Jump to content
Dawgs

AR Fixed Mag

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, vladtepes said:

how do you end up with a "permanent non removable" magazine?

Ummm, Bazooka Bubble Gum and duct tape?

Sorry, I guess I was repeating myself with that phrase.

Sorry, I guess I was repeating myself with that phrase.

Sorry, I guess I was repeating myself with that phrase.

Sorry, I guess I was repeating myself with that phrase. :umnik:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sniper said:

Are you saying someone might even use one of those "high capacity" 15 round mags in that situation?????????

 

Just tell me where you had that boating accident. I have a 50 pound magnet I'll use to go fishing when the time does come. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, remixer said:

In a SHTF senario... do you think anyones going to care what the laws are? :)
 

My point was for HD or SHTF a 5 or 10 round fixed magazine in a AR ruins that weapon. In the SHTF scenario, I would expect we would have the time to gather the needed tools to undo the permanent modifications.

 

3usi9rI1.jpeg

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

My point was for HD or SHTF a 5 or 10 round fixed magazine in a AR ruins that weapon. In the SHTF scenario, I would expect we would have the time to gather the needed tools to undo the permanent modifications.

 

3usi9rI1.jpeg

Tsk, tsk, you silly wabbit, ya caint undo permanent!!!  Gov. Murphy sezz so!

2 minutes ago, Zeke said:

Can the rope hold fiddy? Ah ha!

lets not be rookies!

I gots me 200 pounds of anchor chain. It orta stick to the magnet jis fine.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 345Sire said:

Ummm, Bazooka Bubble Gum and duct tape?

Sorry, I guess I was repeating myself with that phrase.

Sorry, I guess I was repeating myself with that phrase.

Sorry, I guess I was repeating myself with that phrase.

Sorry, I guess I was repeating myself with that phrase. :umnik:

my point is what you described does not exist.. the qualifier is not the mags permanency.. the qualifier is that the firearm has the ability to accept a detachable magazine.. 

no mention of effort.. 
no mention of tools.. 

the simple ability to even accept a detachable magazine.. qualifies the gun.. 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, vladtepes said:

my point is what you described does not exist.. the qualifier is not the mags permanency.. the qualifier is that the firearm has the ability to accept a detachable magazine.. 

no mention of effort.. 
no mention of tools.. 

the simple ability to even accept a detachable magazine.. qualifies the gun.. 

But... if the magazine is now permanently a part of the gun.... the gun no longer has the ability to use a detachable mag... Isn't that the whole bullet button point?  And yes, strictly academic... no practical reason in NJ. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Maksim said:

But... if the magazine is now permanently a part of the gun.... the gun no longer has the ability to use a detachable mag... Isn't that the whole bullet button point?  And yes, strictly academic... no practical reason in NJ. 

CA and NJ are different in that perspective.. I forget how the code is written in CA.. 

IF the mag body was a permanent part of the AR15.. then sure.. have someone mill the mag body into the lower.. then it is without question "permanent".. 

the NJ rule is so incredibly vague.. 

"ability to accept a detachable magazine" well a bullet button doesn't stop that.. the lower can still accept a detachable magazine.. no change.. 

even if a bolt was through it that required a tool to remove (that is the premise of the bullet button) no real change.. the gun can still accept a magazine.. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

CA and NJ are different in that perspective.. I forget how the code is written in CA.. 

IF the mag body was a permanent part of the AR15.. then sure.. have someone mill the mag body into the lower.. then it is without question "permanent".. 

the NJ rule is so incredibly vague.. 

"ability to accept a detachable magazine" well a bullet button doesn't stop that.. the lower can still accept a detachable magazine.. no change.. 

even if a bolt was through it that required a tool to remove (that is the premise of the bullet button) no real change.. the gun can still accept a magazine.. 

Yep... that is the problem with most of the NJ bs... because it is sooo vague and open to interpretation. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

CA and NJ are different in that perspective.. I forget how the code is written in CA.. 

IF the mag body was a permanent part of the AR15.. then sure.. have someone mill the mag body into the lower.. then it is without question "permanent".. 

the NJ rule is so incredibly vague.. 

"ability to accept a detachable magazine" well a bullet button doesn't stop that.. the lower can still accept a detachable magazine.. no change.. 

even if a bolt was through it that required a tool to remove (that is the premise of the bullet button) no real change.. the gun can still accept a magazine.. 

