Legality of "Featureless Rifles" in NYS

[Uzi]

So, since what someone believes a fixed magazine rifle is or isn't years into the passage of the safe act, that begs the question about featureless rifles for me now; Especially the ugly ones with neutered stocks and prick grips.


This was taken directly from the safe act website. Judging by certain interpretation by someone, it looks like anything on a featureless rifle including prick grips, and neutered stocks are most definitely not legal if fixed magazines would not be not legal.


"If you modify your gun so that it is not an assault weapon, you do not have to register it. The modification must be permanent however. This includes, for example, removing the bayonet lug by cutting or grinding, grinding off the threads on the barrel, removing the foregrip so that it cannot be readily reattached, or any change that cannot be reversed through reasonable means."

So, if I use an allen key and take off a prick grip, is that reasonable means enough to swap for an illegal pistol grip? because it's very simple and easy to do that. And what about those neutered stocks, how hard is it to take one of those off and put a telescoping stock back on and a pistol grip along with it? Do those items require normal tools for on and off use or are they designed to permanently stay on once and forever? Do I fill a prick grip in with epoxy or something so it's less easy not to take off?

HAHAHAHA!

 

[NY Leatherneck]

Nothing in the law says permanent!

 

[dsdmmat]

Nothing in the law says permanent!

Correct, the assholes that wrote the guide put in their own language, that doesn't count for a hill of Hillary's email excuses.

 

[GOYABEAN]

I'm Fucking Glad of leaving his Shit behind not the State just BULLSHIT

 

[Marine Cpl]

Why don't you read the Penal Law instead? It'll contain all you need to know that can actually be used in court.

Article 265 Penal Law Firearms | Dangerous Weapons | NY Law

 

[Marine Cpl]

Nothing in the law says permanent!

Oh, but it does for magazines and semi auto rifles if you have a good understanding of common english.

 

[Phazer]

Nothing in the law says permanent!

Bingo.

Websites and open letters from the NYSP are entertaining. But they ARE NOT THE LAW. They are simply someone else's interpretation of the law.

So, I'm going to be guided by the [poorly] written statute. Thank you very much.

 

[Marine Cpl]

If you understand english, this implies permanence or else you have what they don't want you to have.

23. "Large capacity ammunition feeding device" means a magazine, belt,
drum, feed strip, or similar device, that (a) has a capacity of, or that
can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than ten rounds of
ammunition

So does this.

"Assault weapon" means
(a) a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable
magazine and has at least one of the following characteristics:

 

[Uzi]

Oh, but it does for magazines and semi auto rifles

100% incorrect. Still























wait....................














































Yup that's still incorrect. Let me check back with you later just to confirm.

 

[Marine Cpl]

100% incorrect. Still























wait....................














































Yup that's still incorrect. Let me check back with you later just to confirm.

Feel free to debate me in the other thread without jokes with fact and references to the actual law.

 

[NY Leatherneck]

Oh, but it does for magazines and semi auto rifles if you have a good understanding of common english.

Readily restored and permanent are two separate things determined by a jury of your peers. OP's intent was responded to.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Readily restored and permanent are two separate things determined by a jury of your peers. OP's intent was responded to.

Ignore that has a capacity of. That was very convenient to do so.

 

[Phazer]

Readily restored and permanent are two separate things determined by a jury of your peers. OP's intent was responded to.

If we're talking "intent," then the spirit of the law is to prevent rapid reloading of detachable magazines while actively using a full-featured firearm. Any semi automatic rifle that has a limiter in the magazine release (ex/ epoxied bullet button, T-nut, etc) precludes the operator from changing magazines while actively shooting and thus is in compliance with the spirit, and the letter, of the statute as it is currently written.

If you disagree, fine. All we need is a court case and a prosecution based on a statutorial violation to get some precedent established.

Personally, I believe that the Leftist Statist anti-2A gun-grabbers do not want this law clarified in court. They're getting more than they bargained for with the intentional ambiguity that already has us running scared and attacking each other.

 

[NY Leatherneck]

Ignore that has a capacity of. That was very convenient to do so.

Let me guess, you either weren't loved as a child or the teachers didnt pick on you for answers which has compelled you to be argumentative and abrasive on every thread you participate in. The OP was not talking about magazines but featureless rifles. My response stands.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Let me guess, you either weren't loved as a child or the teachers didnt pick on you for answers which has compelled you to be argumentative and abrasive on every thread you participate in. The OP was not talking about magazines but featureless rifles. My response stands.

