestly, it is hard for these Goldilocks to define a pistol that is “just right”.

    2. Because a bolt action short magazine Lee Enfield rifle, used by Great Britain in the war to end all war can be used to fire 20 to 30 AIMED rounds in one minute. (at 200 yards range)

      The end is confiscation of all firearms with or without repeal of the second amendment.

  19. This Monday, the Village of Deerfield?a suburban town some 30 miles north of Chicago?passed a sweeping ban on any semi-automatic weapons that come with a fixed magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds. Also banned are semi-automatic rifles that both accept “high capacity magazines” and feature an adjustable stock, muzzle brake, or pistol grip.

    What?
    No ban on the Shoulder Thing That Goes Up?

    Mebbe the Proggies are learning something …

  20. Every resident of Deerfield who is eligible under Illinois law should apply for a concealed carry permit. And then carry.

    1. Bullshit.
      No one should EVER comply with unconstitutional laws infringing on the second amendment.

  21. fucking commies can take my weapon from my cold dead hands. I’m willing to die to protect my rights. How about these commie punk ass losers? I don’t think so.

    Fuck off ass hat commie losers.

  22. What about the poor dude who drives through Deerfield on the way from somewhere else to someplace else? He has the gun locked up in the trunk, in a locked case, and his car gets rammed by some jerk in Deerfield. The cops come, check out both cars and arrest the guy passing through who had an otherwise legal gun in his trunk?

    This is a perfect example of why states need to have local pre-emption laws in place regarding gun laws. You need to have consistent laws throughout the state.

    I grew up in suburban Chicao, and I’m pretty sure you could still go hunting in Deerfield when I was a kid. I know there were places that are now part of Park Ridge and Des Plaines (nearby suburbs) where you could hunt pheasants, because I saw the hunters every fall. It’s too crowded for hunting now, but apparently the sissies have taken over in Deerfield.

    1. What about the poor dude who drives through Deerfield on the way from somewhere else to someplace else? He has the gun locked up in the trunk, in a locked case, and his car gets rammed by some jerk in Deerfield. The cops come, check out both cars and arrest the guy passing through who had an otherwise legal gun in his trunk?

      This is a perfect example of why states need to have local pre-emption laws in place regarding gun laws. You need to have consistent laws throughout the state.

      Illinois does have ‘safe passage’ laws. It’s application to handguns is pretty solid but long and/or assaulty-style weapons is not 100% consistent. I’ve never had to deal with it directly in IL or any other state, but I know I’ve heard people say ‘unloaded in IL is not unloaded in other states’. That, as long as there’s no round in the chamber and no magazine in the gun, it’s unloaded. Whereas CA, NY, and some other, even pro-2A states, consider a gun and ammunition in the same vehicle as a loaded weapon.

  23. Christian Britschgi went through great pains to include a link to the actual ban in his article. Unfortunately, he didn’t seem to read the document that he included. If he had read it he would have seen that the rifle he references in his story is not included in the ban. It clearly states that a rifle with a .22 caliber tube ammunition feeding device is exempt from the ban. Sometimes when you are very passionate about an issue you react before you think. He probably should have read it before writing the article. Oh well, things like this happen all the time. Just ask Donald.

    What isn’t clear to me is the capacity of handgun magazines. From what I gather, handguns are not affected.

    1. From what I gather, handguns are not affected.

      Yes. Specifically as advertised and/or by design. Nevermind that the overwhelming majority of gun homicides in Chicago, Cook County, and Deerfield are committed with handguns, the point is that someone somewhere shot someone else with something and, therefore, we must ban that something.

      1. Yep they ignore inconvenient facts. The same logic people use to outlaw semiautomatic rifles leads to outlawing semiautomatic pistols and revolvers. All of them can unload a load of bullets in a short amount of time, especially if you are packing multiple ones.

    2. To be fair, the exemption is on what? Page 85? Who has time to read such a long law? The summary is much easier to read, and xit’s still ridiculous, and still arbitrary and capricious, no matter how you slice it.