 

16 minutes ago, Maksim said:

Yep... that is the problem with most of the NJ bs... because it is sooo vague and open to interpretation. 

These posts tell the story.

NJ gun laws are so vague in many areas.  That's what happens when you write laws that say everything is illegal unless we tell you it's legal. That's how you come up with vague terms in a law like "reasonable deviations".  No one has ever been arrested in NJ for an "unreasonable deviation".  An analogy I like to use (I'll bring in another forum member) is like @Zeke and I wrote a law about brain surgery.  The original AWB in NJ proves that. The law was written by people who had no knowledge of guns and their capabilities.  It was a "feel good" law.  Smoke and mirrors.  Look we're really doing something.

Virtually all NJ gun laws can be fixed with the addition of "in the commission of a crime".  You have a dozen ARs with all the evil features sitting in your house with 100 Rd magazines, no problem.  Pull one out and point it at your neighbor because his dog is crapping on your lawn, send you to prison for 100 years.  I don't care. I'm not going to do that.

You're fooling yourself if you look at CA, NY, MD, CT, or laws from other restrictive states. What matters is how they write the law in NJ.

When they do it will be hard to understand.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

 

These posts tell the story.

NJ gun laws are so vague in many areas.  That's what happens when you write laws that say everything is illegal unless we tell you it's legal. That's how you come up with vague terms in a law like "reasonable deviations".  No one has ever been arrested in NJ for an "unreasonable deviation".  An analogy I like to use (I'll bring in another forum member) is like @Zeke and I wrote a law about brain surgery.  The original AWB in NJ proves that. The law was written by people who had no knowledge of guns and their capabilities.  It was a "feel good" law.  Smoke and mirrors.  Look we're really doing something.

Virtually all NJ gun laws can be fixed with the addition of "in the commission of a crime".  You have a dozen ARs with all the evil features sitting in your house with 100 Rd magazines, no problem.  Pull one out and point it at your neighbor because his dog is crapping on your lawn, send you to prison for 100 years.  I don't care. I'm not going to do that.

You're fooling yourself if you look at CA, NY, MD, CT, or laws from other restrictive states. What matters is how they write the law in NJ.

When they do it will be hard to understand.

my test when I lived in NJ was always very simple... especially since I am not a lawyer.. 

i read the law.. and if a term (like large capacity magazine) was defined.. I observed the definition of the term.. 

if the term was was not defined I simply followed the literal meaning of terms... 


for example.. we are a community of gun enthusiasts.. we are all familiar with "thumbhole stock".. unfortunately.. NJ law is not.. so it has no place in application of the law.. the only importance is the following.. is it a pistol grip as defined.. or is it not.. 

so with the "ability to accept a detachable magazine".. 
the same logic applies.. there is no mention of effort or permanency.. so I just read it as it is literally there.. 

"can this semi automatic gun.. accept a detachable magazine"
if the answer is yes.. with a special tool.. if the answer is just yes.. if the answer is yes if you take it apart.. the answer.. is still yes.. so it falls under the scrutiny of the evil features game.. 

if the wording is unclear.. or overly vague.. it would only be fixed with some type of legal challenge.. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't an SKS have the ability to accept a detachable magazine, therefore disallowing the grenade launcher or bayonet mount, yet it is NJ legal, but with the mag converted, those weren't allowed. I am sure there are others also.

Share this post


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

Doesn't an SKS have the ability to accept a detachable magazine, therefore disallowing the grenade launcher or bayonet mount, yet it is NJ legal, but with the mag converted, those weren't allowed. I am sure there are others also.

IIRC NJ bans the SKS with detachable magazine by name.  You can have all evil features with the fixed magazine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PK90 said:

Doesn't an SKS have the ability to accept a detachable magazine, therefore disallowing the grenade launcher or bayonet mount, yet it is NJ legal, but with the mag converted, those weren't allowed. I am sure there are others 

I the law states sks with detachable magazine type (only)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, PK90 said:

Doesn't an SKS have the ability to accept a detachable magazine, therefore disallowing the grenade launcher or bayonet mount, yet it is NJ legal, but with the mag converted, those weren't allowed. I am sure there are others also.

The SKS 'as-is' has a 10-round, non-detachable magazine.  You have to physically take the gun apart to remove the magazine.  The vast majority of them that were imported have this configuration and are NJ-legal. 

