Question on Hi Cap Mags in NJ

[PK90 3,570]

Will it feed 9mm in a stock form or does it have to be modified to feed 9mm?

It works in stock form.

 

I mean, what's stopping them from unilaterally deciding all AR-15s are not reasonably different from ones on the banned list?

A lawsuit did in 1996.

[vladtepes 1,060]

just to be clear.. I think there are two discussions going on here...

 

is it reasonable to be afraid of prosecution using a 15rd magazine in a Glock 22 (for example) because it can hypothetically fire more than 15 rounds of 9mm through a semi auto firearm..

probably not.. the likelihood of prosecution is probably almost 0..

 

BUT with that said.. is that magazine illegal by the LITERAL reading of the law? YES..

 

this is just another illustration of laws written by people who do not understand that which they are legislating..

[PK90 3,570]

Well then, those 15 round AR magazines that everyone is buying through the Group Buy are illegal, because they will certainly hold more than 15 rounds of 5.45x39mm. And yes, I am 92.5% certain that they will function in an AR chambered for that round. :wild:

[DevsAdvocate 112]

It works in stock form.

 

 

A lawsuit did in 1996.

 

Right, but all that did was force the NJAG to clarify what 'substantially identical' meant. Crap like banning bayo lugs, flash hiders, adjustable stocks, are their interpretation of it. What's stopping them from expanding that? Heck, what about banning it by color? Any rifle that is 100% black is banned because the Colt AR-15 was black.

 

Seems to me they can do it, right now, and then the burden shifts onto gun owners to fight it in the Courts... and with the NJ Supreme Court these days, it wouldn't be an easy win.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Right, but all that did was force the NJAG to clarify what 'substantially identical' meant. Crap like banning bayo lugs, flash hiders, adjustable stocks, are their interpretation of it. What's stopping them from expanding that? Heck, what about banning it by color? Any rifle that is 100% black is banned because the Colt AR-15 was black.

 

Seems to me they can do it, right now, and then the burden shifts onto gun owners to fight it in the Courts... and with the NJ Supreme Court these days, it wouldn't be an easy win.

 

what is stopping them is a gun community that pushes back...

offer no opposition and nothing stops the "other side"

unfortunately I don't see much pushing back..

[DevsAdvocate 112]

what is stopping them is a gun community that pushes back...

offer no opposition and nothing stops the "other side"

unfortunately I don't see much pushing back..

 

Nope. In all honesty, what routes are left but for the Federal Gov't to step in to protect our Rights? Look at our options:

 

1. Legislative Change: Not going to be happen thanks to the gerrymandering and legislative make-up.

 

2. NJ Courts: State Supreme Court is like a Military Junta here... they have way too much power and hate us.

 

3. Federal Courts: If we can make a good enough case, then maybe we will see the Feds overturn NJ's onerous laws. Nice thing here is that it can happen an CA and give us the case law to affect change here.

 

As a community, the best we can do is donate money to local pro-2A groups (NJ2AS, ANJRPC) and try to grass-roots some change. I think we're doing quite well here. These forums alone are making a huge impact...

[Missionmtman 2]

OK I do not have any other comments but to say that I can sympathize with you guys that this conversation even had to take place.

[DevsAdvocate 112]

OK I do not have any other comments but to say that I can sympathize with you guys that this conversation even had to take place.

 

It's not really our fault... From what I heard, gun owners in this state have been valiantly fighting for their rights since the AWB was implemented, and before that. The problem is, the political make-up of the state has changed to such a degree that the legislature is permanently Blue, and the Governor's seat is occupied by a succession of Democrats and RINOs... which in-turn means the State Supreme Court is packed with Blue-leaning justices.

 

Even 'holding the line' is difficult, and that's what the community has been doing since 1996... and even then we've seen some defeats, like One-Gun-A-Month... People say: "well, if there were more gun owners, it would change!!!" I would estimate given the number of hunters and NICS checks, we got at least a million gun owners in this state, maybe even two. But we're all so spread out that the voting power is diluted.

 

I used to get mad at NJ gun groups for not doing enough... but that's not the case. It's just we're so limited in all our options.

 

[vladtepes 1,060]

Nope. In all honesty, what routes are left but for the Federal Gov't to step in to protect our Rights? Look at our options:

 

1. Legislative Change: Not going to be happen thanks to the gerrymandering and legislative make-up.

 

2. NJ Courts: State Supreme Court is like a Military Junta here... they have way too much power and hate us.

 

3. Federal Courts: If we can make a good enough case, then maybe we will see the Feds overturn NJ's onerous laws. Nice thing here is that it can happen an CA and give us the case law to affect change here.

 

As a community, the best we can do is donate money to local pro-2A groups (NJ2AS, ANJRPC) and try to grass-roots some change. I think we're doing quite well here. These forums alone are making a huge impact...

 

it is not anything that one individual is or is not doing... the people on this board obviously care... but most don't... I remember talking about CCW with a skeet shooter.. who though me wanting to carry a gun was nuts.. that told me all I needed to know..as long as his hobby was safe.. anything else pro 2a was moot... hed probably be ok with having to leave his guns locked up at the range.. and IMO people like that are the issue.. NJ is SO anti gun.. that even many gun enthusiasts are against 2a rights progress.. they think everything is just fine.. they don't think you need "military guns"... that was more my point..

[siderman 1,137]

Here's another angle on this topic. We, the owners of these dbl duty/alternate use mags are just the end user. Every mag has a dealer, distributer and or manufacturer behind it who made it available to us. Anyone care to speculate from there? personally i think the mods should nuke this thread.

[Trunk 4]

Nope. In all honesty, what routes are left but for the Federal Gov't to step in to protect our Rights? ... 3. Federal Courts: If we can make a good enough case, then maybe we will see the Feds overturn NJ's onerous laws.

On that point, the US District Court for the District of New Jersey denied a challenge to N.J.S.A. 2C:39-1(y), which was based on the premise that the number of rounds in a fixed magazine tube varied with the length of the shells. Coalition of New Jersey Sportsmen, Inc. v. Whitman. 44 F. Supp. 2d 666 - Dist. Court, D. New Jersey 1999.

 

As I read it, the Court reasoned that statute encompassed the "standard shells intended for the magazine." The opinion still leaves the question of what a "standard" shotshell is within a given caliber or gauge. For 12 ga., I'd imagine it would be 2 3/4".

 

Of course, with all of that said, the court's interpretation of the capacity of a fixed tube shotgun really doesn't help with the debate about the capacity of certain milti-caliber-capable magazines. For instance, what is "standard" when comparing .556 vs. .50? Which came first? Which sells better? Which has some kind of immeasurable "standard" firepower? Who knows?

 

Interestingly, the Court also dealt with the issue of scienter and appears to suggest that the Pelliteri Court got it wrong: " In an August 19, 1996 directive issued to the Director of the Division of Criminal Justice, County Prosecutors, and all Law Enforcement Chief Executives, Attorney General Peter Verniero wrote that 'prosecutors and police should remember that an assault firearms offense requires proof that the defendant knows he or she possesses an assault firearm, e.g., that the defendant knows that the firearm is `substantially identical' to one of the named assault weapons.' (Defendants' Exh. B, p. 3). In sum, the Attorney General seemingly claims that an element of scienter is required although neither the statute nor the cases interpreting it seemingly require knowledge."Coalition of New Jersey Sportsmen, Inc., 44 Supp 2d. at 683.

 

As I understand it, though, the Superior Court of New Jersey is still free to say "No, they got it right in Pelliteri" if you ever got hauled in for possession of a high capacity magazine that just so happened to be able to hold more than 15 rounds of some other caliber. So, we're not really any better off, but it suggests that the federal court may be a little more reasonable if the constitutional challenge was presented to them.

 

 

I think that we can all agree that if you're caught with a magazine loaded with more than 15 rounds of anything, you're going to be in trouble. Likewise, we can speculate and agree about law enforcement's interpretation and priorities. But the fact still remains that the statute, as written, is very clear about what constitutes a high capacity magazine.

