sorvanetzsorv

In the context of concealed carry one has to have a loaded magazine. Unloading a magazine when temporarily leaving a handgun in a parked car is not an option. It means that the second best option is to lock a loaded magazine separately from an unloaded handgun.

It was commonly accepted that when the handguns were transported under the exemptions before Bruen, a loaded magazine could not be stored in the same locked box as the unloaded handgun. Those rules also required us to store those locked boxes in the trunk of the car. The "Carry Killer" bill changed that for the PCH holders - its section 7-c(2) (which is codified as N.J.S.2C:58-4.6.c(2)) requires to: "store a handgun or ammunition within a locked lock box and out of plain view within the vehicle in the parking area;" see: https://casetext.com/statute/new-jersey-statutes/title-2c-the-new-jersey-code-of-criminal-justice/chapter-2c58-registration-of-manufacturers-and-wholesale-dealers-of-firearms/section-2c58-46-prohibited-areas-carrying-firearms-destructive-device This is commonly understood to mean that the locked box does not have to be in the trunk, but can be, for example, under the driver's seat. What does it require with respect to the loaded magazine? If the handgun is unloaded by removing the loaded magazine from the grip, can this loaded magazine be stored in the same locked box as the unloaded gun? If the answer to the previous question is no, does it mean that we are required to have a second lockbox for storing the loaded magazine separately from the handgun? Can the loaded magazine be stored in the locked glove compartment?

I am not a lawyer either, but my reading of the law is that a person can be charged with a disorderly persons offense (which is punishable in NJ by up to six months in jail, and is essentially a NJ version of misdemeanor) according to NJ 2C:18-3.b(2): https://lis.njleg.state.nj.us/nxt/gateway.dll/statutes/1/2753/2909

I am not a lawyer, but my reading of 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6106 (b) (11) is that one can carry a loaded handgun in a vehicle in PA without a PA LTC but with NJ PCH: https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/LI/consCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&ttl=18&div=0&chpt=61&sctn=6&subsctn=0 Specifically: "(b) Exceptions.--The provisions of subsection (a) shall not apply to: ... (11) Any person while carrying a firearm in any vehicle, which person possesses a valid and lawfully issued license for that firearm which has been issued under the laws of the United States or any other state."

It's a pity no qualified lawyer has shared their thoughts with us here. Speaking from a non-lawyer perspective, the only direct effect of Bruen on NJ so far is the removal of the justifiable need requirement to obtain permit to carry. The NJ permitting process has been in place for many decades. Any sudden changes to the process, particularly to make it harder, would be legally highly suspect at the moment. The qualification requirement is not well-defined in the current instructions: https://nj.gov/njsp/firearms/pdf/NJSP_WEBSITE_REVISION_FOR_PTC_v2.pdf The current official state document that lists the qualification courses of fire is at: https://nj.gov/lps/dcj/pdfs/dcj-firearms.pdf Many people find the first qualification course of fire - HQC1 - on page 35 of that document and make a rushed judgment that this is what should be expected from civilians as well. In my opinion, this is a wrong judgment for many reasons. First of all, the test is clearly designed for service sized handguns carried by most law enforcement officers. I would venture a guess that a good number of these officers might not be able to pass HQC1 using a snubnosed revolver. Note also that law enforcement officers must repeat qualifications every six months. According to the current rules, the qualifications for permit to carry are only repeated every two years. It seems that the currently existing guidance which is most closely related to permit to carry qualifications is the qualification course of fire for RETIRED law enforcement officers that can be found on page 79 of the above document. This point of view is also supported by the fact that the only NJ state guidance about authorized qualification instructors is the list of ranges that are authorized to provide RPO qualifications: https://nj.gov/njsp/firearms/shooting-ranges.shtml I think that the current RTSP qualification course of fire most closely resembles the RPO qualification course of fire on page 79 in the document linked above.

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?rgn=div8&node=27:3.0.1.2.3.2.1.1 Title 27: Alcohol, Tobacco Products and Firearms PART 478—COMMERCE IN FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION Subpart B—Definitions §478.11 Meaning of terms. ... State of residence. The State in which an individual resides. An individual resides in a State if he or she is present in a State with the intention of making a home in that State. If an individual is on active duty as a member of the Armed Forces, the individual's State of residence is the State in which his or her permanent duty station is located, as stated in 18 U.S.C. 921(b). The following are examples that illustrate this definition: Example 1. A maintains a home in State X. A travels to State Y on a hunting, fishing, business, or other type of trip. A does not become a resident of State Y by reason of such trip. Example 2. A maintains a home in State X and a home in State Y. A resides in State X except for weekends or the summer months of the year and in State Y for the weekends or the summer months of the year. During the time that A actually resides in State X, A is a resident of State X, and during the time that A actually resides in State Y, A is a resident of State Y. ...

