Jump to content
Guest

Magazine registration

Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, 1LtCAP said:

as cheap as they sell the mags for, wouldn't it just be better to buy the whole mag?

 

why destroy your mags why not just buy 2 ten round mags for each gun and put the rest away till we elect someone with a brain. You can find great deals on ebay they have loads of 10 rounders

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MartyZ said:

And local mayors are not?

Local mayor's are definitely not well connected, At least a Sussex town mayor.  Most towns don't even keep the same mayor for that long. You know the ones who are connected, are the ones who make a career out of it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, JackDaWack said:

Local mayor's are definitely not well connected, At least a Sussex town mayor.  Most towns don't even keep the same mayor for that long. You know the ones who are connected, are the ones who make a career out of it. 

Ok, so if you call in a tip, who will respond local PD or NJSP? If it's Local PD do you think they will arrest the mayor or do you think they will visit the return address on that package?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
why destroy your mags why not just buy 2 ten round mags for each gun and put the rest away till we elect someone with a brain. You can find great deals on ebay they have loads of 10 rounders


Yea, but in reality, they are not cheap. I have a few dozen pmags and hexmags. I already bought 10 rounders for my ARs and similar.

BUT, a lot of us own pistols with 15 round capacities. They cost a fortune. They average $30-$50 bux each. Replacing them would cost me $100s.
So, it can be expensive if you own quite a few weapons.

On another note,
RE: Hexmags
Just spoke to my rep there and they will not sell parts to make them 10... Its been their policy for quite awhile... No internal part sales.

He did offer a coupon code, NJ50 for a discount. So if you’d rather use Hexmags, could be an option. Saves ya a few bux.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't there an exemption in the new law that allows you to keep handgun magazines up to 15 rounds if the handgun was purchased in NJ using a "Permit to Purchase a Handgun & Form of Register", as the handgun is registered already?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aaaand this is why for the past 5yrs I've been jumping on every sale or cheap 10 rnd mag I can find. It don't hurt as much as having to buy them all at once. Only ones I couldn't find discounted  were CZs. This law should not have taken anyone by surprise.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, siderman said:

Aaaand this is why for the past 5yrs I've been jumping on every sale or cheap 10 rnd mag I can find. It don't hurt as much as having to buy them all at once. Only ones I couldn't find discounted  were CZs. This law should not have taken anyone by surprise.

Neither should the next limit reduction.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Isn't there an exemption in the new law that allows you to keep handgun magazines up to 15 rounds if the handgun was purchased in NJ using a "Permit to Purchase a Handgun & Form of Register", as the handgun is registered already?

I thought it was all. But someone will come forward and correct me. I wish it is.[emoji848]


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Isn't there an exemption in the new law that allows you to keep handgun magazines up to 15 rounds if the handgun was purchased in NJ using a "Permit to Purchase a Handgun & Form of Register", as the handgun is registered already?
A handgun registered as a handgun is not the same as a handgun registered as an assault weapon. They are different registrations.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A handgun registered as a handgun is not the same as a handgun registered as an assault weapon. They are different registrations.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Where do you get it will be an assault weapon?

Sent from an undisclosed location via Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Silence Dogood said:

According to Evan Nappen's interpretation, pins aren't going to cut it:

(16) May a person lawfully possess a “blocked” large capacity ammunition magazine?

A: Yes, as long as it was owned on the day the law was enacted and was permanently blocked during the six-month grace period. Temporarily blocked magazines are not lawful. (NJAC § 13:54-1.2 Definitions) A large capacity ammunition magazine must be permanently altered so that it is not capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition. (e.g. riveted, welded, epoxied, etc.) It cannot be readily restorable. An ammunition magazine which has been temporarily blocked or modified from holding more than 15 rounds, as by a piece of wood or a pin, is still unlawful.

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.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, PK90 said:

Where do you get it will be an assault weapon?

Sent from an undisclosed location via Tapatalk
 

Because after a 7 or 5 round limit will come the 1 round limit, with any features like "ability to accept a magazine", "revolving cylinder", "pistol grip", or "ability to fire or propel any kind of projectile, at any velocity, with or without sufficient force to injure someone" as an assault weapon.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Mr.Stu said:

A handgun registered as a handgun is not the same as a handgun registered as an assault weapon. They are different registrations.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
 

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, capt14k said:

 


Injunction from Federal District Judge which will put the law on hold until SCOTUS hears and overturns it. See CA.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 A gun friendly judge in NJ? Ok, that stops it until the case is heard. Then you spend years and $$$$$$$ trying to get a win somewhere along the line - and then you get to SCOTUS - which doesn't have to hear the case.

See https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/16-894

for an example of how things have gone for a while now in trying to get them to hear a meaningful 2A case.

