Mean Arms Magazine Lock being sued over Buffalo Top's Shooter illegally removing it.

[FP1201]

Eh, you can figure out the bullshit and real motivations here:

Judge denies motion to dismiss lawsuit against gun accessory maker in Buffalo mass shooting

Buffalo Attorney John Elmore, who represents some of the families of the victims of the shooting, told 7 News a judge has denied a motion by a gun accessory manufacturer to dismiss a civil lawsuit.

www.wkbw.com

 

[fresch]

What school did the judge get his judgeship from?
I need to sue them for giving accreditation to a fool.

 

[Cooolone]

This lawsuit being successful would basically "lock" a firearm to the State in which it is sold... Removable, sure, why not? Because one foot over the border into a neighboring State which doesn't have the ridiculous NY Law and you are legally within your right to remove such restrictions.

Not sure why a Justice would then allow a frivolous lawsuit like this to proceed other than attempting to legislate (an agenda) from the bench!

 

[Saltwater60]

This is absurd. He broke two laws to get the gun in this condition. Why don’t we sue every maker of everything for every illegal action take with their products.

 

[FP1201]

This lawsuit being successful would basically "lock" a firearm to the State in which it is sold... Removable, sure, why not? Because one foot over the border into a neighboring State which doesn't have the ridiculous NY Law and you are legally within your right to remove such restrictions.

Not sure why a Justice would then allow a frivolous lawsuit like this to proceed other than attempting to legislate (an agenda) from the bench!

Black victim mentality...
Money to be exploited from a Company offering a legal, unregulated product...
Self-aggrandizing shyster Lawyer...
Hidden? Encouragement from DA's and others with an "Anti-Gun" Agenda?...
Several years back, NY did pass a Law in which any and everyone associated COULD be Sued: What I'm surprised at is they aren't going after the Company that made the Ammunition, the magazines, the Rifle Manufacturer, the people that made the Sling, the clothes the shooter was wearing, the advertising company, the Dealer/Wholesaler/Distributer, etc. by Law they ALL can be sued....ALL of them!

Oh, and "removing" the Lock requires specific tools, the destruction of components of the device, and cannot be re-used...the feature was defeated by someone intent on making the Rifle illegal in New York to commit the highly illegal act of murder, but it's the fault of the company that made a device that when used as designed would have prevented the exchanging of magazines....if the little fucker had drilled a third hole the money grubbing bastards would be going after the drill bit maker and hardware store that sold it...that's what it's REALLY about: Money!

 

[Apeman]

So what's the difference between this and using a set screw and epoxy on the mag release like quite a few FFLs are using/selling? If someone wants a noncomplaint gun they drill out the mag release and install a new one.

Same thing if you buy a complaint AR with a Thorsden on it and you take it apart and put a traditional grip and stock on it.

You bought a legal weapon. You chose to break the law when you converted it.

Does this mean I can sue Chevy if someone in a corvette plows into me while they're going 150 mph on the northway? The speed limit is 65. It must be Chevys fault if the car was going 150 mph. It can't possibly be tha actions of the driver.

 

[Grimscale]

Still looking for the section of the law saying a mag lock feature must be "permanent".
Nothing about epoxy, nothing about "requiring tools". Only that, with it installed, the gun cannot accept a detachable magazine. Period, end of story.

 

[Depick]

So if we are allowed to sue manufacturers based on the actions of the end users of their product I say we start suing law schools for bullshit lawsuits brought by their alumni.

 

[Vinson57]

We know the state approved epoxied over mag releases along with all the other compliant versions of everything that the ATF allows to be sold.

I'm interested in them dragging the parents in on how little junior planned all this under their nose. Where did the resources come from for the purchases? How was it all hidden? Why do parasite children (anyone not left home after 18 and you can define further) need to have MSRs without the homeowner parents knowing about it? I can say, not at my house.

 

[Beerman]

Anyone with a Mean Arms mag lock can LEGALLY remove it in NYS. There is no prohibiting law or regulation regarding modifying a compliant, fixed mag, semi-auto, fully featured rifle into a compliant featureless rifle with swappable magazine capability. The act of removing the mag lock was lawful; the configuration of the rifle afterwards was not. Case dismissed.

 

[Zerex]

Safe Act says "DESIGNED to accept a detachable mag"...............nothing about mag locks or epoxy.
Design is still the same with epoxy or locks.

Thordsen still may be ruled a "thumbhole stock", which was a deliberate attack upon AW's.

Meaning has not been challenged except by Aunt Jemima...........

SCOTUS has to issue a decision regarding AW's...........until then we live at the mercy of lib interpretations.

 

[Apeman]

Still looking for the section of the law saying a mag lock feature must be "permanent".
Nothing about epoxy, nothing about "requiring tools". Only that, with it installed, the gun cannot accept a detachable magazine. Period, end of story.

A local FFL told me he had a visit from the state popo after the safe act had been around for a while. They told him that if it had a spur or other type of compliant grip on it they needed to put epoxy over the screw head so it couldn't be removed. He said no. 1 - nothing in the law says permanent and 2- its a safety hazard to do that because you can't deal with a safety malfunction if you can't get the screw out.

 

[Beerman]

Safe Act says "DESIGNED to accept a detachable mag"...............nothing about mag locks or epoxy.
Design is still the same with epoxy or locks.

Thordsen still may be ruled a "thumbhole stock", which was a deliberate attack upon AW's.

Meaning has not been challenged except by Aunt Jemima...........

SCOTUS has to issue a decision regarding AW's...........until then we live at the mercy of lib interpretations.

Says here “capable.” Not “designed.”

 

[JRtraderny]

So what's the difference between this and using a set screw and epoxy on the mag release like quite a few FFLs are using/selling? If someone wants a noncomplaint gun they drill out the mag release and install a new one.

Same thing if you buy a complaint AR with a Thorsden on it and you take it apart and put a traditional grip and stock on it.

You bought a legal weapon. You chose to break the law when you converted it.

Does this mean I can sue Chevy if someone in a corvette plows into me while they're going 150 mph on the northway? The speed limit is 65. It must be Chevys fault if the car was going 150 mph. It can't possibly be tha actions of the driver.

Don't forget to sue the state for setting a speed limit also .

 

[Apeman]

Don't forget to sue the state for setting a speed limit also .

I actually do plan to sue the state if I get hit by a repeat drunk driver that was able to buy his way out of jail. I work with guys here that have more than 1 DWI arrest that haven't done more than the first night in jail. One guy here didn't do jail time after his THIRD DWI. While they chose to drink and drive, the state chose not to punish them by putting them in jail and allowing them to be a danger to the public.

 

[RedBreast21]

If this suit stands, the ramifications are endless. No one is responsible for any of their actions. Let your mind run wild with that. lol

 

[FP1201]

Says here “capable.” Not “designed

A magazine fixed in place renders the rifle not capable of receiving or exchanging magazines, and we've used this for over ten years.
Remember, this is about extorting money from a Company they can easily identify and possibly convince a jury of wrong doing based on the language in their product instructions.

 

[FP1201]

So what's the difference between this and using a set screw and epoxy on the mag release like quite a few FFLs are using/selling? If someone wants a noncomplaint gun they drill out the mag release and install a new one.

Same thing if you buy a complaint AR with a Thorsden on it and you take it apart and put a traditional grip and stock on it.

You bought a legal weapon. You chose to break the law when you converted it.

Does this mean I can sue Chevy if someone in a corvette plows into me while they're going 150 mph on the northway? The speed limit is 65. It must be Chevys fault if the car was going 150 mph. It can't possibly be tha actions of the driver.

I don't think there's any difference between the Mean, a Bullet-Button, or a set-screw run through the magazine release; they all (when installed properly) do the same thing in keeping a magazine from being readily "detached" from a MRS. You can "remove" the engine from your Car, but you cannot "detach" it. If you really got technical about it, if you removed a magazine from the Rifle to service/repair it, at that point you could be in violation because a detached magazine could be installed...not likely to happen, but stranger things have manifested.

As for the Epoxy: In the early days of the un-SAFE Act, a Black owned Gun Shop was busted and fucked over for turning out MSR's with Bullet Buttons, and in the end, all charges the bullshit would come to an end IF they would put epoxy over the screw hole. There are/were Dealers and Individuals doing that, but I suspect more that aren't and since very few if any other cases of someone else getting jammed, it mustn't be an issue anymore....If you're going to drill out or otherwise remove/destroy the magazine lock, that epoxy is nothing more than a little extra aggravation.

 

[Beerman]

A magazine fixed in place renders the rifle not capable of receiving or exchanging magazines, and we've used this for over ten years.
Remember, this is about extorting money from a Company they can easily identify and possibly convince a jury of wrong doing based on the language in their product instructions.

You’re correct. We’re also arguing the same exact point if you actually read my post, and that to which it was in response. Wink, wink.

 

[Apeman]

I don't think there's any difference between the Mean, a Bullet-Button, or a set-screw run through the magazine release; they all (when installed properly) do the same thing in keeping a magazine from being readily "detached" from a MRS. You can "remove" the engine from your Car, but you cannot "detach" it. If you really got technical about it, if you removed a magazine from the Rifle to service/repair it, at that point you could be in violation because a detached magazine could be installed...not likely to happen, but stranger things have manifested.

