Interstate transportation of firearms

[OC for ME]

In Illinois, a cop cannot enforce the FOID card state law on a out of state-er. If a cop does he violates the feds law. Illinois supreme court stated so in a round about way. I'll try to find the case.

http://watchdog.org/39531/ilshn-supreme-court-says-only-residents-need-foid-gun-card/

http://www.state.il.us/court/Opinions/SupremeCourt/2011/April/109130.pdf

I don't know what your point is, but a cop who knows that a non-resident, transiting his state with a firearm possessed as the fed law states, goes ahead and arrests, as was done in Illinois, will be subject to civil penalties. This is not a complex situation. Cops should know about the federal exemption, "shall be entitled" is not a affirmative defense statement. By your logic "shall not be infringed" is a affirmative defense statement.

 

[notalawyer]

In Illinois, a cop cannot enforce the FOID card state law on a out of state-er. If a cop does he violates the feds law. Illinois supreme court stated so in a round about way. I'll try to find the case.

http://watchdog.org/39531/ilshn-supreme-court-says-only-residents-need-foid-gun-card/

http://www.state.il.us/court/Opinions/SupremeCourt/2011/April/109130.pdf

I don't know what your point is, but a cop who knows that a non-resident, transiting his state with a firearm possessed as the fed law states, goes ahead and arrests, as was done in Illinois, will be subject to civil penalties. This is not a complex situation. Cops should know about the federal exemption, "shall be entitled" is not a affirmative defense statement. By your logic "shall not be infringed" is a affirmative defense statement.

I don't know what your point is

That much is clear.

The case you provided has nothing, at all, to do with 18 USC 926A, the case was simply about the State failing to prove the elements of the crime of Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon (2 counts). :uhoh:

If a cop does he violates the feds law

Which law, specifically and what is the penalty for doing so?