Kolbe denied, Peruta denied, etc... So there is another CA case.. an injunction only lasts until you get a cert denied from SCOTUS - if you have the $$$$$$$$ to take it that far.

Yet we can't even get a win in NJ when the gov't attorney seems to be trying to deliberately lose the case. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, b47356 said:

 A gun friendly judge in NJ? Ok, that stops it until the case is heard. Then you spend years and $$$$$$$ trying to get a win somewhere along the line - and then you get to SCOTUS - which doesn't have to hear the case.

See https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/16-894

for an example of how things have gone for a while now in trying to get them to hear a meaningful 2A case.

Kolbe denied, Peruta denied, etc... So there is another CA case.. an injunction only lasts until you get a cert denied from SCOTUS - if you have the $$$$$$$$ to take it that far.

Yet we can't even get a win in NJ when the gov't attorney seems to be trying to deliberately lose the case. 

 

What do you propose then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Zeke said:

What do you propose then?

Perhaps I'm just burned out on "we will win this one, its a slam dunk"

And there is nothing else, its either win in court, or win at the ballot box.

We saw how the ballot box went, with Gov. Goldman Sachs II promising to raise taxes and easily winning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, b47356 said:

Perhaps I'm just burned out on "we will win this one, its a slam dunk"

And there is nothing else, its either win in court, or win at the ballot box.

We saw how the ballot box went, with Gov. Goldman Sachs II promising to raise taxes and easily winning.

Just need to find a conservative candidate that is 2A friendly, doesn’t want to raise taxes and promises free meth. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, b47356 said:

Perhaps I'm just burned out on "we will win this one, its a slam dunk"

And there is nothing else, its either win in court, or win at the ballot box.

We saw how the ballot box went, with Gov. Goldman Sachs II promising to raise taxes and easily winning.

I get it. But to quit is always to lose.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 A gun friendly judge in NJ? Ok, that stops it until the case is heard. Then you spend years and $$$$$$$ trying to get a win somewhere along the line - and then you get to SCOTUS - which doesn't have to hear the case.
See https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/16-894
for an example of how things have gone for a while now in trying to get them to hear a meaningful 2A case.
Kolbe denied, Peruta denied, etc... So there is another CA case.. an injunction only lasts until you get a cert denied from SCOTUS - if you have the $$$$$$$$ to take it that far.
Yet we can't even get a win in NJ when the gov't attorney seems to be trying to deliberately lose the case. 
 


I thought I wrote Federal.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, capt14k said:

I thought I wrote Federal.

You do understand that SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) is not required to hear every case sent to them, right? Actually, they only hear ~80 (and issue bench rulings in another ~100) cases each term. Out of the 7K+ sent to them.

Those are not very good odds, yet some seem to believe that there is some requirement that they must hear the case...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You do understand that SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) is not required to hear every case sent to them, right? Actually, they only hear ~80 (and issue bench rulings in another ~100) cases each term. Out of the 7K+ sent to them.

Those are not very good odds, yet some seem to believe that there is some requirement that they must hear the case...

 

Yes I am quite aware how our court systems work, probably more so than most. The reason IMO SCOTUS hasn't taken a 2A case is there isn't a solid 5. Once Kennedy retires there should be. If RBG also dies in the next 2 years there will be. SCOTUS really needs to address 2A Rights outside the home due to a current circuit split. They can't be forced to, but they don't usually like to leave a circuit split dangling. I think once they start taking 2A cases they will take multiple ones. Thomas was pissed about Peruta.

 

As for funds look at the returns for NRA, ANJRPC, and CRPA. I have a post on here detailing ANJRPC and NRA.

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, b47356 said:

You do understand that SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) is not required to hear every case sent to them, right? Actually, they only hear ~80 (and issue bench rulings in another ~100) cases each term. Out of the 7K+ sent to them.

Those are not very good odds, yet some seem to believe that there is some requirement that they must hear the case...

 

you do not understand that if the supreme court declines to hear the case, the circuit court decision is the law of the land for that area. and the 3rd circuit is going to get very favorable shortly...

in short, forget about the supreme court. if they take it, great. if not, well that will turn out just fine too. watch this space

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you know what really PISSES ME OFF?  The fact that NONE of these 15 round magazines that we own now have EVER been used in a crime...Just what exactly do do these assholes expect to happen when we have to register them.  Maybe they are purposely trying to get us to go off the deep end.  I wouldnt put it past them...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, NJLEFTY said:

why destroy your mags why not just buy 2 ten round mags for each gun and put the rest away till we elect someone with a brain. You can find great deals on ebay they have loads of 10 rounders

BECAUSE even if we did manage to get an actual lawful type for governor.......he won't get this shit reversed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...