Jump to content
Jon

A3659: Bans .50 cal weapons

Recommended Posts

A3659

Sponsored by Assemblyman Peter J. Barnes, III District 18 (Middlesex),

Assemblyman Gordon M. Johnson, District 37 (Bergen)

 

Revises definition of destructive device to include certain weapons of 50 caliber

or greater.

 

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2012/Bills/A4000/3659_I1.HTM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just applied for 3 permits. Going to wait things out a bit to see what happens, but I'd like a S&W Model 500 in my collection...

 

I would still get it. This is just plain stupidity... and I hope someone has a head on their shoulders to stop this madness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I would still get it. This is just plain stupidity... and I hope someone has a head on their shoulders to stop this madness.

 

If it wasn't a handgun that the NJSP would definitely know about I would seriously consider it. Unfortunately they would have a record and its too much money to have them decide its illegal right after I buy it. I'd like a Barrett too, but I hear they are tough to come by these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The proposed legislation was changed to include a "muzzle energy" descriptor of 12,000ft/lbs. or greater. Basically only the 50 BMG is considered a destructive device by that reckoning. The Beowulf does not fit that descriptor by a long shot. This was beaten to death on another thread.

 

IMHO The 50 bans at ranges are for the BMG. I've seen SOCOMs and Beowulfs on the 100 yd line at CR.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The proposed legislation was changed to include a "muzzle energy" descriptor of 12,000ft/lbs. or greater. Basically only the 50 BMG is considered a destructive device by that reckoning. The Beowulf does not fit that descriptor by a long shot. This was beaten to death on another thread.

 

IMHO The 50 bans at ranges are for the BMG. I've seen SOCOMs and Beowulfs on the 100 yd line at CR.

 

IMO, the proposed bill bans ALL 50 caliber rifles and handguns, or any OTHER caliber firearm which attains 12,000 ft lbs of energy. So IMO, .50BMG, .50AE, .500SW, .50GI, .50Beo, etc. will be banned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rejiggered proposed bill:

 

"which shall

33 include a 12.7 mm equivalent of 50 caliber or greater or any other

34 metric equivalent, or a copy or duplicate of any such weapon

35 regardless of caliber that is capable of firing a projectile that attains

36 a muzzle energy of 12,000 foot-pounds or greater in any

37 combination of bullet, propellant, case, or primer. The provisions

38 of this paragraph shall not apply to a smooth bore shotgun or rifle

39 barrel shotgun or any shotgun ammunition generally recognized as

40 suitable for sporting purposes in this State"

 

Link to revised bill: http://www.njleg.sta...000/3659_R1.PDF

 

 

I think you're right. I mistook to "or" for an "and" we may be screwed if this goes through the process without further changes, pork and concessions. We may be screwed anyway.

 

The bothersome thing, on this very forum, is the subtle concession to this bill if it doesn't ban 12 ga rifled slug barrels. Loss of our liberty for one means loss of liberty for all. If they wanted to ban hunting, I'd be right there with you hunters protecting your rights. How about everyone does the same for the 50 cal? Just because they exempt the slug barrels DOES NOT MAKE IT OK. Or at least it shouldn't.

 

Shall not be infringed, right? I am always under the assumption that this is a pro2a forum. If they make us turn on each other over the "it doesn't affect me" attitude then it's going to be tough.

 

We must stand together.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imagine being told your prized 1886 Winchester, chambered in .50 Win. Express, built at the turn of the 19th century, that sells for about 5-figures today, would be illegal to own?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like the bill that would ban .50 cal has been amended.

 

The amendments appear to do two things:

1. Narrowed to exclude muzzleloaders and shotguns.

2. Expanded to include copy's of existing .50 cal guns that can achieve a muzzel energy of 12,000 ft lbs, regardless of caliber.

 

The Senate will likely be hearing this bill in the next few weeks.

 

I am a bit flummoxed by this new provision. What, besides a rifle that can shoot the .50 BMG, is capable of achieving a muzzel energy of 12,000 ft lbs? What exactly are they going after?

 

I would like to hear everyone's thoughts on this.

 

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2012/Bills/A4000/3659_R1.PDF

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20mm Lahti Anti-Tank rifle, 20mm Anzio Iron works bolt action rifle, 12.5x157mm Russian, and rail guns*.

 

Seriously. Rail guns can achieve 12,000 ft lbs like its nothing. Problem is, they don't really exist outside of lab environments. And those need to be replaced after every shot because of blowback on the circuit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I recall this was discussed previously and both PK90 and myself agree that this revision will actually ban all .50 caliber cartridges and others of any caliber that can achieve the ME threshold.

 

I looked at the ME generated by cartridges like the .338 LM and the .408 Cheytac and they don't come close - so doubt there is anything, handheld, under .50 that can surpass that threshold.

 

My guess would be that the intent was to revise the bill so as to exclude cartridges like the .500 S&W magnum, .50 AE and those .50 caliber wildcats used in converted Glocks and 1911's (or maybe I'm just an optimist). But the revision is so poorly written that it really doesn't change the bill - with the exception of making it even more far reaching if there actually is something out there that can generate that kind of ME.

 

Before making suggestions on revising it further, you need to find out what the intent was behind revising it to the ME threshold specification.

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my only question is, does it really matter what they are trying to ban? the simple fact that they are trying pisses me off and we need to do everything in our power to stop them. i will continue writing and calling. if there is another rally i will try my best to attend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I recall this was discussed previously and both PK90 and myself agree that this revision will actually ban all .50 caliber cartridges and others of any caliber that can achieve the ME threshold.

 

I looked at the ME generated by cartridges like the .338 LM and the .408 Cheytac and they don't come close - so doubt there is anything, handheld, under .50 that can surpass that threshold.

 

My guess would be that the intent was to revise the bill so as to exclude cartridges like the .500 S&W magnum, .50 AE and those .50 caliber wildcats used in converted Glocks and 1911's (or maybe I'm just an optimist). But the revision is so poorly written that it really doesn't change the bill - with the exception of making it even more far reaching if there actually is something out there that can generate that kind of ME.

 

Before making suggestions on revising it further, you need to find out what the intent was behind revising it to the ME threshold specification.

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

 

I see. So you think that maybe they were trying to ban the .50 BMG and the equivalent without banning other .50 cal firearms, but they didn't take out the language that bans the other .50 cal center fire firearms, just the muzzle loaders, shotguns and rifled barrel shotguns. You might be right.

 

Of course, the objective is to stop the bill altogether. I was just trying to understand what they were trying to do.

 

It seems to me that the other arms mentioned above that could exceed 12,000 ft lbs are already banned because they are over .60 cal. Am I correct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see. So you think that maybe they were trying to ban the .50 BMG and the equivalent without banning other .50 cal firearms, but they didn't take out the language that bans the other .50 cal center fire firearms, just the muzzle loaders, shotguns and rifled barrel shotguns. You might be right.

 

Of course, the objective is to stop the bill altogether. I was just trying to understand what they were trying to do.

 

It seems to me that the other arms mentioned above that could exceed 12,000 ft lbs are already banned because they are over .60 cal. Am I correct?

 

Where does it say that?

 

Serious question, I don't remember seeing that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Destructive device" means any device, instrument or object designed to explode or produce uncontrolled combustion, including (1) any explosive or incendiary bomb, mine or grenade; (2) any rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces or any missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter of an ounce; (3) any weapon capable of firing a projectile of a caliber greater than 60 caliber, except a shotgun or shotgun ammunition generally recognized as suitable for sporting purposes; (4) any Molotov cocktail or other device consisting of a breakable container containing flammable liquid and having a wick or similar device capable of being ignited. The term does not include any device manufactured for the purpose of illumination, distress signaling, line-throwing, safety or similar purposes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Destructive device" means any device, instrument or object designed to explode or produce uncontrolled combustion, including (1) any explosive or incendiary bomb, mine or grenade; (2) any rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces or any missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter of an ounce; (3) any weapon capable of firing a projectile of a caliber greater than 60 caliber, except a shotgun or shotgun ammunition generally recognized as suitable for sporting purposes; (4) any Molotov cocktail or other device consisting of a breakable container containing flammable liquid and having a wick or similar device capable of being ignited. The term does not include any device manufactured for the purpose of illumination, distress signaling, line-throwing, safety or similar purposes.

 

Ten wouldn't that be a defacto ban on cannons then? And AFAIK they're legal to own under NJ law. At least thats what I've heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems to me that the other arms mentioned above that could exceed 12,000 ft lbs are already banned because they are over .60 cal. Am I correct?

 

I don't think anything else in a shoulder fired weapon comes close to that threshold, except a Lahti anti-tank gun (20mm) - and yes they are DD's. I was looking at some of the old African cartridges like the .505 Gibbs and the .470 Nitro Express - and again, not even close.

 

Yes, I think someone was actually trying to cut us a break and just screwed-up because they had no idea what they were talking about. Of course I am probably more charitable than most. And, absolutely, the idea is to lose this bill altogether in any form. Good luck.

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...