gun_slinger_boy
.338 Win Mag
No. It's still a rifle. With a donkey dick.
What would this firearm be?
- Thread starter That_FNG
- Start date
No. It's still a rifle. With a donkey dick.
S
stuck in ny
Guest
I'm not building anything, the pics of the xm-177 parts are just internet pics. I was saying if that if a weapon has an oal 26"+, a vertical forgrip, and no stock it is neither a pistol or a rifle it is just a firearm. It cannot be a pistol, since a pistol cannot have a vg as per the nfa.
S
stuck in ny
Guest
Took of the front wood and put it on a separate PISTOL. It would be an AOW.
gun_slinger_boy
.338 Win Mag
My bad. I read this and thought you wanted to do it "Is everyone sure this is legal in ny? If it is then I would want this, with the sig brace instead of the stock". Whatever the NFA says is what they say. But it's not necessarily what NY will say. That's what airborne is trying to say. We are all big boys. We can do whatever we think is good.
FYI, doesn't a "firearm" have to be on a pistol permit in NY anyway? The few "firearms" that are legal here at all.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
As per the law, only pistols go on pistol licenses.
S
stuck in ny
Guest
PGO shotty 18"+ BL 26 AOL, just a firearm, no pp needed though.
S
stuck in ny
Guest
And the one nfa item we can get, those shotgun based aow, Serbus.
So AOW does but not the few that are considered "firearms". Got it.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Although some judges allow it, it is incorrect. Penal Law 400 clearly says that the license is for the carrying of concealed pistols and revolvers. Not AOW 's
C3D
.308 Win
In a grand jury proceeding it is the prosecutor that instructs the grand jury on potential charges and reads the sections of law to the panel. There is no evidence or defense presented by the accused, other than if the accused makes the mistake of testifying before the grand jury (in which the accused's lawyer is not permitted to perform any direct or re-direct exam). The prosecutor is not showing the FFL's bound book where it says "other", so that's not going to help. And the prosecutor is certainly not presenting the jurors the definition of a pistol, because there is none, at least not in the statute.
Our former Chief Judge Sol Wachtler said it best: "A grand jury would indict a ham sandwich, if that's what you wanted." (Of course that was before Wachtler was indicted and arrested for stalking but so be it.)
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
A defendant can testify at a Grand Jury and give the state definition.
C3D
.308 Win
The accused can testify to anything he wants assuming the DA doesn't squelch him. Heck he can testify that the Great Pastafarian is the dear and fluffy lord of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. That doesn't mean he is instructing the grand jury and there is no debate between the potential defendant and prosecutor over the jury instruction as at trial.
The DA is counsel to the grand jury. He runs the show and gives the instructions and there isn't a judge there sitting and being a referee. Ham sandwich and all.
GJ is a near slam dunk for the state everytime. GJ was easy back when I still did stuff like that. It was like a day off.
Soeaking of, I'm going to Canada tomorrow and I hear that they ask you if you've ever been in front of a judge. Would "hundreds of times" be a valid answer?
Soeaking of, I'm going to Canada tomorrow and I hear that they ask you if you've ever been in front of a judge. Would "hundreds of times" be a valid answer?
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
I'm mearly saying that the defendant can say his piece and not that he instructs the GJ. I don't know where you got that I said that.
I understand that most GJ's elect to send things to trial. I'm not disputing that. But many a case gets thrown out. In the 3 months that I served, we threw out about 10 cases.
I understand that most GJ's elect to send things to trial. I'm not disputing that. But many a case gets thrown out. In the 3 months that I served, we threw out about 10 cases.