Skip to content
Effective

Rapid-Fire Devices:
Bump Stocks and Trigger Cranks

Assault WeaponsPICA

The Protect Illinois Communities Act added the rapid-fire device ban together with its assault weapon and magazine provisions. These devices, which are designed to and function to increase the rate of fire of semiautomatic firearms above their standard rate, are prohibited alongside banned firearms and large-capacity magazines.[1]

What Devices Are Banned

PICA prohibits any device or attachment that is designed to and functions to increase the rate of fire of a semiautomatic firearm above the standard rate of fire for such a firearm not equipped with the device. Specifically, the ban covers:[1]

  • Bump stocks: Devices that allow a semiautomatic firearm to use the recoil energy to slide the firearm back and forth against the shooter's trigger finger, effectively simulating automatic fire
  • Trigger cranks: Devices that repeatedly activate the trigger of a semiautomatic firearm through a lever or other part turned in a circular motion
  • Similar devices: Any other device or attachment designed to and functioning to increase the rate of fire of a semiautomatic firearm above its standard rate

Relationship to Federal Regulation

Rapid-fire devices have been the subject of shifting federal policy. The ATF published a final rule in December 2018 (effective March 2019) classifying bump stocks as machine guns under the National Firearms Act, but the U.S. Supreme Court struck down that rule in Garland v. Cargill (2024), holding that a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a non-mechanical bump stock does not meet the statutory definition of "machine gun" because it cannot fire more than one shot by a single function of the trigger.[1] On May 6, 2026, the ATF published a final rule amending 27 CFR 478.11 to formally remove bump-stock-type devices from the federal "machine gun" definition, codifying the Cargill holding.[4] Illinois's state-level ban, enacted by PICA at 720 ILCS 5/24-1(a)(14), uses a rate-of-fire test that does not depend on the federal classification of a device as a machine gun.[1]

Federal update: By June 9, 2025, the federal government had signed a settlement promising to stop enforcing federal law prohibiting FRTs and to redistribute previously seized devices. DOJ and ATF later announced 34 notices of final and proposed rulemaking on April 29, 2026. The Illinois Attorney General stated that the settlement did not change federal law. This federal change does not affect the Illinois prohibition. PICA bans devices designed to and functioning to increase the rate of fire of a semiautomatic firearm above its standard rate, and the Illinois Attorney General states that FRTs remain illegal under state law. Illinois's prohibition on FRTs remains fully in effect independent of federal classification.

Penalties

The rapid-fire device ban is codified at 720 ILCS 5/24-1(a)(14), not in the assault weapons section. A violation is a Class 2 felony under 720 ILCS 5/24-1(b). The ordinary prison term is 3 to 7 years, or 7 to 14 years for an extended term as provided in Section 5-8-2. The Class 2 felony classification applies to all conduct prohibited by subsection (a)(14), with no reduced penalty for devices owned before the ban.[2]

No Grandfathering Exception

Assault weapons lawfully possessed before January 10, 2023 may be retained with the required timely endorsement affidavit, subject to statutory possession restrictions. Large-capacity magazines lawfully possessed before that date may be retained without registration, subject to statutory possession restrictions. PICA provides no grandfathering exception for rapid-fire devices. Illinois law prohibits knowingly manufacturing, possessing, or selling these devices, and the exemption list in 720 ILCS 5/24-2 contains no carve-out for the (a)(14) offense. There is no registration pathway for pre-owned rapid-fire devices.[3]

Verification

5 of 5 factual claims on this page were matched to their source text as of 2026-10-15.

Show the claims
Factual claims on this page and their verification status
ClaimTypeStatusSourceChecked
Garland v. CargillSource text: Garland v. Cargill (22-976)CASEverified against sourceNone2026-10-14
27 CFR 478.11Source text: # § 478.11 Meaning of terms When used in this part and in forms prescribed under this part, where not otherwise distinctly expressed or manifestly incompatibleSTATverified against sourceNone2026-10-14
720 ILCS 5/24-1(a)(14)Source text: # § 5/24-1 Unlawful possession of weapons (a) A person commits the offense of unlawful possession of weapons when he knowingly: (1) Sells, manufactures, purchaSTATverified against sourceNone2026-10-14
720 ILCS 5/24-1(b)Source text: # § 5/24-1 Unlawful possession of weapons (a) A person commits the offense of unlawful possession of weapons when he knowingly: (1) Sells, manufactures, purchaSTATverified against sourceNone2026-10-14
720 ILCS 5/24-2Source text: # § 5/24-2 Exemptions (a) Subsections 24-1(a)(3), 24-1(a)(4), 24-1(a)(10), and 24-1(a)(13) and Section 24-1.6 do not apply to or affect any of the following: (STATverified against sourceNone2026-10-15