The Protect Illinois Communities Act (PICA), recently passed in Illinois, purports to enhance safety by regulating so-called "assault weapons" in the state. This legislation, while seemingly designed to reduce crime and violence, has sparked significant controversy and criticism, particularly from gun rights advocates and those who see the act as an ineffective and poorly conceived approach to public safety. Ironically, while named to "protect" Illinois communities, PICA arguably does little to accomplish this. Instead, it imposes broad and complex restrictions on firearms based primarily on cosmetic features and subjective definitions, requiring law-abiding citizens to navigate an overly bureaucratic system that targets specific guns and accessories with questionable rationale.
In this article, we will explore how PICA's approach to gun regulation, its overreach in defining "assault weapons" and "assault weapon attachments," and its confusing requirements for firearm registration create more obstacles for responsible gun owners than meaningful protections for Illinois communities. Additionally, we will review the legal responsibilities now placed on Illinois gun owners under this act, the exemptions allowed, and the role that our law firm, Mitchell S. Sexner & Associates LLC, can play in defending against related charges.
The Origins of PICA: A Law Based on Appearances, Not Lethality
The core issue with PICA is its reliance on appearances rather than functionality when determining what constitutes an "assault weapon." Instead of focusing on a firearm's actual lethality, the law disproportionately considers how "scary" or "military-like" a weapon looks. This subjective standard has led to a list of 170 specific firearms and numerous attachments deemed unacceptable under the law. For example, a rifle that merely has a telescoping or folding stock—features designed to improve the firearm’s adaptability and user comfort—falls under the scope of PICA. Similarly, weapons with certain grips or handguards are labeled "assault weapons," regardless of their firing mechanism, caliber, or practical usage.
The legislature's approach under PICA reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of firearms. Functionally, many of the weapons now restricted under the law are no different from hunting rifles or shotguns, but because they have certain attachments or design elements, they are categorized as more dangerous. To any firearm expert or even a novice observer, this classification appears arbitrary and rooted in aesthetics rather than substance.
For example, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) defines an "assault weapon" as a centerfire semiautomatic rifle without a fixed magazine that has one of several features, such as a thumbhole stock, pistol grip or folding/telescoping stock. PICA aligns itself with this definition, focusing on superficial elements that neither increase the gun's rate of fire nor its capacity to do harm. By centering its definitions on these design features, Illinois is following a trend of conflating military-style appearance with elevated lethality.
Broad Definitions and Vague Language: PICA’s Confusing Classifications
One of the most striking issues with PICA is its broad and unclear language. Rather than defining a clear and universally an "assault weapon," the law simply provides a list of banned models and a series of confusing terms that do not clarify what separates an assault weapon from a traditional rifle or shotgun. Under PICA, an "assault weapon" is defined as any firearm or parts combination which has been designed for the conversion of a firearm into what is considered to be an “assault weapon.”
The irony of using the term "assault weapon" within its own definition is not lost on those who study the law. This circular reasoning results in a definition that lacks a consistent and universally applicable standard, making it nearly impossible for responsible gun owners to know whether their firearm falls under PICA’s restrictions without painstakingly consulting an ever-evolving list.
In practice, this means that many firearms, some of which have been safely used for hunting, sport shooting, and personal defense for decades, are suddenly recast as dangerous weapons. Not only does this place undue burdens on responsible gun owners, but it also leaves the door open for arbitrary enforcement and potential legal challenges on the grounds of vagueness and overbreadth.
The “Assault Weapon Attachments” Dilemma
Along with the firearms themselves, PICA regulates “assault weapon attachments.” Any firearm accessory that fits the broad definitions within PICA must be reported, registered, or potentially relinquished. This includes items like pistol grips, folding stocks, thumbhole stocks, and even certain types of sights and mounts. While these accessories may provide functional benefits, such as improving accuracy or comfort, none of them inherently make a firearm more lethal.
Under PICA, gun owners are required to submit an “endorsement affidavit” to report the purchase, sale, or disposal of any of these attachments. This affidavit must be updated each time an attachment is added or removed, creating a bureaucratic hurdle for Illinois gun owners who want to make even minor modifications to their legally owned firearms. The requirement to report the addition or removal of these accessories places a significant administrative burden on gun owners while offering little, if any, tangible benefit to public safety.
For gun owners who enjoy customizing their firearms to suit their needs, whether for sport, hunting, or self-defense, PICA’s restrictions on attachments present an ongoing logistical challenge. Each update to the endorsement affidavit not only requires time and effort but also exposes the gun owner to potential penalties if they fail to report an attachment. This could result in unintentional noncompliance and potential legal consequences, despite the owner’s good faith effort to adhere to the law.
Exceptions and Exemptions: Acknowledging PICA’s Limitations
PICA does offer certain exceptions for individuals who meet specific criteria. For example, law enforcement personnel / police, retired law enforcement officers, and individuals moving to Illinois from other states where they previously owned now-banned firearms or attachments may be exempt from some of PICA’s requirements. These exceptions suggest an implicit recognition that PICA may not be the most effective means of protecting Illinois communities from gun violence. If PICA’s regulations are essential for public safety, one might reasonably question why some groups are exempt from the very standards imposed on others.
