Illionois has just made it illegal to own "assault weapons" and must register them to the state police. Does this include illegal aliens and criminals

[Mikeoxenormous]

MSN

‘Assault Weapons’ Are Now Banned, Here’s What You Need To Know

MSN

A federal judge ruled that the Second Amendment applies to illegal immigrants. U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman said that a federal law that makes it unlawful for undocumented individuals to own a gun is unconstitutional.
The case revolved around the June 2020 arrest of Heriberto Carbajal-Flores in Chicago for being an illegal immigrant in possession of a handgun. Carbajal-Flores argued that he had the gun for self-defense and had never been convicted of a violent crime.

So we know that the Constitution is there to protect US citizens from a rogue government that wants to take their rights away. But what Constitutional right does an illegal alien have to own a gun, because he committed a Felony just crossing the southern border. I think the Joe Biden admin wants to form his own army, and then go around breaking windows at night. What do you think?


Maybe we can get lucky and have a gun carrying illegal criminal shoot and kill that flaming liberal judge from Chicago...

 

[Magnus]

MSN
MSN So we know that the Constitution is there to protect US citizens from a rogue government that wants to take their rights away. But what Constitutional right does an illegal alien have to own a gun, because he committed a Felony just crossing the southern border. I think the Joe Biden admin wants to form his own army, and then go around breaking windows at night. What do you think?


Maybe we can get lucky and have a gun carrying illegal criminal shoot and kill that flaming liberal judge from Chicago...

No. This law only applies to MAGA retards. Happy?

 

[1srelluc]

During the "grace period" less than 2% complied.

Nice little law you got there.

 

[Leweman]

Illinois exists still?

 

[Death-Ninja]

No. This law only applies to MAGA retards. Happy?

No, happiness comes when we convert you animals into fertilizer....

 

[Oddball]

 

[pknopp]

MSN
MSN So we know that the Constitution is there to protect US citizens from a rogue government that wants to take their rights away. But what Constitutional right does an illegal alien have to own a gun, because he committed a Felony just crossing the southern border. I think the Joe Biden admin wants to form his own army, and then go around breaking windows at night. What do you think?


Maybe we can get lucky and have a gun carrying illegal criminal shoot and kill that flaming liberal judge from Chicago...

Crossing the border is a misdemeanor but you probably know that already. I know I've posted it enough times.

 

[1srelluc]

I'd never comply with a law like that and I can't say I know anyone that would.

 

[1srelluc]

Crossing the border is a misdemeanor but you probably know that already. I know I've posted it enough times.

Nobody believes nor likes you.

 

[Freedomisneverfree]

No. Illegals don't have to follow the rules of Americans.

 

[skews13]

During the "grace period" less than 2% complied.

Nice little law you got there.

No problem. These things take time. Don't get caught traveling with that unregistered weapon, because now the state owns it, and you get to spend some quality time in thug world at the local jail.

It is a nice little law isn't it?

 

[1srelluc]

No problem. These things take time. Don't get caught traveling with that unregistered weapon, because now the state owns it, and you get to spend some quality time in thug world at the local jail.

It is a nice little law isn't it?

I didn't lose anything in IL. Why would I want to go there?

 

[leftwinger]

I'd never comply with a law like that and I can't say I know anyone that would.

Maybe they go thru sales receipts and 3AM kick in doors of legit buyers for arrest? Criminals go free with AR15.

 

[whitehall]

At the stroke of a pen the liberal (ignorant) Illinois government turned law abiding citizens into felons and did nothing about the murder rate in Chicago. Way to go democrats.

 

[Magnus]

No, happiness comes when we convert you animals into fertilizer....

Spoken like a true dumb Nazi. Why am I not surprised. Back at ya, you fucking nazi whore.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Criminals cannot be prosecuted for failing to register their illegal weapons. This has been settled law since the Johnson administration.

 

[Magnus]

Criminals cannot be prosecuted for failing to register their illegal weapons. This has been settled law since the Johnson administration.

What the fuck are you babbling about? Prove it with a link. Go.

 

[Jarlaxle]

What the fuck are you babbling about? Prove it with a link. Go.

The case was Haynes vs United States, decided 1968. In a 7-1 ruling (Warren dissenting, Marshall wasn't on the Court for the whole case and did not participate), the Supreme Court decided that a prohibited person cannot be prosecuted for failing to comply with registration laws, on the grounds that doing so constituted self-incrimination.

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/390/85.html

Game, set, match, you lose.

 

[AZrailwhale]

What the fuck are you babbling about? Prove it with a link. Go.

SCOTUS ruled that it was a violation of their Fifth Amendment Right against self-incrimination. That was because it was a crime for them to possess firearms of any sort.

 

[Magnus]

The case was Haynes vs United States, decided 1968. In a 7-1 ruling (Warren dissenting, Marshall wasn't on the Court for the whole case and did not participate), the Supreme Court decided that a prohibited person cannot be prosecuted for failing to comply with registration laws, on the grounds that doing so constituted self-incrimination.

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/390/85.html

Game, set, match, you lose.

Thank you for following up and actually posting a link to support your case. This takes you a couple of notches over the usual idiots who come to argue with me. They usually keep arguing in circles without producing any links to back up their point.

Unfortunately, you only got it partly right. Yes, the 1967 Haynes vs United States did invalidate the National Fire Arm statutes.

However, the NFA was later amended in 1968 to remove the requirement for possessors of unregistered firearms to register them.
"Title II amended the NFA to cure the constitutional flaw pointed out in Haynes. "

National Firearms Act | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives


Prove me wrong. The ball is back in your court.