There were some SKSs built/imported that would accept an AK magazine, and there were kits floating around that would modify the SKS to accept a proprietary magazine....both of these are on the "NJ-bad list" by-name (SKS with detachable magazine type).  From what I remember back in the day, neither of these worked very well.

There's also kits floating around that change the SKS fixed-round capacity to either 5 rounds (NJ-Legal) or 20 rounds (NJ-Illegal).  Both replace the entire magazine assembly on the SKS - the 5-round fixed magazine becomes flush with the stock and (IMHO) improves the handling of the SKS, while the 20-rounder extends the magazine farther-out than the 10-round mag.  Both require the SKS to be disassembled in order to change-out the fixed magazine. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the law very well thank you. Many have missed the point.

8 hours ago, vladtepes said:

...
so with the "ability to accept a detachable magazine".. 
the same logic applies.. there is no mention of effort or permanency.. so I just read it as it is literally there.. 

"can this semi automatic gun.. accept a detachable magazine"
if the answer is yes.. with a special tool.. if the answer is just yes.. if the answer is yes if you take it apart.. the answer.. is still yes.. so it falls under the scrutiny of the evil features game.. 
...

Using this interpretation of the law, ALL SKSs are illegal (even with a fixed mag), because it has the "ability to accept a detachable magazine".

ETA: I am not saying that I agree with it, but it could be determined this way, but has not as of 1990, AFIIK.

Share this post


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

I know the law very well thank you. Many have missed the point.

Using this interpretation of the law, ALL SKSs are illegal (even with a fixed mag), because it has the "ability to accept a detachable magazine".

ETA: I am not saying that I agree with it, but it could be determined this way, but has not as of 1990, AFIIK.

Careful.....You're starting to sound like Evan Nappen, and his "loaded magazine = loaded firearm" rant...

Share this post


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

I know the law very well thank you. Many have missed the point.

Using this interpretation of the law, ALL SKSs are illegal (even with a fixed mag), because it has the "ability to accept a detachable magazine".

ETA: I am not saying that I agree with it, but it could be determined this way, but has not as of 1990, AFIIK.

It doesn’t matter if it makes sense.. it just

matters what the law says..

Just like it says ALL AK types are assault weapons... there is nothing cryptic about that.. if it’s an AK “type” then it’s banned.. yet tons are sold in NJ all the time..

The wording says “semi auto and ability to accept a detachable magazine” it says nothing more than that.. so one can only assume that’s what it means..

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we're stretching the arm of the law here. If I invent a magazine for the M1 Garand or Marlin 60, does that restrict those firearms to one evil feature? I hope not. I believe that the statement "ability to accept a detachable magazine" is interpreted as to the current configuration. Although, one must wonder why "ability to accept" was used instead of "has". Hmmm.

Share this post


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

I think we're stretching the arm of the law here. If I invent a magazine for the M1 Garand or Marlin 60, does that restrict those firearms to one evil feature? I hope not. I believe that the statement "ability to accept a detachable magazine" is interpreted as to the current configuration. Although, one must wonder why "ability to accept" was used instead of "has". Hmmm.

This is an assumption on my part.. but the reason the wording was chosen was a result of the intention.. 

The intention was to ban as many “scary” “evil” “military looking” guns as possible..

it is absolutely a stretch.. but what it’s not is a departure from the wording..

could a prosecutor stand in front of a court and say “this is an assault rifle because... detachable magazine.. *insert demo of him putting the mag in*... “

And would a courtroom full of people impartial or outright against guns agree with that?

would a normal reasonable person that knows little about guns.. agree that the gun presented in front of them accepts a detachable magazine.. my concern is they would accept that...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you knew NOTHING about guns..

were told by a prosecutor the legal standing is “can the gun accept a detachable magazine” 

and you were then shown a detachable magazine going into the gun..

if you being a reasonable person knew nothing about guns.. were not interested in them.. etc..

would you not accept that you just saw something that fell under the scope of the law?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, vladtepes said:

... could a prosecutor stand in front of a court and say “this is an assault rifle because... detachable magazine.. *insert demo of him putting the mag in*... “ ...

But, this would only occur with the gun in its then current configuration if it had a detachable mag.

10 hours ago, vladtepes said:

... even if a bolt was through it that required a tool to remove (that is the premise of the bullet button) no real change.. the gun can still accept a magazine.. 

If the mag was "permanent" like the MA Lock, the Prosecutor could not do that.

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...