Copyright 2024 All Rights Reserved.

February 21, 2024

New Lawsuit Filed Seeking Interpretation Of Illinois’ “Assault” Weapons Ban –

By John Kraft & Kirk Allen

On January 31, 2024

Effingham, Ill. (ECWd) –

A new lawsuit for Declaratory Judgment was filed last week attacking Illinois’ “assault” weapons ban (“AWB”).

This time, it is based on the statutory and caselaw language granting every person the right to police powers under the Citizens Arrest laws.

The Plaintiffs are a Firearms Dealer and potential firearms purchaser in Effingham County.

The language from the case file:

  • The AWB is clear that peace officers defined in Section 2-13 of the Code are exempt . . .
  • As such, any such person who is by definition a peace officer may purchase and possess [the “banned firearms”] without fear of criminal prosecution
  • A peace officer is defined by statute which statutory definition has been interpreted by numerous Illinois Courts
  •  Section 2-13 of the Code defines “peace officer” to include, among others, “any person who, by statute, is granted and authorized to exercise powers similar to those conferred upon any peace officer employed by a law enforcement agency of this State (see 720 ILCS 5/2-13)
  • Plaintiff (purchaser) concedes he is not a peace officer as defined in 720 ILCS 5/2-13(i)
  • Plaintiff seeks a legal determination that he is a peace officer as defined in 720 ILCS 5/2-13(ii) – the statutory power granting Plaintiff powers similar to those conferred upon any peace officer employed by a law enforcement agency
  • Illinois law, 725 ILCS 5/107-3 states that any person may arrest another when he has reasonable grounds to believe that an offense other than an ordinance violation
  • Several Appellate Courts and the Illinois Supreme Court have concluded that a private citizens arrest under 725 ILCS 5/107-3 easily satisfies the standard of a peace officer employed by a law enforcement agency, as law enforcement officers acting outside their jurisdiction have consistently found to be operating lawfully under 725 ILCS 5/107-3
  • See People v Marino, 80 Ill. App.3d 657 (2nd Dist. 1980), People v Rowe, 128 Ill. App.3d (4th Distr. 1984), and People v O’Conner, 167 Ill.3d 42 (1st Dist. 1988)

The suit is seeking a declaration that Plaintiff is a peace officer as defined under 720 ILCS 5/2-13(ii) and is exempt from the prohibitions of the AWB.



Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on print


  • Andrea Taylor
    Posted at 15:00h, 31 January Reply

    So these new laws are being challenged in the courts under the authority of the constitution.

  • John Manspeaker
    Posted at 15:44h, 31 January Reply

    Hah! Would have loved to see the looks on Kwame’s and JB’s faces when they learned of this action. I hope Plaintiffs prevail.

    • kathiann54
      Posted at 13:26h, 07 February Reply

      They should prevail by the plain reading of the statute….as long as chicanery is not involved.. It will be interesting to see what the AG’s arguments will be and what trickery they will employ. I’m quite sure the debate in court will be a good time. Guaranteed!

  • Rory Helgoth
    Posted at 11:15h, 01 February Reply

    The people hold the constitutional rights and the people are tired of our rights being taken away! How can you take away something that you have no right to take without the people as the majority saying so???

Post A Comment