AR Maglock and Hyperswitch legalities?

[Marine Cpl]

I am not sure that we've ever actually seen a single case testing the need for a permanently fixed AR solution. After all, the word "permanent" never appears in the statute.

There was one case against a person named Perkins here in NY where he had AR’s with the MR2s. They charged him with a few counts of Assault Weapons and his argument was that they had fixed magazines. At the Grand Jury trial, he quoted out of state laws on what makes a fixed magazine detachable and it was throw out by the court because it didn’t apply here. It was scheduled to go to trial and he appealed. An appellate court reviewed the case and also ruled that out of state definitions did not apply and the charges against him for the assault weapons were valid but threw out the assault weapons charges because an illegal search was conducted to acquire the weapons. They wrote in their footnotes that the charges were valid to stand for the assault weapons but no determination can be made if MR2’s makes a magazine not detachable since it was thrown out due to the illegal search.

Had the search not been illegal, he would have been tried for the rifles and he would have had to play the dance that everyone here likes to play with words on what makes a magazine detachable to a jury.

People v Perkins

So there has been fixed magazines arrests. This one with Perkins and another one with the Tresmonds which also was about an MR2 that probably resulted in a plea since they stopped posting about it on the other site.

This is why I don’t play the AR game anymore. I don’t have the time or money to go through this if one day I become that dude Perkins. Besides, there are better options out there than fixing a magazine for looks.

 

[subsonic]

This is NOT a definitive ruling on the legality of the MR2 as you imply.

True, but,

Had this gone to trial, Perkins' counsel would almost certainly have presented the other states' definitions as well the firearm examiner's report to the jury as part of his defense.

Almost certainly untrue; the lawyers could argue to the judge before trial or outside the presence of the jury that other states law is pursuasive, but the judge would determine what NY law is and instruct the jury on that and instruct them to apply the facts to that law. The jury would probably never get to hear anything about what the law is in other states.

However, we DO know from the Perkins case that the state AG doesn't think the MR2 is legal. Do you want be the test case that actually goes to trial? Or do you want the state to win the MR2 battle, not by fighting the battle but by chilling its use through the mere threat of prosecution? It's a choice each man needs to make for himself.

Yup, but no one wants to set themselves up for a felony conviction and losing all their firearm rights. If you use an MR2 in NY you’d best be discreet about it unless you want to be the next Perkins.

 

[ManrisFrack]

True, but,

Almost certainly untrue; the lawyers could argue to the judge before trial or outside the presence of the jury that other states law is pursuasive, but the judge would determine what NY law is and instruct the jury on that and instruct them to apply the facts to that law. The jury would probably never get to hear anything about what the law is in other states.

Yup, but no one wants to set themselves up for a felony conviction and losing all their firearm rights. If you use an MR2 in NY you’d best be discreet about it unless you want to be the next Perkins.

NY didn't define detachable magazine. Hell, we can't even agree what it means. I'd say other state's definitions are relevant to it's common use. But you're right, it depends on the judge. I can't see firearm examiner's report getting blocked though.

Right, like I said... let the state win without even fighting cause you're scared.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Right, like I said... let the state win without even fighting cause you're scared.

Has nothing to do with being scared. Has everything to do with not having the time or money to deal with it for a toy when you could have a fully functioning gun without gimping it.

 

[BDinPutnam]

NY didn't define detachable magazine. Hell, we can't even agree what it means. I'd say other state's definitions are relevant to it's common use. But you're right, it depends on the judge. I can't see firearm examiner's report getting blocked though.

Any state judge that is doing his job properly, wont care how or if some other state defines "detachable magazine."

You touch on "common use" which intentionally or not, invokes Heller.

Should you decide to become the next Perkins, and subsequently can drag your case into the Federal court, that certainly becomes germane. I'm not aware of a controlling second circuit case that applies Common Use back down from the Federal level to NY state.

 

[ManrisFrack]

Any state judge that is doing his job properly, wont care how or if some other state defines "detachable magazine."

You touch on "common use" which intentionally or not, invokes Heller.

Should you decide to become the next Perkins, and subsequently can drag your case into the Federal court, that certainly becomes germane. I'm not aware of a controlling second circuit case that applies Common Use back down from the Federal level to NY state.

Common use as in language. As I understand it, terms not defined revert to common use definition (or whatever the legal term is).

Has nothing to do with being scared. Has everything to do with not having the time or money to deal with it for a toy when you could have a fully functioning gun without gimping it.

Whatever you say, sweetheart.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Common use as in language. As I understand it, terms not defined revert to common use definition (or whatever the legal term is).



Whatever you say, sweetheart.

Yes it is what I say unless you are gonna to donate time and money for me.

 

[subsonic]

Whatever you say, sweetheart.

Ok big guy, why are you bothering with maglocks at all?

Since the SAFE Act is obviously unconstitutional, why don't you parade down Main Street in Rochester slinging a properly-configured AR-15?

You first.

 

[BDinPutnam]

"Gentlemen- you can't fight in here; this is the WAR ROOM."

 

[ManrisFrack]

Yes it is what I say unless you are gonna to donate time and money for me.

If it were any other guy Will, I would. I have. Well, money anyway. My time ain't worth shit in a legal battle.

Ok big guy, why are you bothering with maglocks at all? Blah, blah, blah...

Mine's bigger but that really isn't justification for you being so eager for me to stick it up on the chopping block, sweetheart.



You guys are so easy...

 

[Marine Cpl]

If it were any other guy Will, I would. I have. Well, money anyway. My time ain't worth shit in a legal battle.

Neither is mine. Don’t have any at all. Or money to waste on a toy either. I’ll tell you what since you are such a tough guy that isn’t scared to have a fixed mag. Wait. That’s an oxymoron.

 

[BDinPutnam]

Talk about a "hyperswitch", geez.

 

[Bustedknees]

Any state judge that is doing his job properly, wont care how or if some other state defines "detachable magazine."

but here is the kicker,, the whole damn SAFE ACT is a reaction to a tragedy that happened in another state..