      To make matters worse, that exemption to the law is an amendment, so it might not have even been a part of the bill when this article was written.

      1. It’s on page 6.

  24. I am making $85/hour telecommuting. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is acquiring $10 thousand a month by working on the web, that was truly shocking for me, she prescribed me to attempt it. simply give it a shot on the accompanying site.

    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.Jobpost3.tk

  25. The gloves are off. The leftist in the Communist States of America are making plain there objectives with these unconstitutional edicts. The trouble at the moment is they have a number allies on the circuit courts who will agree with this nonsense. Unfortunately the SCOTUS is unlikely to weigh in until the balance of the court is more firmly established.

  26. Countless Millions of Americans are sick and tired of guns. Sick and tired of murders and mass murders with guns. Sick and tired of guns being easy for just about anyone to own. Sick and tired of gun owners spouting about their perceived rights based on an unclear and antiquated 200 year old amendment to our constitution that doesn’t relate to today’s society, crime, or mental health issues. Sick and tired of schools not being safe for children because of guns. Sick and tired of America having the highest crime and mass shooting rates of any country on the planet. Sick and tired of the Millions of guns being manufactured in this country every year. Sick and tired of the Hundreds of Millions of guns that exist in this country today. Sick and tired of gun stores and shows in our local communities. Sick and tired of the NRA representing rich gun companies and paying off politicians to advance their agendas. Sick and tired of the ridiculous slippery slope argument and fear mongering of “take one gun they’ll take them all”. Sick and tired of gun nuts and collectors that get their jollies out of shooting and bragging about, comparing, and loving their guns. Sick and tired that these gun nuts can’t find something better to do with their free time such as bowling, tennis, carpentry, music, art, reading, chess, basket weaving, bird watching, fishing, hang gliding, scuba diving, surfing, playing tiddlywinks, etc., dear Lord anything at all besides guns. SICK AND TIRED OF GUNS.

    1. Countless millions more are sick and tired of people like you, spewing forth all sorts of nonsense and lies.

    2. If you’re sick of guns, don’t own one.

      Oh, but you’re not sick of guns; you’re sick of not being able to tell other people–people who have not harmed anyone else, and never will–how to live their lives. You want to tell peaceful people how they should spend their free time because it offends your delicate sensibilities.

      You are factually incorrect on multiple fronts: the US absolutely doesn’t have the “highest crime and mass shooting rates of any country on the planet.” Less than 3% of homicides with children as victims occur on schools, so schools are about the safest place for kids.

      Shockingly, owning guns and “bowling, tennis, carpentry, music, art, reading, chess, basket weaving, bird watching, fishing, hang gliding, scuba diving, surfing, playing tiddlywinks” are not mutually exclusive.

      Thank you for this display of your ignorance, arrogance an sense of superiority that reminds me why I am a libertarian.

    3. The dries felt the same way about bibers and topers and we got the Prohibition Amendment and Volstead Act.
      SICK AND TIRED OF DEMON RUM.

  27. These ridiculous bans have always been about control, no matter how much they claim they are designed to “protect”.

    Intentionally vague wording that covers a large proportion of firearms, and official declarations that such arms “have no role or purpose in civil society” show their tyrannous thought process.

  28. You should fight.

  29. I question the quote, “may increase the public’s sense of safety by effecting a cultural change which communicates the normative value that assault weapons should have no role or purpose in civil society.” Please tell me about this civil society, this pharmaceutically created Utopia which has no crime, violence, drugs wars, or gangs. In a civilized society wouldn’t one be expected to respect privacy, the free market, and the right to own property? Would it not only punish criminals rather than force to coerce compliance with the whims of the cowardly and protected? Would personal responsibility not be a virtue?

    Robert A. Heinlein famously said, “An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.” Criminals prefer unarmed victims. Mass shooters love gun free zones. When will this law be enforced? When someone is forced to defend themselves or their home from violent criminals or when a jilted lover or scorned friend snitches for payback even if the gun owner was committing no other crime. Then on someone’s word a warrant would be issued to violate the sanctity of their home.