The inclusion of these exemptions also highlights the legislature’s acknowledgment that PICA’s provisions might be overly restrictive or impractical for certain individuals. While law enforcement and retired officers may be more familiar with firearms, this does not inherently make their firearms any less lethal or dangerous in the hands of civilians with similar training or experience. This inconsistency is another example of PICA’s failure to apply a rational or evidence-based approach to firearm regulation.
The Role of Cosmetic Features in PICA’s Focus on “Scary” Guns
Both Illinois’ PICA and the ATF emphasize superficial aspects of a gun’s design, rather than its functionality or lethality. By targeting features like pistol grips, folding stocks and thumbhole stocks, PICA suggests that a weapon is somehow more dangerous based solely on how it looks or feels to hold. Yet, none of these features actually increase the gun’s power, rate of fire, or capacity for harm.
For example, a rifle with a pistol grip that allows the shooter to hold the weapon in a specific position is no more lethal than a rifle without a pistol grip. The folding stock, which makes a gun easier to transport, does not affect its ability to discharge bullets or the damage those bullets can inflict. These are, quite simply, features of convenience or comfort, not lethality.
The focus on cosmetics within PICA underscores a fundamental misunderstanding of firearms. By concentrating on aspects that influence a weapon’s appearance, Illinois lawmakers have arguably missed the mark in terms of targeting actual risk factors for gun violence. Gun violence is an incredibly complex issue that involves socioeconomic factors, mental health considerations, and community-based approaches to crime prevention—elements that cannot be addressed through restrictions on stock shape or grip type.
Practical Impact on Law-Abiding Citizens
For law-abiding citizens in Illinois, PICA creates a range of new legal obligations and logistical obstacles. Gun owners must be vigilant in understanding and complying with a lengthy and confusing list of restricted firearms and accessories. If they own a gun or attachment that falls under PICA’s purview, they are required to register it with the state and provide a detailed endorsement affidavit.
Moreover, each time a gun owner purchases or sells an attachment, they must submit an updated affidavit, effectively placing them under constant surveillance by the state police regarding their firearm usage and accessories. This system not only places a tremendous burden on responsible citizens but also raises significant concerns about privacy and government oversight in areas traditionally associated with personal freedom and individual responsibility.
The lack of a clear standard for what constitutes an “assault weapon” and the constant need for updates to the endorsement affidavit increase the likelihood that gun owners will inadvertently violate the law. PICA thus has the potential to criminalize ordinary citizens who are simply trying to follow an unclear and overly restrictive statute, rather than effectively targeting individuals who pose a legitimate threat to public safety.
Law Blocked by Federal Injunction
On October 23, 2024, a Federal judge in East St. Louis, Illinois, issued a new preliminary injunction that temporarily blocks enforcement of the Protect Illinois Communities Act (PICA). This Act, designed to regulate certain firearms and enhance public safety, has faced ongoing legal challenges since its passage. The recent ruling halts any immediate enforcement of PICA, signaling a victory for opponents who argue that the legislation infringes upon Second Amendment rights. This move intensifies the debate over gun regulation in Illinois, drawing attention from both state and national advocates on both sides of the issue.
Given this latest injunction, the Illinois Supreme Court will likely face increasing pressure to consider the legality of PICA. The court’s involvement could provide a more definitive ruling on whether the state’s attempt to enforce stricter gun laws aligns with constitutional protections. As the Act faces both federal and state judicial scrutiny, its future remains uncertain, with significant implications for Illinois residents and the broader gun regulation landscape in the U.S. This pivotal case could shape legislative strategies across the country, especially as similar laws face challenges in other jurisdictions.
Mitchell S. Sexner & Associates LLC: Your Defense Against PICA-Related Charges
At Mitchell S. Sexner & Associates LLC, we understand the challenges and complexities posed by PICA and are here to provide you with comprehensive legal support. Our firm is experienced in defending clients facing charges related to firearm possession and other criminal matters. We recognize the difficulties that responsible gun owners face under PICA and are prepared to help you navigate the legal system to ensure your rights are protected.
Whether you are unsure about PICA’s specific requirements, need assistance in submitting your endorsement affidavit, or are facing charges related to an alleged violation of PICA, we have the experience and knowledge to offer effective legal representation. Our attorneys are available 24 hours a day to answer your questions, provide legal counsel, and help you take the necessary steps to ensure compliance with Illinois law.
If you or a loved one is facing legal issues related to firearm possession, don’t hesitate to reach out to us. At Mitchell S. Sexner & Associates LLC, we are criminal attorneys committed to defending your rights and advocating for common-sense approaches to firearm regulation that genuinely protect Illinois communities. Contact us at (312) 644-0444 anytime to discuss your situation and get the support you need.