Judge Blocks Chicago Suburb from Confiscatory Gun Ban, Fining AR Owners $1,000 Per Day

The Second Amendment Foundation scored a big victory this week by convincing an Illinois judge to swat back a draconian gun ban that would fine those who refused to comply $1,000 per day.

Back in April, the village of Deerfield, Illinois voted to ban the sale, possession, and manufacture of “assault weapons” and “large capacity magazines” to “increase the public’s sense of safety.”  Problem is, under a state preemption law enacted in 2013, only the state Legislature can pass laws that regulate firearms.

The 2013 statute reads, “the regulation of the possession or ownership of assault weapons are exclusive powers and functions of this State. Any ordinance or regulation, or portion of that ordinance or regulation, that purports to regulate the possession or ownership of assault weapons in a manner that is inconsistent with this Act, shall be invalid…”

An outline of the Deerfield ban that was set to go into effect this week. (Photo: CBS 2)

SEE ALSO: Illinois Town to Fine AR Owners $1,000 Per Day to Increase ‘Public Sense of Safety’

SAF along with the Illinois State Rifle Association sued the Chicago suburb on behalf of Deerfield resident Danieal Easterday on the grounds that it violated that preemption statute.  On Tuesday, Judge Luis Berrones Lake County circuit court judge agreed, granting the injunction thus preventing the village from rolling out its “assault weapons” ban.

“We moved swiftly to challenge this gun ban because it flew in the face of state law,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb in a press release obtained by GunsAmerica. “The village tried to disguise its extremism as an amendment to an existing ordinance. The ordinance bans possession of legally-owned semi-auto firearms, with no exception for guns previously owned, or any provision for self-defense.

“Worse, still,” he added, “the ordinance also provided for confiscation and destruction of such firearms and their original capacity magazines. It was outrageous that the ban would levy fines of up to $1,000 a day against anyone who refused to turn in their gun and magazines or move them out of the village. This certainly puts the lie to claims by anti-gunners that ‘nobody is coming to take your guns.’”

Following the Judge’s ruling, Deerfield issued a statement saying that it will consider an appeal.

“We are reviewing with our legal team the full written opinion that the judge entered. We will, of course, honor the order issued by the court and temporarily not enforce the ordinance,” Deerfield said. “But we are certainly going to review all of the options available to the village, including the right to appeal the decision to the Illinois appellate court.”

About the author: S.H. Blannelberry is the News Editor of GunsAmerica.

{ 11 comments… add one }
  • JoshO June 17, 2018, 12:18 am

    Enough with all this bullshit: you want em? Come and take them, pussies.

  • Hondo June 16, 2018, 7:44 pm

    Three cheers for a judge that actually gets it.

  • Jake June 16, 2018, 1:30 pm

    These are the folks who watch MSNBC and Colbert and think they are informed.

  • Jack June 15, 2018, 12:43 pm

    Finally a sensible decision.

    A sense of safety? When was the last time a legal owner caused anyone to feel unsafe. 99.9999999% of legal gun owners do not tell anyone they are moving a gun between their house and the range for fun and recreation. Only the criminals show off their guns.

    This law was designed to support criminals and not the general public. Hopefully the city council will get voted out.

    • J June 15, 2018, 6:05 pm

      I guess the ‘right of the people to keep and BEAR arms’ only meant we were supposed to transport them from house to car in locked cases or else they’re criminals for ‘showing off their guns’.

  • Greg H. June 15, 2018, 10:07 am

    Virginia has had such a pre-emption law for years, and gun-hating liberal democrats have been trying for years to either gut it or get rid of it altogether. Without our pre-emption law, guns would most likely be effectively BANNED in the counties and/or cities of what us down-staters now call “Occupied Northern Virginia”, and a couple of other democrat-enslaved urban sewers as well.

  • G.O.A. Patriot June 15, 2018, 9:13 am

    Welcome to the state that gave us Barack Obummer!

    • Hondo June 17, 2018, 9:54 pm

      When did Kenya become a state ?

  • Dr Motown June 15, 2018, 8:36 am

    Ultimately, we need a SCOTUS with the cajones to stop all this nonsense from local community anti-gunners

  • Mike June 15, 2018, 5:35 am

    The judge should have taken it one step further. He should have made a ruling that made each and every person on the city council financially responsible for paying the court costs and attorney fees for this case having to go to court. He should also fine them a thousand dollars a day that said costs aren’t paid. They are doubling dipping the tax payer on this. Making them pay for their criminal activity

  • SuperG June 14, 2018, 11:10 am

    Sad that the state government didn’t jump to defend their own law, but instead sat on its hands while the citizens had to expend monies to fight it. Truly, not a government of the people.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend