P.A. 102-1116 - PARTIAL REPEAL
SB2136 would partially repeal Illinois’s 2023 firearm restrictions by removing the statutory bans on assault weapons, assault weapon attachments, .50 caliber rifles and cartridges, large-capacity ammunition feeding devices, and “rapid-fire” or rate-of-fire increasing devices. It also repeals related Freedom of Information Act exemptions tied to assault-weapon endorsement records and directs the Illinois State Police to permanently destroy endorsement affidavits and any information collected from them that is in the possession of state or local law enforcement.
The bill amends the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act and the Criminal Code of 2012. In practical terms, it would eliminate the legal framework created by the earlier assault-weapons legislation, including the offense provisions and penalties associated with possession, manufacture, sale, purchase, transfer, or importation of the covered firearms, ammunition, and accessories. It also repeals the sections that made it unlawful to possess or use devices designed to increase the rate of fire of a semiautomatic firearm.
Because the bill is a repeal measure, its impact would be to restore legality for conduct that had been prohibited under the repealed sections, subject to any other existing state or federal firearm laws that remain in force. It would also remove the special confidentiality treatment for assault-weapon endorsement information in FOIA and require destruction of records tied to those endorsements, affecting both Illinois State Police recordkeeping and any local law enforcement agencies holding copies.
The available context shows no committee transcript and no recorded votes, so there is no documented debate or formal legislative action to gauge support or opposition. Based on the bill’s substance and sponsor, the measure appears aligned with gun-rights or anti-ban policy goals, while the principal likely opposition would come from supporters of the existing assault-weapons restrictions and public-safety advocates who favor retaining them.
The main point of contention is the reversal of Illinois’s assault-weapons and large-capacity magazine restrictions, along with the mandated destruction of related records. Supporters would likely frame the bill as restoring firearm rights and rolling back what they view as overbroad restrictions, while opponents would likely argue that repealing these provisions would weaken public-safety protections and erase enforcement records that may be relevant to regulation and oversight.
SB2136 would repeal key provisions of the Criminal Code of 2012 and the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act that were added by Public Act 102-1116, including the bans and penalties for assault weapons, assault weapon attachments, .50 caliber rifles and cartridges, large-capacity ammunition feeding devices, and rate-of-fire increasing devices. It would also repeal the FOIA exemption for assault-weapon endorsement information and require the Illinois State Police and any law enforcement agency to permanently destroy endorsement affidavits and related data. The practical effect would be to remove those specific state-level firearm prohibitions and associated recordkeeping rules, while leaving other firearm restrictions and licensing laws intact.
There is no committee transcript or voting history available for SB2136, so there is no direct record of debate, amendments, or roll-call sentiment. From the bill text alone, the measure appears to be a pro-firearm-rights repeal bill intended to undo recent gun-control provisions. In the absence of recorded legislative discussion, the likely sentiment is polarized: supporters would favor the rollback, while opponents would view it as a retreat from firearm regulation and public-safety policy.
The central controversy is whether Illinois should keep or repeal the assault-weapons, large-capacity magazine, and rapid-fire device restrictions enacted in prior legislation. Another notable point of contention is the bill’s requirement that the Illinois State Police and other law enforcement agencies permanently destroy endorsement affidavits and related information, which raises concerns about record retention, transparency, and enforcement history. Supporters are likely to emphasize individual gun ownership rights and the removal of what they see as unconstitutional or burdensome restrictions, while opponents are likely to stress gun violence prevention, regulatory enforcement, and the value of maintaining records tied to firearm endorsements.