As for the Epoxy: In the early days of the un-SAFE Act, a Black owned Gun Shop was busted and fucked over for turning out MSR's with Bullet Buttons, and in the end, all charges the bullshit would come to an end IF they would put epoxy over the screw hole. There are/were Dealers and Individuals doing that, but I suspect more that aren't and since very few if any other cases of someone else getting jammed, it mustn't be an issue anymore....If you're going to drill out or otherwise remove/destroy the magazine lock, that epoxy is nothing more than a little extra aggravation.

While I don't agree with any of these bullshit laws I can see them not allowing bullet buttons like they used to have in CA. People started wearing rings with a protusion on them that would release the mags so you didn't have to use a tool. That made mag changes easy

 

[Acer-m14]

Boone Co. Indiana Sheriff Ken Campbell - Debunks Gun Magizne restriction​

10 years ago ...

 

[HEX]

This is absurd. He broke two laws to get the gun in this condition. Why don’t we sue every maker of everything for every illegal action take with their products.

Unfortunately, that seems to be exactly what we're moving towards in this country.

 

[IraIII]

“People started wearing rings with a protusion on them that would release the mags so you didn't have to use a tool. That made mag changes easy”
The ring was the tool needed to release the magazine.

 

[Grimscale]

They told him that if it had a spur or other type of compliant grip on it they needed to put epoxy over the screw head so it couldn't be removed.

In the early days of the un-SAFE Act, a Black owned Gun Shop was busted and fucked over for turning out MSR's with Bullet Buttons, and in the end, all charges the bullshit would come to an end IF they would put epoxy over the screw hole.

It's not in the law.
This behavior is NO different than what the ATF has been doing (or the EPA, or any other 3-letter draconian tyrannical .gov group).

Cops can't make up law, neither can lawyers, DA's, or der eyebrows fuhrer herself (without the rest of the NY legislature being complicit).

All you need to be in compliance to the law is a $0.25 nut that has the same threads as the mag latch. Replace the button and spring with that nut, tighten it down, and you're good to go. A mag already installed cannot be removed without tools, and even when empty a "detachable" mag cannot be inserted.

 

[Zerex]

I had Mean Arms, full featured AR's..................their mag loaders are the gas.
So far no NYS court has ruled on the merits of Mag Locks, or them changing the intent of the written law.

At one time, a 15 second time limit was a supposed standard for mag changes and locks but that was BS.

A Rem 700 can accept a detachable mag..............but a semi cannot unless it has no PG or FH.

Only SCOTUS can sort out the Assault Weapon bans, and mag capacity and evil features issue.......and will.

As long as mag lock equipped guns are being sold in NYS, it is a good sign that the issue has not been closed, or lock down, as illegal.

 

[Beerman]

I had Mean Arms, full featured AR's..................their mag loaders are the gas.
So far no NYS court has ruled on the merits of Mag Locks, or them changing the intent of the written law.

At one time, a 15 second time limit was a supposed standard for mag changes and locks but that was BS.

A Rem 700 can accept a detachable mag..............but a semi cannot unless it has no PG or FH.

Only SCOTUS can sort out the Assault Weapon bans, and mag capacity and evil features issue.......and will.

As long as mag lock equipped guns are being sold in NYS, it is a good sign that the issue has not been closed, or lock down, as illegal.

I don’t like the Mean Arms side loaders dropping the bolt for me. I prefer to do that myself. Especially if that final round didn’t seat properly into the magazine, which is common with any side loader device. Instant jam. Yeah, I know- never happened to you, ever. But it’s happened to a lot of other people. Bear Flag Defense = better side loader.

 

[Acer-m14]

so will Glock be sued for the removal of the back plate so you can put a switch in there ..

 

[Zerex]

No gun is illegal OR any device or any ammo......"A MILITIA, NECESSARY FOR THE SECURITY OF A FREE STATE..THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

Well regulated means well armed...........not run by Hochul types.

 

[JRtraderny]

No gun is illegal OR any device or any ammo......"A MILITIA, NECESSARY FOR THE SECURITY OF A FREE STATE..THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

Well regulated means well armed...........not run by Hochul types.

And that's what I don't understand it's right here in the NYS bill of rights .

 

[Saltwater60]

I think we should all get together and sue VW for their atrocities with defrauding and trying to kill us with their environmental fraud on their vehicles. How about Kathy Hochul for not holding all companies to the same environmental standards. They allow steel plants to pollute like crazy while cracking down on others.