Illinois Argues It Knows What Your Life Is Worth

In an opening brief that feels more like a slap in the face to the Constitution than a legal argument, the State of Illinois has laid out its defense of the Protect Illinois Communities Act—a sweeping “assault weapons” and magazine ban that critics say goes far beyond regulation and straight into outright disarmament.

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to follow and signup for notifications!

The case, Barnett v. Raoul, is one of the top federal challenges to the law. The plaintiffs already won at the district level, but the state is now trying to reverse that ruling in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. What’s catching everyone’s attention isn’t just that Illinois is defending a controversial law—but how they’re doing it.

William Kirk, president of Washington Gun Law, pulled no punches in his breakdown of the state’s legal strategy.

“Illinois wants to assign a value to your life,” he says. “They’re arguing that only the state can decide what type of firearm you get to use in order to defend it.”

Let that sink in.

According to Illinois’ own filing, they’re claiming:

1. Only firearms “in common use” for self-defense are protected by the Second Amendment.
2. Firearms “more appropriate” for military use—like AR-15s—aren’t protected at all.
3. Any accessories or features deemed “unnecessary” by the state are fair game to ban.
4. The state alone gets to make those determinations for you.

Illinois’ brief reads like it was written by someone who’s never touched a firearm but has spent hours googling scary-sounding terms. It says the AR-15 is basically an M16—ignoring the very real fact that one is semi-automatic and the other is a select-fire military weapon. Because the two rifles can use the same ammo and have similar barrel lengths, Illinois argues the civilian variant should be banned.

That’s like banning Mustangs because they can drive the same speed as police cruisers.

It gets worse.

The state also argues that high-capacity magazines aren’t needed because “the average number of rounds fired in self-defense is only 2.2,” according to one of their expert witnesses. That’s right—they want to limit your capacity based on a number that can’t possibly predict the next violent encounter in your life.

And when it comes to overpenetration concerns? Illinois says AR-15s are “unsuitable” for home defense because of the potential risk of bullets going through walls. Translation: your neighbor’s drywall has more rights than you do.

But the real gut punch comes with the idea that the state gets to decide what your life is worth—and what tools you’re allowed to use to preserve it.

“By claiming certain weapons are ‘overkill’ for civilian self-defense,” says Kirk, “Illinois is arrogantly declaring that they—not you—know what you should be allowed to use in a life-or-death situation.”

That’s the most offensive part of the entire brief. Illinois is not just banning hardware. It’s banning your autonomy, your judgment, and your right to make the most personal decision imaginable—how to defend your life and your loved ones.

This isn’t just a legal skirmish in one state. It’s a blueprint for what anti-gun states across the country may attempt next. If Illinois wins, you can bet New York, New Jersey, California, and others will follow suit—armed with the same twisted logic.

So to the rest of America: don’t tune this out just because it’s “Illinois’ problem.” Because if the courts buy what Illinois is selling, this fight is coming to your doorstep next.

*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! ***