JackDaWack

It will be illegal until you complete it. It IS a part that can be used to make a rifle into an "assualt rifle", or an NFA SBR. Once completed it should be gtg as it is no longer a part. Are you attempting to make a pistol or Non NfA firearm?

The money bought him the party nomination....that pretty much stopped there. His ridiculous progressive ideas got him elected. When push comes to shove... next election, if Sweeney can out Murphy in the primary... who do you think all the liberals in the state will support? My hope is that the Murphy hatred runs sooo deep that Sweeney becomes a moderate and the legislature utilizes it's Republicans to continue veto proof legislation. So these bills can die out this session. Keep in mind he may be trading these bills the other way to keep Republicans on his side.

I wish that were so... but im gonna have to see it when i believe it.... If Murphy can become governor... any ass hat democrat can in this state.

The FID bill wasnt voted on, neither was the ammunition bill or storage. Looks like they just expanded on criminal activity for once and unfortunatyl "smart" guns. So stores are required to carry a smart gun.. Add convictions of crimes such as carjacking or making terroristic threats to the list of crimes that ban people from buying firearms in the state (A5454/S3897). It passed the Assembly 58-10 with 9 abstentions and the state Senate. 34-1. Encourage firearm retail dealers and operators of firing ranges in the state to attend a suicide prevention course (A3896). It passed the Assembly 73-0 with 3 abstentions and the state Senate, 37-0. Make it a third-degree crime for people who aren’t allowed to have a gun who attempt to obtain one (A4449). It passed the Assembly 70-5 with three abstentions and the Senate 57-1.

Damn its only 1k!? Good review, certainly something to give the others a run for their money.

Im under the impression that the sale took place in NV.... if so... "The lawsuit accuses New Frontier Armory violating New Jersey’s Consumer Fraud Act along with state regulations governing illegal products." If that is the case, then it sounds like neither of these two accusations will hold up in court when challenged. The state is relying on this idea that they have jurisdiction over the internet and specifically advertising that ends up on a persons computer in NJ.

That's what most people do unless they plan on doing the work themselves..

Constructive possession says specifically, "parts" that can be made into an Assault weapon. While we don't have much case law to go on here you have to use the language in the law. If I have anything in question that could be considered a part used to make an AW, i make sure it's used to complete firearm that is legal. Just having any threaded barrel for an ar-15 could fall under constructive... but it must be a "part" per the law... Intent is just part of it, so if you have a lower and upper that could make a "firearm" it still needs to be assembled to satisfy the readily assembled part if you have any other lowers with stocks or complete rifles. 4. A part or combination of parts designed or intended to convert a firearm into an assault firearm, or any combination of parts from which an assault firearm may be readily assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person Ya gotta just take it for what it says...I have a hard time believing they would get you on something that involved deconstructing a legal firearm. Just make sure you don't have any "parts" laying around that can make an AW.

I think the issue here is the context... The NJSP is telling the manufacture they must sell a complete product marketed as a non-nfa firearm. Since a receiver was never part of the equation in their opinion, i don't think they are taking it into consideration when advising a company how to sell them in order to make them legal. So it's clear they cannot take a rifle model and modify it to meet the definition of a Non-nfa firearm, that is definitely a no go... and in that context the NJSP is 100% correct. We will see what they answer when directly asked about receivers.. But my guess is it will be a muddy answer.. the problem with guns like the shockwave.... or their shotgun counterparts... is the receivers made for say a 590 or 870 was specifically manufactured for a shotgun... where as the ar-15 receiver is extreme versatile in what it can become. Now, it's a game of what does the manufacturer identify it as?

Not sure who was buying that bullshit.... some of these will pass... Rumor was yesterday he was only bringing a few to the floor for a vote

My hope would be their statement was to clarify to manufactures they needed to market the firearm a specific way and to also discourage people from selling uppers that could be used to make an SBR, or a complete lower that could be used as a pistol. Hence their use of the statement "complete firearm". Aside from the federal issue of the manufactured purpose.. the constructive intent wording for NJ AWB is probably another main concern here.

I believe MM stated his info came from the NJSP, i think you guys got the same exact statement. If it's not coming from the ATF, then we can focus this to a state level issue... The other thing, they maybe referring to you guys manufacturing and marketing the gun as a "firearm". This was a big deal for manufactures to make clear the manufactured purpose of the gun was to be a "firearm" and not a rifle, pistol or shotgun. THAT is a very important aspect to this process for people selling them.

Im still not clear here, is all of this coming from the NJSP? or is this now being referenced as an ATF statement...? MM said his NJSP contact gave him the info.. Dark Storm said "per the ATF" The fact is people have been constructing pistols and rifles from receivers since their inception, and the ATF never batted an eye at it. Now, a Non-NFA firearm which has absolutely no extra regulations or stipulations than either of the former is somehow off limits if it starts life as a receiver? So lets recap receiver ---> Non NFA pistol OK receiver ---> Non NFA Rifle OK receiver ---> Non NFA "firearm" NOT OK.. by reason of insanity

Yeah sorry, but I'm still not buying it and haven't seen a single law referenced that says I can't take a legally defined receiver and make an non nfa out of it. The log books that manufacturers and ffls need does not have a standard "type" of firearm to be entered. Just that it's description needs to be accurate.***** AFAIK, a stripped reciever goes into the books as such.. and is NICS as a reciever...and the ATF has guidlines that they should be referred to as recievers and NOT complete firearms under ANY condition. Everything your describing is counter to what the ATF has said about a reciever being classified and not as an example: a pistol or rifle.. and would apply to any other weapon that could be constructed from them... Since there is no law outlining a difference. If it's booked into and out of an FFL as a reciever... Show me a single law or ATF guidlines that says it can only be used to build a rifle or pistol, and not a legal non nfa weapon? As pointed out, everyone buys recievers to make pistols and rifles, if we have a law outlining that non nfa are off limits... Then Lets see it.. otherwise I'm at a point where this is pure propaganda... A whole lotta statements from people with no legal basis in their opinion. I pointed out before and will say it again. The ATF allows you to construct your own weapons. So long as they are not rifles made into pistols, or NFA or AOW.... or in this case a pistol or rifle made into a non-nfa... otherwise..It's all legal.