    Creating a nonsensical and unconstitutional law like this is a huge invitation for criminals. I hope the taxpaying citizens of Deerfield won’t have to pay too dearly to discover this.

  30. I had that rifle, too! No can or fishing bobber was safe when that bad boy came out. Crazy to think my $60 Marlin Model 60 would cost me $1,000 a day.

    Yes, the world has lost its compass. With the unprecedented access to information, we still let emotions and sound bites rule our decision making. What a disappointment.

  31. I make up to $90 an hour working from my home. My story is that I quit working at Walmart to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around $40h to $86h%u2026 Someone was good to me by sharing this link with me, so now i am hoping i could help someone else out there by sharing this link… Try it, you won’t regret it!……

    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.Jobpost3.tk

  32. That shouldn’t be considered illegal and neither should my two AR-15’s. It’s ridiculous and won’t last long under the eye of any judge who holds any value in the bill of rights.

    1. Aye, there’s the rub: how many judges are there, who respects the Bill of Rights?

  33. I’ve been showing people a picture of this rifle:

    http://www.thefirearmblog.com/…..e-chassis/

    Then asking them “Is this an assault weapon?”

    The number of people answering in the positive is indicative of their ignorance.

    Common responses when I point out that it is bolt-action rifle is that “It still looks like an AR-15.” and “Who needs a bipod on a gun?”

  34. There’s always one person who ruins everything, isn’t there? Again and again I wish Reason had “Ignore User” features.

  35. Looks like a Marlin. I gave my son one just like it for Christmas when he was 11 years old.

  36. Looks like a Marlin. I gave my son one just like it for Christmas when he was 11 years old.

  37. I make up to $90 an hour working from my home. My story is that I quit working at Walmart to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around $40h to $86h%u2026 Someone was good to me by sharing this link with me, so now i am hoping i could help someone else out there by sharing this link… Try it, you won’t regret it!……

    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.Jobpost3.tk

  38. So gun control really is one more front in the culture war? And that by the confiscationists own statements. Tell me again how it was the NRA who acted as aggressor and made gun control into part of the culture war?

  39. The ordinance specifically exempts .22 caliber tubular magazines. The entire premise of this article is false and was written by someone who didn’t even read the ordinance closely enough to understand their mistake. I would have expected more from Reason. See page 6 http://www.deerfield.il.us/Doc…..View/1506.

    1. Page six of how many? The DEM and GOP platforms run some 30,000 to 50,000 words, yet the Constitution is only about 7000. How about a cap on the number of pages in a law that infringes the Bill of Rights?

      1. Page 6 of 10. Is it too much to expect someone read all 10 pages of a law before making unfounded complaints?

  40. One might note, respecting this town ordinance, the following. Local government enacted this foolishness. Let them now enforce it.

  41. The Deerfield law does not make this 22 rifle illegal. The law specifically states that 22s with fixed tubular magazines are expressly excluded.

    Did the author of this simply not read the text of this ordinance? Did Mr. Britschgi not understand what he read? Or is he willfully misrepresenting the law in order to create a more sensational headline?

    Whether or not one is in favor of more or less gun control, I personally see this particular law as something of a publicity stunt, using deception to make your case should not be tolerated by anyone.

  42. “A lot of the weapons that this ordinance would affect are not so much unnecessary for defense purposes as wholly inadequate for them. That includes my family’s old rifle, which thanks to the small rounds it fired and the time it took to load would be pretty useless in scaring off home invaders.”

    ANY firearm is better than none for home defense. Someone who has broken into your house is going to be scared when ANY sort of gun is pointed at them. “The Armed Citizen” page in The American Rifleman has reprinted many articles over the decades of home invaders scared off and even killed by ‘peashooter’ .22 rimfire rifles like this one.

    Very often no shots need to be fired. The criminal sees the gun and runs because getting shot will hurt or might kill them.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.