No. I was once held at a Vietnamese prison camp that shoved NY Penal Laws in my face and I was forced to read them.

Your decision still stands because you refuse to read them.

 

[NY Leatherneck]

No. I was once held at a Vietnamese prison camp that shoved NY Penal Laws in my face and I was forced to read them.

Your decision still stands because you refuse to read them.

No Hablo Ingles

 

[Marine Cpl]

No Hablo Ingles

Then I'll tell you in Spanish then.
Lee las leyes.

 

[Uzi]

Gel free to debate me in the other thread without jokes with fact and references to the actual law.

No. I was once held at a Vietnamese prison camp that shoved NY Penal Laws in my face and I was forced to read them.

Stop with the jokes and we can have a real debate. Refuse to cite the law pertaining permanent fixed magazines, Tell me I was dancing around the question and that everyone else is wrong too, But this time do it in a serious manner, then I'll go back to your super thread, promise?

 

[NY Leatherneck]

Then I'll tell you in Spanish then.
Lee las leyes.

I did maybe you should again

 

[Marine Cpl]

Stop with the jokes and we can have a real debate. Refuse to cite the law pertaining permanent fixed magazines, Tell me I was dancing around the question and that everyone else is wrong too, But this time do it in a serious manner, then I'll go back to your super thread, promise?

Considering that your OP is a joke because you are quoting a website instead of the actual law, jokes are fair game.

What is your question? It was hard to understand since it was structured improperly.

 

[Marine Cpl]

I did maybe you should again

Then why did you skip the part that says, "Has a capacity of" ?

 

[GOYABEAN]

Some more Dangerous so called Assault weapons


All could be modified or kept the same and all deadly Fuck You Safe Act

 

[NY Leatherneck]

Then why did you skip the part that says, "Has a capacity of" ?

Show me the definition of capacity of in the NYS penal code pertaining to firearms, rifles etc..

 

[Uzi]

Considering that your OP is a joke because you are quoting a website instead of the actual law, jokes are fair game.

What is your question? It was hard to understand since it was structured improperly.

My question is, where in the law does it say that a semi automatic rifle must have a permanently fixed magazine for NYS? BUT WAIT!!! Don't tell me what your opinion is though, I'm not interested in that, I'm looking for the cited law only.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Show me the definition of capacity of?

That doesn't need to be defined. It's english. Which word do you need help in. "Capacity" or "Of"?

 

[NY Leatherneck]

That doesn't need to be defined. It's english. Which word do you never help in. "Capacity" or "Of"?

Yes it does, in trial for example....all words in a section of law not otherwise defined are subject to scrutiny when brought up by a defense. Particulary when no such case law exists.

 

[Marine Cpl]

My question is, where in the law does it say that a semi automatic rifle must have a permanently fixed magazine for NYS? BUT WAIT!!! Don't tell me what your opinion is though, I'm not interested in that, I'm looking for the cited law only.

You are a broken record asking the same question that has been answered already.

Here is goes again. It doesn't. It never once ever mentions the term "fixed" in regards to anything. All it says is that if a rifle is semi automatic and has the ABILITY to accept detachable magazines and has one feature, it is an AW.

That's it. That is all it says. That is the problem. Get it now? Putting in a lock that you can take off doesn't make the rifle magically not have the ABILITY to accept a detachable magazine.

What you fail to understand is had they defined what a fixed magazine is like California did, then you can make it that way. But they didn't. It isn't even acknowledged as existing.

 

[Marine Cpl]

That doesn't need to be defined. It's english. Which word do you never help in. "Capacity" or "Of"?

Now you are being ridiculous if you think they need to define "has a capacity of". This is why you can't understand the point I've been making assuming you don't know what "capacity of" means.

 

[Uzi]

Here is goes again. It doesn't. It never once ever mentions the term "fixed" in regards to anything.

Okay, close enough, I still got your OPINION which I didn't ask for, but you found nothing making a fixed magazine illegal written into law. Only your opinion was given, which amounts to nothing about the legality.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Okay, close enough, I still got your OPINION which I didn't ask for, but you found nothing making a fixed magazine illegal written into law. Only your opinion was given, which accounts for nothing about the legality.

Laws don't work that way. That may be your problem understanding.

Laws do not say what you can do to circumvent them. They just say what you can't do. So this law says that you can't have a semi automatic rifle that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine with one feature. That's it. Had they made an exception to that law, then you can do it. Had they defined what a non removable magazine is, then you can make it that way. They didn't. So as of now if it can accept, it's illegal assuming you meet other factors.