Does any one know which bills made it to the floor for tomorrow senate vote?

Federally speaking a person can construct and manufacture their own "firearm non-nfa". They can also make their own pistols and rifles. Whether it's from bare steel or an 80% receiver, or just standard 100% receiver. There are stipulations on modifying manufactured firearms, but completing receivers and assembling them into something that is legal to own is not against the law federally. https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/4473-part-1-firearms-transaction-record-over-counter-atf-form-53009/download second page shows the box checked for "other Firearm" Question 16. Type of Firearm(s): "Other" refers to frames, receivers and other firearms that are neither handguns nor long guns (rifles or shotguns), such as firearms having a pistol grip that expel a shotgun shell, or National Firearms Act (NFA) firearms, including silencers. If a frame or receiver can only be made into a long gun (rifle or shotgun), it is still a frame or receiver not a handgun or long gun. Do you guys sell receiver not check off as that on 4473?

Im not aware of any NJ state law that mentions a 26" or greater OAL requirement, other than the "sawed off shotgun" definition. "Sawed-off shotgun" means any shotgun having a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length measured from the breach to the muzzle, or a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length measured from the breach to the muzzle, or any firearm made from a rifle or a shotgun, whether by alteration, or otherwise, if such firearm as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches. I cant find anything else in the NJ law that has length requirements... so my non lawyer opinion would be that the NJSP can pound sand in terms of measuring OAL for a "firearm". For a modified rifle or shotgun, yes. I understand companies try and find a middle ground to get a product legal in as many states possible, that makes sense why you would go with a 12.5" barrel for that purpose.

And who's measurement actually counts? if the ATF finds you under 26" you got an AOW and are in serious Sh*t for violating the NFA. If the NJSP find it under 26".......? what they gonna do?

I'm more interested in if it even matters how the NJSP measure? If you violate the NFA it's an ATF issue, not NJSP. They can measure it under 25.9" all day long from buffer to muzzle... If the ATF follow their guidelines, then you should be fine. Unless of course I'm missing something about a NJ law. Is there a NJ statue that can be referenced, or are they trying to enforce a federal law as their own?

Where does it say that in the letter? They said that oal was measured by placing the firearm on a flat surface and taking a measurement from the extremes ends. Better question: Does it matter how NJ would measure it? The 26" min is a federal requirement, so doesn't it only matter how the ATF measures?

An max defense PDW brace with 11.5in barrel and pinned A2 flash hider is a hair over 26" at min length. AFAIK that PDW braces utilize the proprietary buffer tube length, springs and buffers. JP even makes a silent spring for them.

There is nothing to ponder over, a receiver is not classified as anything per say. Only one condition needs to be met, and that is if you build it into a pistol.... even then I find it a stretch of the law that you MUST use a P2P for the receiver... but since pistols are strictly regulated i guess they get that argument on their side. Nothing else in the law outlines how a receiver, rifle, shotgun or "firearm" is recorded upon sale. In fact I could call my FFL right now and have him add to specific COE "semi auto receiver firearm". The only requirement is that a COE is used and records the requested info. NJ law is clear on "sawed off" firearms, so the "firearm" CANNOT begin life as a rifle, which is where this headache with receivers is coming from. It sounds like the NJSP are trying to get receivers classified as rifles, or make it purposely confusing to keep people from taking already built rifles and converting them... because how the hell will they know what you made it into? After looking at my docs, I do have a single receiver that was purchased back in 2012 that was listed as "semi auto rifle". To me, that would be a definitive no go based on the documentation the FFL has stored. NO, you will not be able to keep it. When has NJ grandfathered anything in the last 20 years?

My built rifles all listed on a COE as semi auto receiver, but a COE only has the "action" listed/requested. I was under the impression that guns aren't registered in NJ? Aside from Pistol Permits, isn't everything else just FFL records? Not trying to give me him attitude. I understand he was told something and just relaying that back. Just trying to understand why they said it was a no go.

YOU said you received clarification from them? I'm simply asking what the question proposed was and the specific response. I cannot find anything in NJ's firearms laws that even remotely comes close to it being illegal to assemble a "firearm" from a receiver. Why would I ask them a question if the law clearly doesn't show a conflict in assembling one? If i can build a rifle from a receiver, why not a firearm? Not trying to be confrontational, but getting a private message from the NJSP on this issue is a bit different than the provided letter which becomes a PSA.

I call BS, why cant you build one from a legally purchased stripped receiver? If I slap together the same exact parts outlined in the letter there is nothing stopping someone from building their own. The only thing the letter outlines is the legal configuration of the "firearm", and in addition to it names the 2 submitted "firearms" in question as legal... I see nothing in the letter outlining that it must be purchased complete. If the question was.... can i take a NJ legally purchased rifle and convert it... then the answer is no.... Exactly how was the questios proposed when they said you couldn't build one?