[norahc]

Originally Posted by Alpo

Just a minor thought, here.

He was getting on the bus, in Chicago. That means, to me, that he was IN Chicago (not "passing through" from a spot where it was legal to have to gun to another spot that it was legal to have the gun, which would be protected under the FOPA of 1986). If you are IN Chicago, with a gun, you have broken the law.

Now, if he (the Nevada guy) was visiting someone in Chicago, as soon as he crossed the city limits with those guns in his suitcase, HE BECAME A CRIMINAL. And if the cops found out about the guns, when he was getting on the bus to go back to Nevada, he was still in Chicago, and STILL BREAKING THE LAW.

It seems to me that if you feel the need to go to the City of Chicago, the City of Washington, the State of New Jersey, the State of Massachusetts, the State of New York or the State of California, you need to either leave your firearms at home, or for God's sake keep your mouth shut about it.

Morons run around telling the police, "I'm breaking the law", and then the internet gets upset when said morons get arrested.

Assuming the following:
1) He wasn't transporting the firearms in accordance with Federal law
2) He wasn't just passing through the city of Chicago as part of his travels and,
3) He wasn't changing modes of transportation in Chicago (such as switching buses in a terminal).