Engineer testifies during 2nd Amendment challenge to Illinois assault weapons ban (original) (raw)

Federal courthouse for the Southern District of Illinois in East St. Louis.Provided

An engineer who spent decades designing weapons for one of the world’s leading gun manufacturers testified Tuesday that the assault-style weapons now banned in Illinois are intended only for civilian use and cannot be easily converted into military-grade firearms.

James Ronkainen, a former engineer for the Remington Firearms, said the AR-style rifles and many other weapons that are now heavily restricted under the Protect Illinois Communities Act, are classified in the industry as “modern sporting rifles,” or MSRs, and he said ordinary users of such weapons cannot easily convert them into fully automatic weapons.

“I don’t think they can,” he said.

Ronkainen testified during the second day of a bench trial before U.S. District Judge Stephen McGlynn in a case challenging the constitutionality of the assault weapons ban.

In 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to keep and bear the type of arms that are commonly used for lawful purposes such as self-defense. But it also said not all firearms are protected under the Constitution, including certain “dangerous and unusual” weapons.

Ronkainen testified that the AR-style weapons restricted under the Illinois law are widely popular with consumers and that they are intended for legal purposes, including self-defense, hunting and target shooting.

But attorneys for the state have said they plan to argue the weapons covered by the law are commonly used in mass shootings, including the one at a Fourth of July parade in Highland Park in 2022 that left seven people dead and dozens more injured. That shooting prompted Illinois lawmakers to quickly pass PICA in January of 2023.

The attorneys for the state also said they will argue that the way gun manufacturers market and sell their products to consumers should not determine whether the weapon is protected under the Constitution.

The trial is scheduled to continue through Friday, but attorneys in the case have suggested it could wrap up as early as Wednesday or Thursday.

This story was originally published September 18, 2024, 5:00 AM.