[this_is_nascar 162]

Sorry that I'm coming in late, however all along, I thought I had read/heard here that the 15-round mag limit was only for a semi-auto. If you have a bolt-action or levered-action that there's no limit of rounds for the mag. Was that incorrect?

[Trunk 4]

Sorry that I'm coming in late, however all along, I thought I had read/heard here that the 15-round mag limit was only for a semi-auto. If you have a bolt-action or levered-action that there's no limit of rounds for the mag. Was that incorrect?

 

That's correct.

"Large capacity ammunition magazine" means a box, drum, tube or other container which is capable of holding more than 15 rounds of ammunition to be fed continuously and directly therefrom into a semi-automatic firearm.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Here's another angle on this topic. We, the owners of these dbl duty/alternate use mags are just the end user. Every mag has a dealer, distributer and or manufacturer behind it who made it available to us. Anyone care to speculate from there? personally i think the mods should nuke this thread.

 

why do you ask people to speculate and then ask for the thread to be nuked 5 seconds later..

 

your statement would be relevant if means of acquisition was relevant.. it is not.. simply possessing the item if a crime..

[DevsAdvocate 112]

Wait... so Glock 22 mags can hold/feed 9mm rounds? What about .357SIG Glock mags? Aren't they functionally similar to a Glock 22 mag?

[PK90 3,570]

Yes. You all will be arrested soon.

[DevsAdvocate 112]

Yes. You all will be arrested soon.

 

Well... in this state, it's only a matter of time before they get you for something....

[siderman 1,137]

why do you ask people to speculate and then ask for the thread to be nuked 5 seconds later..

 

your statement would be relevant if means of acquisition was relevant.. it is not.. simply possessing the item if a crime..

 

So you're saying its ok to sell an item thats illegal to possess?

[reloaderguy 30]

Well then, those 15 round AR magazines that everyone is buying through the Group Buy are illegal, because they will certainly hold more than 15 rounds of 5.45x39mm. And yes, I am 92.5% certain that they will function in an AR chambered for that round. :wild:

 

Well that's interesting. The owner of Bullseye Tactical told me your 20 round,pinned to 15 round Magpul mags that I bought from you were illegal because they were pinned and the pin could easily be removed. He told me that had to be "permanately blocked" and not "pinned".

[alec.mc 180]

I managed to stuff about 100 rounds of .22 into my saiga 7.62 mag-- Should I just report directly to prison?

 

 

[alec.mc 180]

Well that's interesting. The owner of Bullseye Tactical told me your 20 round,pinned to 15 round Magpul mags that I bought from you were illegal because they were pinned and the pin could easily be removed. He told me that had to be "permanately blocked" and not "pinned".

 

Anything could really be removed, even if a block was "permantly" welded in place, what says I can go at it for 5 minutes with my dremel ? Nothing is permanent with enough ingunity. Follow the law, dont be stupid , and trouble wont find you.

[siderman 1,137]

I managed to stuff about 100 rounds of .22 into my saiga 7.62 mag-- Should I just report directly to prison?

 

 

LOL- I think you're ok, doubt that will do a reliable feed

[vladtepes 1,060]

So you're saying its ok to sell an item thats illegal to possess?

 

no.. but I am saying that simply possessing the item would be your concern.. and "well they sold it to me so I assumed it is legal" is not a reliable defense..

 

I managed to stuff about 100 rounds of .22 into my saiga 7.62 mag-- Should I just report directly to prison?

 

 

you missed the part about them having to feed.. so you should be ok..

[hd2000fxdl 422]

I managed to stuff about 100 rounds of .22 into my saiga 7.62 mag-- Should I just report directly to prison?

 

 

 

Yes, sorry we won't see you at the steel match... ROLFMAO

[MrSurfboard 1]

Wait... so Glock 22 mags can hold/feed 9mm rounds? What about .357SIG Glock mags? Aren't they functionally similar to a Glock 22 mag?

 

Yes they are and they hold the same amount of rounds as their 40 counter parts. Remember the 357sig is a 40 case necked down.

[Dr. Horrible 0]

I managed to stuff about 100 rounds of .22 into my saiga 7.62 mag-- Should I just report directly to prison?

 

 

 

 

I lol'd IRL. Great picture.