See: http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php/topic/57609-legality-of-a-glock-with-a-threaded-barrel/

I decided to start a new thread to make this visible after I posted this question in an older thread where Luth-AR MBA-1 was used in a build. This is a new rifle length stock: http://www.luth-ar.com/the-mba-modular-buttstock-assembly/ The length of pull can be adjusted by slightly over an inch, but it requires unscrewing and tightening - see: So, it's not as fast to change the length of pull as using a standard M4 adjustable stock. The stock itself is fixed, only the butt plate can be moved out by about an inch. This is very similar to Magpul PRS (but lighter). There have been spirited discussions about the legality of Magpul PRS in NJ - see e.g. http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php/topic/63689-another-is-this-legal-in-nj-question/ Magpul PRS has been used in NJ and sold by some NJ FFLs, but I do not know if its legality has ever been challenged. So, what about Luth-AR MBA-1 - is it good to go here?

Given that Luth-AR MBA-1 has an adjustable length of pull, is it still considered NJ legal? How is fixed length stock defined?

The legality of threaded barrels in semi-auto pistols is regulated by the Guidelines Regarding the "Substantially Identical" Provision in the State's Assault Firearms Laws: http://www.state.nj.us/lps/dcj/agguide/assltf.htm A threaded barrel is one (#2) of the five named "evil" features, and the presence of any two of those would make a pistol into an "assault weapon" (i.e., illegal) in NJ. In the case of Glocks, the main issue is the "evil" feature #5; whether a pistol is "a semi-automatic version of an automatic firearm". Since Glock 18 is a select-fire machine pistol, there is an opinion that Glock 17 is "a semi-automatic version of" Glock 18, and therefore a Glock 17 with a threaded barrel would be illegal in NJ. For example, PK90 seems to be adhering to this position: http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php/topic/29933-threaded-barrel/#entry394581 On the other hand, the NJ Gun Law Summary by vladtepes: http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php/blog/1/entry-16-nj-gun-law-summary/ specifically states that: "A glock (which is a semi automatic pistol that has a detachable magazine ) with a threaded barrel. LEGAL" I would like to know if there has been any consensus opinion reached on this issue. This issue is complicated by the semi-mysterious existence of Glock 18: neither the US nor the EU sites of Glock have any mentioning of Glock 18. I suppose it does not imply that Glock 18 is legally non-existent in NJ. I cannot find any official technical information on Glock 18. Every available Internet source states that Glock 18 and Glock 17 are actually incompatible: http://www.cybershooters.org/dgca/prod01.htm One cannot put a Glock 18 slide on a Glock 17 frame. This seems to invalidate the claim that Glock 17 is "a semi-automatic version of" Glock 18. However, until this position is confirmed by the NJSP, I suppose one would still take a risk by using a threaded barrel in Glock 17. Another murky issue is the use of threaded barrels in, say, Glock 22. To the best of my knowledge, Glock has never made anything in .40S&W with a full auto capability. This seems to provide very strong support to the position that Glock 22 is NOT "a semi-automatic version of an automatic firearm", and therefore threaded barrels should be perfectly legal in Glock 22. However, there exist various full auto conversions (illegal in the US!) for Glock 22, or any other Glock for that matter, see, e.g. http://www.defensereview.com/select-firefull-auto-glock-22-40-sw-machine-pistol-at-the-range-sts-arms-select-fire-backplatebackplate-fire-selector-switch-for-glock-pistols-video/ and http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2011/03/04/how-to-make-your-glock-fully-automatic/ I wonder if that would put at risk the use of a threaded barrel in any Glock in NJ. Of course, in my view, such a position should have no legal standing, since with sufficient ingenuity, almost any semi-automatic pistol can be converted to full auto. Any informed opinion on this issue would be highly appreciated. is there a way to get a definitive answer to these questions?

If you want to get the stats from the horse's mouth, here is the place: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports Download the file titled: Total NICS Firearm Background Checks by State (pdf)