JHZR2 56 Posted November 2, 2018 5 hours ago, JackDaWack said: AFAIK, The serial number must be registered with an FFL if you were to own an 80%. The wording of the law does speak specifically to items which still need to be manufactured/assembled. This should mean that any completed firearms are not effected. So you cant own an 80% lower, unless registered with an FFL, but you can own a manufactured receiver, so long as you manufactured it outside of NJ. Solution... buy outside of NJ, manufacture out side of NJ, return to NJ. At least thats how i read it. How do you register a serial number on an unserialized item? I think I saw that CA allows these 80% if they have a SN engraved, so some of these companies do it. It seems sensible that if you buy and make outside of NJ, it's yours and you can own it. But if you were ever pressed on it, especially if something like an 80% P320 or similar very new firearm (as opposed to, say an 80% AR or 1911 made out of state) was in question, they would be able to date your time of residence in NJ and maximum age of the gun, and start to assume the worst in trying to charge you. i thought the AG had sent "cease and desist" letter to many of the 80% manufacturers/resellers, to prevent sale and shipment to NJ on the premise that these are "illegal" in NJ. I don't think it holds water without the clarification that manufacture is illegal in NJ. As I understand it, currently ownership of the 80% parts, or the finished item are both legal at least until this bill flies through. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shawnmoore81 623 Posted November 2, 2018 Let’s say someone owned a .22 bolt action from 1910 and they didn’t have serial numbers back then. Is that gun going to be illegal?Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackDaWack 2,895 Posted November 2, 2018 9 hours ago, JHZR2 said: How do you register a serial number on an unserialized item? I think I saw that CA allows these 80% if they have a SN engraved, so some of these companies do it. It seems sensible that if you buy and make outside of NJ, it's yours and you can own it. But if you were ever pressed on it, especially if something like an 80% P320 or similar very new firearm (as opposed to, say an 80% AR or 1911 made out of state) was in question, they would be able to date your time of residence in NJ and maximum age of the gun, and start to assume the worst in trying to charge you. i thought the AG had sent "cease and desist" letter to many of the 80% manufacturers/resellers, to prevent sale and shipment to NJ on the premise that these are "illegal" in NJ. I don't think it holds water without the clarification that manufacture is illegal in NJ. As I understand it, currently ownership of the 80% parts, or the finished item are both legal at least until this bill flies through. The bill is already through, just waiting for a signature and it's enacted.. might as well just consider it law right now. Not sure of the legality, but the law states that the part to be made into a firearm must be traceable through an FFL. So a serial number would be registered, but I have no idea if this is even allowed if it's not a firearm yet or how they would record it. Honestly, if you have a complete firearm made from an 80% whatever... The state would still have to prove you built it in state. Just because you live here doesnt automatically make it built here... A friend of mine built a few of these at his lake house out of state, and returned with the complete firearm. Even if they found the tools used to make one, they would have to prove it was used in state. I haven't yet, but my dad has the tools needed down in Florida to finish an 80%, and I have no issues making one there and bringing it home with me. Nothing in the new law makes any mention of a fully functional firearm... In fact the law specifically states the parts outlawed reqiure manufacturing and cannot function. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackDaWack 2,895 Posted November 2, 2018 2 hours ago, Shawnmoore81 said: Let’s say someone owned a .22 bolt action from 1910 and they didn’t have serial numbers back then. Is that gun going to be illegal? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk No, if you read the law carefully, the possession of a part not registered with an FFL that requires manufacturing is illegal. The law goes a step further and states that the parts in question wouldn't be able to function as a firearm. Not sure if they did it on purpose or not, but it sounds like actual functioning firearms have nothing to do with the new law, unless 3d printed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JHZR2 56 Posted November 3, 2018 13 hours ago, JackDaWack said: No, if you read the law carefully, the possession of a part not registered with an FFL that requires manufacturing is illegal. The law goes a step further and states that the parts in question wouldn't be able to function as a firearm. Not sure if they did it on purpose or not, but it sounds like actual functioning firearms have nothing to do with the new law, unless 3d printed. The AG claimed these were illegal months ago. https://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2018/06/murphys_ag_fires_warning_shot_at_ghost_gun_makers.html if this was overstepping bounds, where is the NRA suing over restrictions on interstate commerce and misrepresentation of current law? I suppose they purposely left out the manufacturing part back then. Whats not clear to me is possession in NJ after manufacture out of state. If some overzealous officer/DA wanted to make a situation out of it, where’s your P2P for this unserialized item?? Notionally any NJ resident who can’t make the case as a part time resident of another state, shouldn’t own such things or be able to acquire handguns without a P2P, right?? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackDaWack 2,895 Posted November 3, 2018 3 minutes ago, JHZR2 said: The AG claimed these were illegal months ago. https://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2018/06/murphys_ag_fires_warning_shot_at_ghost_gun_makers.html if this was overstepping bounds, where is the NRA suing over restrictions on interstate commerce and misrepresentation of current law? I suppose they purposely left out the manufacturing part back then. Whats not clear to me is possession in NJ after manufacture out of state. If some overzealous officer/DA wanted to make a situation out of it, where’s your P2P for this unserialized item?? Notionally any NJ resident who can’t make the case as a part time resident of another state, shouldn’t own such things or be able to acquire handguns without a P2P, right?? Everyone ignored him. Nothing can keep you from bringing an otherwise legally obtained firearm from out of state back home. Unless otherwise banned to own in sate, whats to keep you from? A P2P is only used for handguns purchased in NJ. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JHZR2 56 Posted November 3, 2018 9 minutes ago, JackDaWack said: Everyone ignored him. Nothing can keep you from bringing an otherwise legally obtained firearm from out of state back home. Unless otherwise banned to own in sate, whats to keep you from? A P2P is only used for handguns purchased in NJ. Not trying to be argumentative; but to learn. Can’t buy a handgun across state lines except for via an ffl transfer, no?? The burden of proof lies on the prosecution or on one of us that would love to learn about gunsmithing by making one of these (or a flintlock kit for all it matters I guess). This my discriminator, if you can’t prove that you have a residence elsewhere that makes you eligible as a resident of that state for some time, then I’d suspect they could try to throw the book at you. The only case then is that manufacture isn’t illegal in _____, and that comes back to who has he burden of proof. You may be innocent until proven guilty, but if they want to make an example, may get $$. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackDaWack 2,895 Posted November 3, 2018 12 minutes ago, JHZR2 said: Not trying to be argumentative; but to learn. Can’t buy a handgun across state lines except for via an ffl transfer, no?? The burden of proof lies on the prosecution or on one of us that would love to learn about gunsmithing by making one of these (or a flintlock kit for all it matters I guess). This my discriminator, if you can’t prove that you have a residence elsewhere that makes you eligible as a resident of that state for some time, then I’d suspect they could try to throw the book at you. The only case then is that manufacture isn’t illegal in _____, and that comes back to who has he burden of proof. You may be innocent until proven guilty, but if they want to make an example, may get $$. You cant buy a handgun across state lines. Luckily, your not buying a handgun across state lines. What your buying is not considered a firearm, per ATF. YOU manufacture it out of state, 100% legal. There are no laws that prevent you from bringing a firearm legally obtained out of state back home with you. I don care much to argue what NJ might try to do to you, but I dont see what exactly your going to be charged with. Again, simply being in possession of a complete firearm that originated as a 80% has no implications to being manufactured in NJ. It's speculative and barely circumstantial. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted November 3, 2018 1 hour ago, JackDaWack said: You cant buy a handgun across state lines. Luckily, your not buying a handgun across state lines. What your buying is not considered a firearm, per ATF. YOU manufacture it out of state, 100% legal. There are no laws that prevent you from bringing a firearm legally obtained out of state back home with you. I don care much to argue what NJ might try to do to you, but I dont see what exactly your going to be charged with. Again, simply being in possession of a complete firearm that originated as a 80% has no implications to being manufactured in NJ. It's speculative and barely circumstantial. Concise Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SmittyMHS 603 Posted November 14, 2018 This is what I was talking about... https://bearingarms.com/tom-k/2018/11/14/home-ar-builds-danger-new-house-bill/?utm_source=badaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&bcid=8337136815a23e34c800cf3d6b18fae2 I'm sure Murff is already looking at this. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DirtyDigz 1,811 Posted November 14, 2018 BTW, I read the new law all the way through today and I don’t see anything that makes POSSESSION of an 80% unfinished lower illegal. Purchasing/Obtaining one in NJ? Yes, illegal. Possessing one that you purchased/obtained outside of NJ? Possessing one that you purchased in NJ before the law went into effect? Not sure either of those are illegal under the new law. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DirtyDigz 1,811 Posted November 14, 2018 Another example for the “No P2P required for handgun legally acquired out of state”: You can go to Cabela’s in PA and buy a black powder pistol and/or a bb pistol without restriction. Neither are considered firearms in PA or Federally. Bring them back into NJ, and now they’re firearms under NJ law. They’re legal to own in NJ, you acquired them legally outside of NJ, and no NJ P2P was/is required. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted November 14, 2018 42 minutes ago, DirtyDigz said: Another example for the “No P2P required for handgun legally acquired out of state”: You can go to Cabela’s in PA and buy a black powder pistol and/or a bb pistol without restriction. Neither are considered firearms in PA or Federally. Bring them back into NJ, and now they’re firearms under NJ law. They’re legal to own in NJ, you acquired them legally outside of NJ, and no NJ P2P was/is required. Ah ha! Fed doesn’t consider them firearms... like BB guns. But joisey does Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
voyager9 3,434 Posted November 14, 2018 17 minutes ago, Zeke said: Ah ha! Fed doesn’t consider them firearms... like BB guns. But joisey does Joisey should consider your posts deadly weapons. You’re so on target... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted November 14, 2018 9 minutes ago, voyager9 said: Joisey should consider your posts deadly weapons. You’re so on target... With your lack of use are you now a “ prohibited person “? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites