oofogbp 3 Posted March 23, 2011 http://www.dsarms.com/Semi-Auto-762-X-39-RPD-Rifle--RPDRIFLE/productinfo/RPDRIFLE/ I know I would only be able to use 15rd belts, but it does have a threaded barrel, and that's what I'm unsure of Thanks Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zed's_Dead 16 Posted March 23, 2011 I think you would have to permanentlymodify the drums as well so that they could not accept belts with more than 15 rounds. And it just looks so darn scary I'm sure you would have problems with it! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vladtepes 1,060 Posted March 23, 2011 http://www.dsarms.com/Semi-Auto-762-X-39-RPD-Rifle--RPDRIFLE/productinfo/RPDRIFLE/ I know I would only be able to use 15rd belts, but it does have a threaded barrel, and that's what I'm unsure of Thanks the answer will always be the same.. 1) Is the gun banned by name? YES - The gun is illegal and can not be owned in NJ NO - proceed to question 2 2) Is the gun substantially identical to anything banned by name? A. semi-automatic rifle that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of the following: 1. a folding or telescoping stock; 2. a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon; 3. a bayonet mount; 4. a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and 5. a grenade launcher; YES - it is substantially identical - then the gun is to be considered an assault rifle and therefore illegal NO - it is not substantially identical as defined by law - then the weapon is legal... if it can accept detachable mags has a pistol grip AND a threaded barrel.. throw a brake on it and have the brake welded.. that should solve your problem.. I do not see the weapon obviously listed as banned.. but might want to double check the list.. Here is the list of guns banned by name.. Algimec AGM1 type Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder such as the "Street Sweeper" or "Striker 12" Armalite AR-180 type Australian Automatic Arms SAR Avtomat Kalashnikov type semi-automatic firearms Beretta AR-70 and BM59 semi-automatic firearms Bushmaster Assault Rifle Calico M-900 Assault carbine and M-900 CETME G3 Chartered Industries of Singapore SR-88 type Colt AR-15 and CAR-15 series Daewoo K-1, K-2, Max 1 and Max 2, AR 100 types Demro TAC-1 carbine type Encom MP-9 and MP-45 carbine types FAMAS MAS223 types FN-FAL, FN-LAR, or FN-FNC type semi-automatic firearms Franchi SPAS 12 and LAW 12 shotguns G3SA type Galil type Heckler and Koch HK91, HK93, HK94, MP5, PSG-1 Intratec TEC 9 and 22 semi-automatic firearms M1 carbine type M14S type MAC 10, MAC 11, MAC 11-9 mm carbine type firearms PJK M-68 carbine type Plainfield Machine Company Carbine Ruger K-Mini-14/5 and Mini-14/5 SIG AMT, SIG 550SP, SIG 551SP, SIG PE-57 types SKS with detachable magazine type Spectre Auto carbine type Springfield Armory BM59 and SAR-48 type Sterling MK-6, MK-7 and SAR types Steyr A.U.G. semi-automatic firearms USAS 12 semi-automatic type shotgun Uzi type semi-automatic firearms Valmet M62, M71S, M76, or M78 type semi-automatic firearms Weaver Arm Nighthawk Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pew Pew Plates 358 Posted March 23, 2011 I think you would have to permanentlymodify the drums as well so that they could not accept belts with more than 15 rounds. And it just looks so darn scary I'm sure you would have problems with it! no...its like saying an ammo can that holds multiple AR15 magazines attached to the bottom of an AR is illegal. Its not. The drum that holds belts in NOT an ammunition feeding device. The belt is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oofogbp 3 Posted March 23, 2011 Yea I've been through the list and as far as I can see it's good to go as long as it has a welded break. This may be a stupid question but is a belt cosidered a detachable mag? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pew Pew Plates 358 Posted March 23, 2011 Yea I've been through the list and as far as I can see it's good to go as long as it has a welded break. This may be a stupid question but is a belt cosidered a detachable mag? Yes Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zed's_Dead 16 Posted March 23, 2011 no...its like saying an ammo can that holds multiple AR15 magazines attached to the bottom of an AR is illegal. Its not. The drum that holds belts in NOT an ammunition feeding device. The belt is. I'm going to respectfully disagree with you on this, Glenn. NJSA 2C:39-1y defines a large capacity magazine as "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 semiautomatic firearm." There's no way to directly feed ammo from an ammo can into an AR, so I don't think your analogy works. EDIT: Discussed this with my law partner...he agrees with Glenn's analysis. I still think that the words "capable of holding" are enough to make the drum a "high capacity" magazine. We both agree that no matter what, you're going to get charged with having a high capacity magazine if you have a 100 round drum in your possession and get caught with it for whatever reason. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
halbautomatisch 60 Posted March 24, 2011 I'm going to respectfully disagree with you on this, Glenn. NJSA 2C:39-1y defines a large capacity magazine as "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 semiautomatic firearm." There's no way to directly feed ammo from an ammo can into an AR, so I don't think your analogy works. EDIT: Discussed this with my law partner...he agrees with Glenn's analysis. I still think that the words "capable of holding" are enough to make the drum a "high capacity" magazine. We both agree that no matter what, you're going to get charged with having a high capacity magazine if you have a 100 round drum in your possession and get caught with it for whatever reason. Not to say your wrong about being charged with hi cap possession - this is NJ after all, but if the drum is incapable of feeding into the rifle without a belt, I would think the drum is legal as is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pew Pew Plates 358 Posted March 24, 2011 I'm going to respectfully disagree with you on this, Glenn. NJSA 2C:39-1y defines a large capacity magazine as "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 semiautomatic firearm." There's no way to directly feed ammo from an ammo can into an AR, so I don't think your analogy works. EDIT: Discussed this with my law partner...he agrees with Glenn's analysis. I still think that the words "capable of holding" are enough to make the drum a "high capacity" magazine. We both agree that no matter what, you're going to get charged with having a high capacity magazine if you have a 100 round drum in your possession and get caught with it for whatever reason. yes but that drum cannot feed ammo into the gun. It is a round device that holds 15 round belts (magazines). If I have an ammo can and throw in 10 15 round AR magazines, it is the same thing. Its like saying that this would be illegal even if it only contained 15 round belts. Its just a box....it does not feed ammunition Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zed's_Dead 16 Posted March 24, 2011 yes but that drum cannot feed ammo into the gun. It is a round device that holds 15 round belts (magazines). If I have an ammo can and throw in 10 15 round AR magazines, it is the same thing. Its like saying that this would be illegal even if it only contained 15 round belts. Its just a box....it does not feed ammunition Glenn, that picture is perfect as that's the exact argument my partner used to make his point. I certainly understand the argument and even think it has merit. I just can't give the State enough credit to think that you wouldn't be charged and run up a large legal bill. And the penalties for "high capacity" mags are steep. Up to 18 month in jail and $10k fine. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites