FLHX 1 Posted April 26, 2012 Ok I have gotten 2 yes you can have it and 2 no not legal in NJ. There seems to be some confusion over this guns legality in our fine state. I want to purchase this gun for my kid to shoot but not only are they very difficult to get they may not be legal. Please can someone help clear this up for me can I own this rifle in NJ. I see M1 type on the not allowed list!!!! Link below to website http://www.legacysports.com/products/cit_m1.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheDon 3 Posted April 26, 2012 Whenever someone says that something is not legal, ask them why. The M1 Carbine is banned by name. The receiver is stamped as follows: The Citadel .22LR is NOT an M1 Carbine. It is good to go in NJ. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tommy3rd 132 Posted April 26, 2012 Whenever someone says that something is not legal, ask them why. The M1 Carbine is banned by name. The receiver is stamped as follows: The Citadel .22LR is NOT an M1 Carbine. It is good to go in NJ. yes, BUT if you have that same stamp but instead of cal..30 it says cal..22 then it is also illegal based on the name and it being an "m1 carbine type". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PK90 3,569 Posted April 26, 2012 Most M1 Carbines as we know them are actually stamped "US Carbine" and "Cal. .30M1", as pictured above. That really does not make a difference, because the NJSP Firearms Unit has said that "it is how the carbine is advertised". (name withheld for obvious reasons). I have been in contact recently with Kahr Arms about doing a special run of a "NJ Carbine". Long story short, "Contact us next year only if a republican president gets into office, and they catch up on current sales of their standard US Carbines". So, good luck in your pursuit. I say don't even think about acquiring one, no matter the caliber. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tj462nj 32 Posted April 26, 2012 I agree with Paul Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tommy3rd 132 Posted April 26, 2012 in other words, if TJ or PK will sell one to you, it's legal. I suggest you stay away from the 2 shops that were willing to sell it to you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gun Guy in NJ 10 Posted April 26, 2012 Get a Ruger 10/22 and add this.. http://www.eabco.com/m1_carbine_ruger_1022_tribute.htm Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheDon 3 Posted April 26, 2012 Most M1 Carbines as we know them are actually stamped "US Carbine" and "Cal. .30M1", as pictured above. That really does not make a difference, because the NJSP Firearms Unit has said that "it is how the carbine is advertised". (name withheld for obvious reasons). I have been in contact recently with Kahr Arms about doing a special run of a "NJ Carbine". Long story short, "Contact us next year only if a republican president gets into office, and they catch up on current sales of their standard US Carbines". So, good luck in your pursuit. I say don't even think about acquiring one, no matter the caliber. I'll accept Paul's experience in this matter. But this brings up an obvious question: By the cited standard, if Daisy advertised a M1 Carbine BB-gun, it would be a prohibited assault weapon. Does the NJSP Firearms Unit know anything about firearms? The only simularities between these two rifles is in the name and appearance. They are substantially DISSIMULAR. Even my kid knows the difference between a gas-operated carbine rifle that shoots center-fire ammunition and a recoil actuated rifle that shoots rimfire ammo. Again, I am not saying Paul is wrong, just saying that the NJSP's position could not be further from the spirit of the law on this one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mcbethr 42 Posted April 26, 2012 I also have a 10/22 dressed up to look like an M1 Carbine. It's good enough for now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
when_shtf 4 Posted April 26, 2012 The specs of this rifle is similar to many semi-auto .22 caliber rifles on the market. Calling it an M1 is just pure marketing because clearly it is not an M1 Carbine, .30 Cal. I can call my wife's red minivan a Ferrari, but that doesn't make it one. If you purchase the rifle by an NJ FFL, who is at fault? If the dealer is willing to sell it, buy it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Qel Hoth 33 Posted April 26, 2012 Again, I am not saying Paul is wrong, just saying that the NJSP's position could not be further from the spirit of the law on this one. The spirit of the law was to ban as many weapons as possible without being declared unconstitutional... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FLHX 1 Posted April 26, 2012 This is just a joke "the spirit of the law" wouldn't you figure the law would be spelled out and not be able to be interpreted as the lawmakers see fit to do so (I know I know). I know its all been said before!!! I just get pissed off when the supposed intellectuals make laws about shit the know nothing about. The NJSP who supposedly should know about guns and they still have no clue!! So if the M1 carbine was just advertised as a NJ legal carbine and there were no changes to the gun it would be legal!! MY God I want to move out of this state more and more each day. If I could sell my house for what I paid for it I would be gone in a minute actually I would sell it for what is owed on it plus moving expense if anyone is interested!!!!! Sorry for the rant but he dog wasn't around to kick!! (and sorry I wouldn't really kick the dog) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
