JHZR2

No you missed my point. I use the LA specifically because it was irrelevant to the SA consideration. If I disassembled the action, could I swap out the magazine in a LA or not? The comment point was that NJ doesn't allow disassembly. My point was that anything can be disassembled to a point that the mag is then detachable and can be replaced. If one doesn't like my example because I used a LA, fine. But the fundamental question is, "isn't any magazine detachable if an action is disassembled?" if so, then any and every magazine in any manner is detachable. If disassembly of the action is a reasonable way to determine if a magazine is intrinsically detachable or not, then something like the AR Magblock should work in NJ too.

I was under the inpression that the hexmags use specific length springs. So if you remove the extended height floorplate, the spring will be useless. A cut or reduced length spring won't work without the base that blocks the rest of the volume. That's fundamentally different than putting a block THROUGH a standard length spring which then could be removed and be fundamentally operational at full capacity again.

Let's pull the thread a bit. Let's look at a LA rifle, because it's outside the bounds of these current laws. If I disassembled the action, could I swap out the tubular magazine? it seems to me that this is another one of those interpretation things. With enough disassembly, nothing is fixed. So then is the determinant how "easy" the disassembly is?

That's not letterhead signed by someone with authority to bind the department. Hate to be negative, but I wouldn't trust it, at least with what I know. Was it sent only to you in response to a query, or to the population at large? My local PD didn't accept my citing of correspondence with NJSP on providing more than three permits and automatic six month extension, as it wasn't official guidance signed out by NJSP.

Then why is it that well established NJ FFLs can fix an adjustable stock on an AR with a pin? Ive also seen AR mags with pins from reputable NJ B&M shops.

Not worth the electrons or phone call it came on unless it was officially written.

Looks similar to the AR Magblock. AR Magblock claims the following: AR MAGLOCK allows California AR-15 owners to comply with existing fixed magazine laws, thus avoiding Department of Justice registration. AR MAGLOCK engages the magazine so it stays “fixed” in the firearm until the action is disassembled, complying with California SB 880 & AB 1135, and Department of Justice regulations. It is our reasonable belief the AR MAGLOCK complies with New York NY SAFE , Connecticut, Maryland, New Jersey and other states (and other local municipalities such as Cook County Illinois) detachable magazine laws based on our in depth analysis of these laws and regulations. In an effort to address some consumers concerns related to our website statement “potentiality complaint”… “Potentially compliant” does NOT refer to California as it IS compliant within this state, but it does refer to other states and municipalities with detachable magazine restrictions. Locations such as Cook County IL have ordinances that make our product potentially compliant also, but we leave it to the end consumer to make that judgement based on their knowledge of their local laws and regulations. We can’t be expected to know all of the regulations in every place that the AR MAGLOCK can be used. Additionally, at a minimum the AR MAGLOCK being installed on your firearm demonstrates to law enforcement that you are making a good faith effort to comply with the vague legislation. See our legal disclaimer and terms of use for additional information. https://www.armaglock2.com/

I believe on these site it talks about state laws, and it gives guidance that CA is considering the clarification that epoxy is the appropriate permanent approach. Its still not definite, but at least a bit of precedent and clarification.

Have to ask if all these "events" were actually anomalies or not... Unfortunately many people on either end of the spectrum wouldn't be above taking life to get their way.

IMO, everyone's having such queries (or everyone in general) should be flooding the NJSP, AG, Governor and bill sponsors. Suits should be made in advance of the grace period, over unclear, ambiguous laws that can potentially entrap the population while turning them into automatic felons. Personal suits should be made against some of these people for their actions. It's not like these laws clearly outlaw and define things. There's always some lack of clarity it seems which put law abiding people on edge. That's unfair.

Does it matter whether a handgun capable of holding 15 rounds in its standard magazine configuration is considered a handgun or a semi-automatic assault weapon? Does it change the relevance related to forcing the magazine capacity to go from 15 rounds to 10? I thought it was any and all "large capacity" magazines. Isnt it kind of like having a bolt action rifle that accepts AR or M14 mags? Doesnt matter what youre employing them in, the mag itself is still contraband.

I suspect that this has been discussed before, but I think it begs for clarification. In legal matters, definition of words and terms is VERY important. The word "pin" as bolded here, is not well defined. Allow me to pull the thread here a bit. In laymen's terms, "pin" could mean safety pin, sewing pin, roll pin, split/cotter pin, etc. Which is it? Ill say that in personal experience with well-established dealers and FFLs, using a roll pin to permanently fix an otherwise adjustable stock is acceptable. So is a roll pin considered permanent or not? Is it considered permanent and acceptable for a stock, but NOT for a magazine? Has any of this actually been determined AT LAW? After all, anyone with half a brain knows that roll pins can be removed. For better or worse, California seems to be moving towards some clarification. Magazine blocks' website indicates that CA code appears to be clarifying that the employment of epoxy as an indicator of permanency. Similarly, in the context above, the term rivet is used. Unless Im looking at an older version of the law, or missing the location, I dont see clarification at law, that riveting, epoxying or welding are acceptable means. How is a rivet more permanent than a pin? Does it mean that I can apply pop rivets at a specific location to block motion below a point and be good? Or does it have to be a true round rivet with a beat head? Is the suitability of a rivet something that is Nappen's interpretation? Or the State's? If the former, its worth what we paid for it. If the latter, then an application guide must be provided so that there is an objective standard against which to compare. I get that a piece of wood just blocking the follower from going any further down is not really permanent; but the term pin is vague. A rivet can be easily drilled out, and therefore is as non-permanent in my mind as a screw or similar device. Epoxy at least notionally creates a chemical bond that adheres the unit together and makes it much more difficult to take apart. If such terms are going to remain, without clarification or basis, it would be desirable to sue the governor and authors of this bill, both personally and in their official function, on the basis of creating law that is vague in a manner that could readily entrap and turn otherwise well-meaning people (who made some attempt in good faith) into felons, above and beyond those who would be unwilling to adhere. For those that it applies to, Id love to see them disbarred as well on the basis of not producing appropriate legislation and legal wording in the best interest of the entire population, regardless of their desirements associated with the law.

Link??

That's my position too.

That's fine. To think that the other side doesn't realize the plan of their opponent is just not the case. But to delay within the law, to "play the game"... got it... But silence and secrecy, and donations going to a black hole with no traceable action means that some high priced lawyer may be getting paid for minimal work. I want to invest, know that it will be invested in efforts relevant to us (this, reprocity, challenge/change of laws that are unclear and/or an excessive hassle, etc.). I don't currently have a good feel that this is happening. Not sure we want "rabid", think crazy SJW types that just turn the common person off to their cause... but we do want persistent, active, and results-driven folks pushing the legal end where it counts.

I want this ready yesterday. Where's the guesstimate of costs to prep and file from both organizations, and the link to donate to this in a dedicated manner? Not looking for gun giveaways, not looking for spirited talks. I'm looking for a project plan, staffing plan, and costs. Run this like a program in a successful company. With a sense of urgency and a transparency to ensure traceability and execution.

What's the requirement on it? $10 is OK to spend on a $10 item (w/tax), or do you only get the $10 if you spend some other, larger amount? If the former, take whatever you can as close to $10 with tax as possible, and use it up. If the latter, its only eating into their margin, so abandon it.

Not saying the logic is right... I was just saying what some of their logic is.

Of course the people pushing this will "innocently" ask, "why do you NEED nine mags?".

Let's hope class action if not much more than that. Even if one bought a $5 magblock for each mag they owned, it would be $$$ plus time. Add everytown and all these other groups that are at the root of much of this to the parties harming the class.

Depressing...

Why would you need to?

+1. There was a variant on an earlier page with a clause that didnt invoke SA firearms as definitely. I know that was my cause of confusion before. it left a feeding device as the language, not magazine, and excluded SA. Maybe its OBE, maybe it was an error, maybe I misread as did others. I no longer have an issue; it was clarified. Hopefully others see it the same way, FWIW...

Thanks for the recommendation, but Im really not. I want to be able to shoot more, which means closer than Range 14 for me (which is currently like 50-55 mins), and better hours (later on weekends). Otherwise Range 14 is ideal to me given cost and setup... Thanks though!!!

It's pretty lousy if that goes through. Since there are lots of 15 round mags, especially from handguns, that are 100% ok right now, it lets them be modified now, not destroyed or shipped away. Lots of AR mags are ruined from initial reduction - so are donefor. But you're right, it's an excessive burden regardless of if it is a forced purchase of new ones, or a forced modification. Wonder if a Nappen, or even just a regular "Lionel Hutz" lawyer could create a class action suit on behalf of people forced to incur major costs to avoid becoming felons.