JackDaWack

There is no "rifle' section" "Assault firearms" means: 1. Any of the following firearms: "Avtomat Kalashnikov type semi-automatic firearms" The gun is made by Kalashnikov USA... soo i guess that could get sticky. i would guess dropping the A in AK and adding a US could suffice... By definition it is NOT a Avtomat Kalashnikov.. its a Kalashnikov USA Colt dropped the ar-15 and car-15 nomenclature and people own those..?

Yeah, i think the storms on Saturday/Sunday were worse up here. Rain was blowing completely sideways...

Sussex didn't get hit by the storm cells that knocked out south and central jersey. I guess we got spared this time around. While the thunder and rain was heavy at times, the wind was relatively mild.

I cant believe i never thought of this, brilliant legal advice.

The problem is that this ruling is contextualized through enforcement of the NFA.. The appeal was to charges of violating the NFA. The lower courts, applied the NFA law incorrectly... Whereas NJ law, which is allowed to be more strict.. specifically states how parts can be considered a firearm, where the NFA never used such language. The ruling in this case applies to enforcement of the NFA, not NJ state law. If they changed the language in the NFA to include what NJ law states, this ruling would be moot.

https://www.aeroprecisionusa.com/m4e1-handguard-combo

If youre going to use the aero lower, use their mono upper and rail. You will not be disappointed. and just order the barrel from BCM..

Perhaps it's the opposite? maybe once you figure out how to get around constructive possession you wont have to worry about it? I don't discuss NJ law to figure out what i can't own... It's about figuring out ways to own the stuff I want. People who dig their heads into the sand are betting on blind luck... If some asshat wants to come at me with owning a non-nfa firearm I know how to fight the charges without relying on a silly argument... or in your case no argument at all. But my argument requires foresight.... and prior action....

My personal belief.... most instances no one would bat an eye... because nothing is really raising a red flag. If the parts were truly interchangeable? I stand by the legality is in the "readily assembled" language of the law. IF you had to go to court over this would you argue that a gun is not a combination of parts? Is that something you think a jury could believe? the prosecutor will argue that if a gun is made of parts, it is therefore a combination of parts... Or would you rely on the fact that disassembling a firearms parts to reassemble another is beyond the scope of "readily assembled"? The prosecutor will have to attempt to show the jury how easy it is to assemble the assault weapon. If he does it in under 20 seconds by punching take down pins out... how does a jury look at that? If he needs a bench vice, specific tools... and takes enough time for the jury to pander how exactly easy is this task?

If the ATF wanted to flop tomorrow and say that a VFG by virtue is an accessory to the gun and doesnt change it's classification, then that does cause an issue.... They just did that with pistol braces... so i see no reason why your proposed logic couldnt take place. For the sake of argument, you need to contextualize this to NJ's law... As pointed out many times, the NFA violations of constructive possession need to show intent. Personally i believe that take down pins still allows for 'an assault firearm to be readily assembled by simply removing a combination of parts from one firearm to assemble an assualt weapon.' If that statement makes sense to you... then im not sure what the argument is, notice how i used the exact words of the law and arguably any person with a brain could fully understand exactly what i meant and how the law applies to that situation. I personally suggested the takedown pin that works by blind pinning an expansion ring... it has to be drilled out if you want to separate the (upper/lower)parts.

you realize were talking about a NJ law... The NFA is specific to intent... NJ's law is specific to possession..

There is nothing inherently wrong with understanding the risks of doing or owning something. It also better allows you to protect yourself if you do choose to exercise such risks.. There is something to be said about keeping one step ahead of what seems to be a very anti-gun administration. There is a reason i would suggest building one, even against NJSP guidance, over purchasing one in this state.. If i did buy one, maybe do it out of state.

But i can define it.. its when parts are together. What other meaning are you trying to suggest it refers to? Your argument is, does a part stop being a part when it is assembled?

There are not two interpretations. The law applies to anything that qualifies as a combination of parts. If you can find a gun expert to sit on a stand and tell a jury that a firearm is NOT a combination of parts... Let us know who he is. If a component needs any prior modification it is not "readily available", for instance... A prosecutor cannot take a firearm and swap uppers in a court room with that showing a jury it is not readily available. If he drilled out the pivot pin, he also is tampering with evidence..

I would use something like this on the firearm. https://pof-usa.com/product/inseparable-pivot-pin-kit/ To satisfy the "easily assembled" portion of the law, which would make it difficult to swap combinations of parts between guns.

The law may be general but it isn't ambiguous. You're just trying to argue against reason. Im not trying to argue anymore than what the law says.... and it does say that an assault weapon is also defined as a combination of parts.. (where as prior case law, bicycles?, did not define them as such) A combination of parts(not being defined by law) is therefore defined by a reasonable person. You cant even convince a bunch of gun guys that a firearm is not a combination of parts... but you will convince a bunch of non gun people on a jury? I count it a blessing the NJSP have been on our side, but a prosecutor wont care what they have to say if they want to nail your balls to the wall.

Do you understand the standard application of a law? The law is to be interpreted as if a reasonable person would understand it. Unless otherwise defined, a law is interpreted through the use of reasonable application. Is a firearm made of parts? yes. Does that make a firearm a combination of parts? yes. Good luck trying to convince a jury otherwise.

One of the definitions of an Assault firearm is clearly labeled as a combination of parts.. What more is a rifle than a combination of parts? If you find yourself trying to justify a reasoning here without directly using the language in the statute, your fate is in the hands of a jury.. Like i said before, the line is drawn with the "readily assembled" language in the law.... I cannot readily assemble an assault weapon if i have to deconstruct other weapons to do so. The truth is... @vladtepes is correct.. the law has just enough ambiguity to be ignored in general.. but if you found yourself being singled out... you would have a hard time arguing it.

Based on that argument... It's open to interpretation in this state. Will a jury believe that a firearm is not a combination of parts? I personally believe if you found yourself in such a pickle that you needed to defend yourself.... you would be using the readily assembled language in the statute.

Federally, in accordance with NFA rules I believe intent is a factor, however here in NJ mere possession is what the law states.

Nope f-35's I have seen them as far north as lower sussex county doing loops over my house... they were so low you could see the pilot.. I saw blackhawks around morristown yesterday..

Is a firearm in a complete format considered "parts"? Doesn't this also pertain to federal issues of constructive possession as well since it would potentially create an NFA Item?

Nothing wrong with being suspicious.... but i don't see a reason people cant answer the question or offer alternative ways to reach his intended goal.. It's not like he asked the forum where to get 30 round mags in NJ... HA!

I'm at 119.5 We lost power briefly mid day. I'm sure it's a more isolated issue tho.

The question doesn't mention anything about age, so the answer is Yes to the question. Get your information together about the incident, medical records and the professional who observed and discharged you..