M4BGRINGO 139 Posted April 26, 2012 Don't kick your dog, that isn't nice. Go to Trenton and trip all the morons that were elected to office and make laws on things they really know very little about. Then let your dog pizz on them while they are still down. Take pictures/video too and post it here for us. Thanks! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheDon 3 Posted April 26, 2012 I do not see this as a Legislative issue. The spirit of the law is clear: possession of an Assault Firearm is a crime. The issue is that the enforcement authority has been given the power to dictate what is and is not an Assault Firearm. Paul's assertion is that the NJSP feels the way that something is advertised is substantial as to whether it is an Assault Weapon. That is just crazy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
when_shtf 4 Posted April 26, 2012 possession of an Assault Firearm is a crime. The issue is that the enforcement authority has been given the power to dictate what is and is not an Assault Firearm. I would argue that a NJ legal AR or AK is closer to an "assault weapon" then a .22 cal plinker. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pizza Bob 1,488 Posted April 26, 2012 BANG! That was the sound of NJ gun owners shooting themselves in the foot, once again. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheDon 3 Posted April 26, 2012 + 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 So, for Ray Ray, does this mean that you "strongly agree"? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
when_shtf 4 Posted April 26, 2012 BANG! That was the sound of NJ gun owners shooting themselves in the foot, once again. Is that directed at me for referring to the AR and AK as assault weapons? That is why I put those two words between quotation marks; I don't believe that any semi automatic weapon is an assault weapon. I also don't see how the Citadel M-1-22 and the Tribute M-1 10/22 are different. If the Ruger 10/22 is NJ legal, how is it that the Tribute M-1 10/22 is legal. And if the Tribute M-1 10/22 is legal, then the Citadel M-1-22 must be legal as it shares the same features and marketing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HarryLee 0 Posted April 26, 2012 I also have a 10/22 dressed up to look like an M1 Carbine. It's good enough for now. I think there's some good ruger 10/22 selections right now. there's one with a nice wood stock & bull barrel. one called tactical target. and you can buy your own stock on hoguestore.com in bull & non bull barrel. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FLHX 1 Posted April 26, 2012 We all know that the M1 tribute stock is legal to have but can you actually put the 10/22 upper in it and have it be legal? That's the problem with the laws if the cop is having a bad day you get a ticket or jammed up for having an illegal gun. Then you go see the judge and hopefully he is having a great day and he says no way that's not an illegal gun!! I guess until the laws change I will stay away from anything with an M1 in the name (so we all no laws ain't gonna change) so no citadel M1 .22 for my kid. Maybe an M1919 with a pistol grip and 15 round belt feeds. Try explaining to a kid that a little .22 is an illegal gun in Nj but you can have this m1919 instead. I couldn't even keep a straight face and tell him why it was like this in NJ. I just reminded him to send more resumes out of state!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheDon 3 Posted April 26, 2012 What does ray have to do with my post It means I agree with bob I was making fun Ray Ray's post in Suggestions. Translating for his benefit that by putting + a google, you strongly agree. He asked for "Agree"/"Disagree" buttons instead of people replying with +1/-1. Check it out. I got a good chuckle. http://njgunforums.c...isagree-option/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KpdPipes 388 Posted April 27, 2012 I'll accept Paul's experience in this matter. But this brings up an obvious question: By the cited standard, if Daisy advertised a M1 Carbine BB-gun, it would be a prohibited assault weapon. Does the NJSP Firearms Unit know anything about firearms? The only simularities between these two rifles is in the name and appearance. They are substantially DISSIMULAR. Even my kid knows the difference between a gas-operated carbine rifle that shoots center-fire ammunition and a recoil actuated rifle that shoots rimfire ammo. Again, I am not saying Paul is wrong, just saying that the NJSP's position could not be further from the spirit of the law on this one. Actually NJSP TRIED to authorize a Carbine copy for NJ.it was Stopped by the now Former AG specifically. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KpdPipes 388 Posted April 27, 2012 I do not see this as a Legislative issue. The spirit of the law is clear: possession of an Assault Firearm is a crime. The issue is that the enforcement authority has been given the power to dictate what is and is not an Assault Firearm. Paul's assertion is that the NJSP feels the way that something is advertised is substantial as to whether it is an Assault Weapon. That is just crazy. No, that was the DIRECT order of the Attorney general at the time, Paula Dow. Auto Ordnance "Carbines" were marked "ML" not M1 IO Firearms rifles were advertised as "American AK-47's" and the entire brand was banned by name.....at the DIRECT decree of Dow. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sixtytwo327 14 Posted April 27, 2012 I had a Fulton Armory AR-15. The receiver is marked "FAR-15." I had one shop say legal, another said it wasn't. I sold it before I moved here, partly because the laws are confusing, but mostly because it was a varmint gun, and there is no easy place longer to shoot than 100 yards in North NJ. I sold it to a guy who shoots service matches. I vote 10/22 - cheap, available, plenty of customization options and you know parts will be available 30 years from now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
when_shtf 4 Posted April 28, 2012 I was just looking at the NJ Administrative Code, Firearms and Weapons. According to section 13:51-1.2, Definitions, of the code, "M1 carbine type rifles" are included in the definition of "Assault firearms". While many other banned weapons are included by name, the M1 is included by type. Also included are "Any firearm manufactured under any designation which is substantially identical to any of the firearms listed in paragraph" 13:51-1.2, Definitions. Knock-off M1 rifles, chambered for .22LR as the Citadel is, are not substantially identical to the M1 carbine type. In fact, they are significantly different, having no interchangeable parts. This couldn't be any clearer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheDon 3 Posted April 29, 2012 I was just looking at the NJ Administrative Code, Firearms and Weapons. According to section 13:51-1.2, Definitions, of the code, "M1 carbine type rifles" are included in the definition of "Assault firearms". While many other banned weapons are included by name, the M1 is included by type. Also included are "Any firearm manufactured under any designation which is substantially identical to any of the firearms listed in paragraph" 13:51-1.2, Definitions. Knock-off M1 rifles, chambered for .22LR as the Citadel is, are not substantially identical to the M1 carbine type. In fact, they are significantly different, having no interchangeable parts. This couldn't be any clearer. I was of the same opinion in my first post at the top of this thread. That is why I told the OP he was good to go. But, the FFL holders say otherwise. If someone wants to test this, IMHO, they would probably avoid prison. But who wants the legal bills? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted April 29, 2012 I was just looking at the NJ Administrative Code, Firearms and Weapons. According to section 13:51-1.2, Definitions, of the code, "M1 carbine type rifles" are included in the definition of "Assault firearms". While many other banned weapons are included by name, the M1 is included by type. Also included are "Any firearm manufactured under any designation which is substantially identical to any of the firearms listed in paragraph" 13:51-1.2, Definitions. Knock-off M1 rifles, chambered for .22LR as the Citadel is, are not substantially identical to the M1 carbine type. In fact, they are significantly different, having no interchangeable parts. This couldn't be any clearer. Actually, Who knows? This is up to the AG to determine. Fairly recently, the AG and NJSP came down on a few dealers both for the "jersey legal" M1 carbine, and AK Sporter. IO had a jersey legal AK, called the "IO Sporter" however a few stores had the AG came down on them because the marketing material referenced it as an AK type gun for ban states. Same with the M1 Carbine. It was going to go through, but then the collective firearms community killed it when they blasted the NJSP with calls about it, when an NJSP Lt went on a limb and approved it. Because of the mass of phone calls, AG noticed and nixed the whole thing. The issue of if it is substantially identical to the original will be up to the judge and jury to decide. Think of it this way, if the marketing material for it says M1 chambered in 22lr, odds are, it is "substantially identical" to a firearm banned by name. Edit: Just because an FFL is willing to sell you the gun, does not give you automatic immunity, nor does it mean the FFL is right. Ie, look at the posts from an FFL who was selling pistol gripped semi automatic shotguns. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Missionmtman 2 Posted April 29, 2012 OMG I am staying in Montana. I am sorry you guys have to become lawyers just to have a little trigger time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PK90 3,569 Posted April 29, 2012 Just to clarify my position and to give my opinion: This Citadel and all US Carbines are LEGAL within NJ if they only have ONE evil feature or less thanks to the 1996 SA and Colt law suit. HOWEVER, the problem is that you will probably put yourself and family through an unwanted stressful life change. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darkmagik 2 Posted April 30, 2012 Just to clarify my position and to give my opinion: This Citadel and all US Carbines are LEGAL within NJ if they only have ONE evil feature or less thanks to the 1996 SA and Colt law suit. HOWEVER, the problem is that you will probably put yourself and family through an unwanted stressful life change. That is the worst thing to experience ever. I learned somethign with NJ if it is questionable by anyone just walk away it is definately not worth the legal bill. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites