Details of Chicago Alderman Loophole ordinance

I've been following this situation for quite a while now (most recently here)--probably well beyond the point that it ceased to be interesting--but as a wise man once said, "anything worth doing is worth doing until everyone is absolutely sick of it." OK--maybe no wise man ever said that, but I'm not one to limit myself to listening to wise people.

Anyway, as I mentioned in the above-linked blog post, the ordinance passed on June 11th, but I hadn't been able to find details of the final version as passed--until now. Here are the details:

SECTION 1. Notwithstanding any provision in the Municipal Code to the contrary, if all of the following conditions are met:

1. A person possesses a firearm that was at one time validly registered to that person in the city of Chicago pursuant to Article II of Chapter 8-20 of the Municipal Code; and

2. The registration for that firearm lapsed; and

3. As of the effective date of this ordinance, such firearm is unregistrable solely because of such lapse in registration and for no other reason, then that person may submit a renewal application accompanied by a renewal fee of Sixty and no/100 Dollars ($60.00) for each such firearm to the Superintendent of Police ("Superintendent") within one hundred twenty (120) days after the effective date of this ordinance, and the Superintendent shall accept such submission if received by him within said one hundred twenty (120) day period, and shall process it as if it had been timely submitted.

The burden of demonstrating compliance with condition Number 1 of this section shall be on the applicant, through submission of proof acceptable to the Superintendent.

The Superintendent is authorized to promulgate rules to implement this ordinance.

SECTION 2. This ordinance shall be in force and effect upon passage and approval

I assume that means it went into effect on June 11th, meaning that the "amnesty" (such as it is) ends after October 9th.

By the way, Mayor Daley's support for it, on the grounds that it would help "to get a realistic handle on the number of guns in Chicago," is clearly bunk (being polite here), because this ordinance changes nothing with regard to guns that have never been registered in Chicago.

I'm not a gambling man, but I'd be willing to wager whatever I could borrow that an overwhelming majority of the unregistered guns in Chicago have never been registered. Hell, I would even bet that nearly the same overwhelming majority of unregistered guns are owned by people who don't have valid Firearm Owner ID (FOID) cards (which might make them smarter, in the end, than those of us who do).