Has nothing to do with detachable. It’s when it has the ability to accept a mag that is the problem. If that setup would allow you to break open the rifle and drop the mag, then only be able to insert or accept a new mag while the rifle is still open it would be legal. Unfortunately that system allows the rifle to be closed without a mag in place and allows it to accept a mag when closed. If they could engineer around that it would be good to go.
What is the legal consensus on the juggernaut hellfighter kit in NY?
- Thread starter Sev289
- Start date
garyv350
.357 mag
Where in the law does it say that a rifle can have the ability to accept a magazine only while the rifle is open? Where did you find it's "when it has the ability"? That's totally not accurate at all.
garyv350
.357 mag
Good luck with that. Your still new here. That argument was beaten to death. There used to be something called an MR2. See if you can find them for sale. That was supposed to be the fix fo NY around the law.
New here or not, not new to firearms and I’m going literally word for word with what is in black and white in written law. Things get beaten to death here all the time. Doesn’t make anyone any more right or wrong. Facts are facts. We can beat to death 2+2 doesn’t = 4 here for years and years, but it will still be wrong.
By the way this is not my setup and the way the product is manufactured does not currently comply, as I said before. If it were made in a way the lower could not accept a mag unless the lower was not attached to the upper it would pass the law text. A lower not attached to an upper or a lower attached to a bolt or pump action upper CAN legally ACCEPT a detachable mag. Sorry your feelings got hurt or you misunderstood.
This is correct. It does not mean you can't be arrested and chared though. The armr2 should actually be legal by the definition of the law, but the state police have said otherwise.
You can also be sentenced to 15 days in jail for speeding.
spat
.700 Nitro Express
You are fixated on the "ability to accept" part and always ignore the "detachable" part.
The ability to accept a fixed magazine is not a forbidden feature. This all hinges on what constitutes a detachable magazine.
Technically any rifle with a magazine inserted cannot accept another magazine, but if that magazine can be removed without "gunsmithing" then they will call it close enough and probably prosecute.
If someone needs to disassemble the rifle before it can accept a magazine you are probably safe.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
It’s not accepting a fixed magazine. We’ve been through this. It’s accepting a magazine that is detachable . Nowhere in the law does it mention gunsmithing, heat, a tool, ect as what constitutes if a magazine is fixed or not. Nowhere. We have no definition on what constitutes what makes a magazine fixed. That was struck from the original draft.
You can only go by what the law says. Not logic or feelings. And yes. That includes SKS’s .
spat
.700 Nitro Express
Yes, we know you think all semiautomatic rifles with any "features" are illegal in NY because all of them can accept a detachable magazine.
You are wrong. It's as simple as that.
Is your stock adjustable because I own a saw ? Do you have a bayonet mount because I have a stick of JB weld ? Do you have an unregistered machinegun because I have a drill ?
"gunsmithing" is the legal difference between something that *is* illegal and something that could be illegal with some modifications.
It's fuzzy as all hell, but that's what it is.
Which is the problem, and also why nobody with a fixed mag has been charged.
Mine cannot accept a detachable mag without first removing with a tool. Even after removed, it can't accept a detachable mag without putting in the original mag release and spring. Now if the law said I can't remove a mag with with specific tools that would be a different story.
Why can't you agree? The state's even allowing them to be put on pistol permits for crying out loud.
It doesn’t solve the problem in NY because the rifle can still accept a detachable mag after being re-assembled. In CA they are legal because of the wording of the law there. They were designed for them not for us.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
The law doesn’t say a semi automatic rifle with the ability to accept a detachable mag and the ABILITY to have one feature.
It only says and has one feature. Nowhere is the word “ABILITY” in reference to features like pistol grips or stocks.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
They are allowing them only because they are allowing them. Just like they allow open carry of pistols while hunting even though the law only gives you an exemption for concealed carry. Another example is a semi automatic version of an automatic version. They allow that too. Another example is carrying ammo in your car with your rifle. According to the law, just having your rifle along with ammo in the same car constitutes a loaded rifle but they allow that. Why?
Just because. It’s a poorly written law with unintended consequence but they just do not change it.
They also allow you to do 66 on a 65 too.
Last edited:
BDinPutnam
.475 A&M Magnum
My permit says nothing about "concealed."
1075tech
.338 Win Mag
A lower, separate from the upper, i.e. not attached, is not a semi-automatic rifle. Correct?
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
What’s written on your license means nothing. It’s what’s written in a penal law that matters.
BDinPutnam
.475 A&M Magnum
It's not even a rifle.
1075tech
.338 Win Mag
So if I have to disassemble my rifle to remove the magazine, at that point it is no longer a rifle. Correct?
If there were a device that would not allow me to put my rifle back together until the magazine was inserted, my rifle then would not be able to accept a detachable magazine.
I believe that the "law" is intentionally vague. On those grounds alone, it should not stand
If there were a device that would not allow me to put my rifle back together until the magazine was inserted, my rifle then would not be able to accept a detachable magazine.
I believe that the "law" is intentionally vague. On those grounds alone, it should not stand
spat
.700 Nitro Express
It's implied.
What is a bayonet mount if not the ability to accept a bayonet ?
What is a collapsible stock if it isn't a stock with the ability to collapse.
You are so obsessed with that one word you ignore the rest of the text.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Implications aren’t law. An out of spec bayonet mount that can’t hold any bayonet is still illegal. You can only go by what a law actually says. That is why break allowed us to briefly use a brake until a court fixed it and the penal law was amended.
spat
.700 Nitro Express
By your reasoning any rifle with a magazine inserted is legal and it only becomes illegal once you detach it. Since a rifle with a magazine attached does not have the ability to accept another magazine.
Good luck with that argument in court.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Nope. My argument says that it has the ability to. Even if a bolt is placed through the magazine release. It’s still has the ability to.
true, but it is a "firearm".
Not without you changing what I've got. That's like saying flour and water and yeast is a loaf of bread. It's not until you make it that. My car has the ability to fly - if I attach wings and jet engines etc etc...... So back to reality, by picking up my rifle if you can hit the release and the mag doesn't drop it's fixed in place and therefore cannot accept a detachable mag. If you show up with your tool box you can change what it is, but that's something you did, not what I had.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
You can only go by what the law says. Period. It still has the ability to accept. The law doesn’t say without the ability to temporarily accept a detachable magazine.
Is it enforced? No. Is the open carry of handguns by security guards enforced even though they only have ah exemption for a concealed carry license? No. Are people arrested when they go to the range with their unloaded rifle and ammo in the same car that by now makes the rifle loaded? No.
My point is to show you and make you understand what the law actually says and that it’s written poorly. The meaning about the ability to accept totally changed when they struck the definition on what constitutes a fixed magazine from the original draft.
if there is already a fixed mag in place it no longer possess the ability to accept a mag. only 1 mag can be inserted at a time.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Can a standard, unaltered rifle that has a magazine inserted have the ABILITY to accept another one? Yes. By removing the magazine that’s there. What does it matter if you can only remove it via a finger, pin, wrench, or heat? The key word is ABILITY.
Again, my car has the ABILITY to fly, if I change the way it is and add things to it. Can a person pick up a regular rifle and drop the mag and re-insert it under normal operating circumstances? If so then it has the ability to accept a detachable mag. Now can that person pick up a fixed mag rifle drop the mag and re-insert it under normal operating circumstances? Nope. You need to modify the rifle to do so. The law doesn't say the rifle must be IMPOSSIBLE to alter by the use of all tools and resources. It just says it can't accept. My mag is fixed. Try jamming another mag in there. It's not gonna work.