Gorilla800lbs

With all due respect, you sound like a "death panel" proponent or something

To make my question clearer -- there is no doubt that per NJ statutes this is a firearm. Subject to all purchase restrictions (FID). My rumination is whether it is a NJ-legal firearm (40-round magazine capacity issue notwithstanding).

Assuming I have a FID. Not sure I'd need a P2P since this is not a handgun.

Sorry guys, forgot to clarify. This is a C02 powered .177 cal BB gun, not a bona fide Airsoft.

Done.

Dear esteemed experts, At the risk of asking yet another "is this gun legal?" question, I hope you can help me parse the 2C:39 when it comes to such thing as manufacturer licensed, BB or pellet-firing replicas of weapons that are enumerated as assault. A perfect example is an MP5 PDW replica produced by Umarex. Edit: CO2 powered, shoots .177 BBs. 1. "Banned by name". "H&K MP5" is printed right there on the frame, but it's obviously not THE H&K MP5. It's an officially licensed replica which could as well be machined out of cheese or fine chocolate, so... But then again, 2C-39-1w says "any firearm..." that has a listed name, and this product is a firearm (according to NJ) and its name is on the list... 2. "Substantially identical". Despite being visually identical, this is not THE H&K MP5. One cannot expect, say, Secret Service or Delta squads to be able to use it interchangeably with the real MP5 PDW. 3. Limitations on stock, pistol grip etc -- do not seem to apply because this weapon doesn't match the 2C-39 definition of a "rifle" or a "shotgun". 4. High-capacity magazine -- definitely evil, but nothing that a pinning by a qualified FFL gunsmith wouldn't solve? What is your opinion? Thanks, G.

GiantsFan: I figure this is because Airsoft does not produce "sufficient force to injure a person".

I just discovered this forum (and this thread). A real RPD?! How sweet! I get that you figured out the stripping and assembly via YouTube, but if you do have a manual in Russian and are interested in getting an English translation, I can do that for you. Scan or snap pics of the pages and PM me for email, or we could meet in person somewhere (I am in Bergen county)...

A-ha, thanks! I didn't pay attention to that part.

This must be right from the perspective of laser being a coherent wavelength light source, but nevertheless this effect is observable. It maybe has to do with the atmospheric air reaction to the beam, not the beam itself, you're right. Or maybe those device HAVE to alternate pulses to include include a secondary emitter like target designators used for airstrikes do -- one wavelength to actually "paint" the target, and another one used for the rangefinder. Or maybe I am incorrect altogether -- hence my "not really sure" disclaimer. Have to educate myself

What about Republican president-nominated Justices who who vote "anti" -- Souter and Stevens, I believe?

My modest knowledge of the subject: 1. The lasers used by hooligans to blind the pilots are of GREEN variety. The green beams are actually visible in the air (esp at night), and are customarily used for stargazing, as well as light shows at rock concerts and such. Because they're visible, the hooligans can easily train them on aircraft. But just like tracers work both ways, so the pilots can see where on the ground the beam is coming from. 2. (Not really sure about this one) The variety that is only visible using IR goggles is actually the regular RED laser, commonly used in laser pointers for presentations and lolcat Youtube videos. Those beams actually also have a significant IR spectrum component. So, same designator that produces a "red dot" also produces a beam visible in IR. Or so I gather.

That's great to know, thanks!!

njpilot: thanks!! That's the informative post I've been hoping for!

I suppose you gentlemen are talking about Cabela's store in Hamburg, PA? Do they indeed sell to NJ residents?

No, not really.

I guess it goes in between wall studs? In my house, I might have a hard time finding a spot where it would not interfere with horizontal runs of in-wall electric wiring.

Paintball markers have a much greater potential to produce an injury than Airsoft. I wonder if past summer was the last time I got to play paintball in NJ.

Not that I propose this as a method that facilitates illegal transportation, but why drive around with your gun case sitting in the trunk makes, so to say? For some extra piece of mind, why not put it into a duffel bag or a small carry-on, and lock the zipper with a gym-locker type padlock?

If he took a long detour from MI to NJ via NYC, he'd be in violation of transportation article anyway, since that would be an "unreasonable deviation". Edgeword: once you cross the NJ border, you gotta drive with your guns straight to your domicile. Transportation of firearms is allowed only in between: your home, a shooting range or a club or a gunsmith, a place of business that you own, a gun exhibition, or hunting grounds (I hope I got everything right).

I assure you that I am not a troll. I simply don't have a strongly informed opinion on the subject, and I am looking forward to developing one. He may well have a large number of people with an anti-gun bent in his administration, but again, the matter of the record is that so far this administration has been rather restrained on this subject. Surprisingly so, I would say. What I'd say you SHOULD be afraid of is him NOT winning the 2nd term. Then there could be some nuclear option in his plans, when at 11th hour of his presidency he busts out some reaally drastic changes. But even then, any executive order he issues in December 2012 can be easily rolled back by 45th President in January 2013, whomever it is. By the way, if you really dislike presidents who're given to arrogance and ego, just pray its' not Gingrich (or Perry, or Santorum)! And I think that at this point it's beyond safe to say that Obama (assuming he wants to) won't muster any support in the Congress for any long term gun-restricting regulations.

Or conversely, if a politician is truly up to something, then he's REALLY gotta try and ram as much of his nefarious legislation as possible DURING THE 1st TERM, since the subsequent term is never guaranteed. To keep one's aces up the sleeve for the 2nd term doesn't make any sense as a strategy. To keep the focus of this discussion, I won't call into question this argument as a whole -- I'll merely ask how do his alleged arrogance and ego might apply to firearms regulations? What is there to say that Romney's (Santorum's, Gingrich's etc) "arrogance and ego" won't make him ban guns sales just because, or vice versa -- start selling guns, I don't know, to to illegal immigrants and convicted pedophiles? My thoughts exactly. All manner of gullible people will start another run at the market, and prices of arms and ammo will be driven further up. No new regulations are introduced in the end, but shooting enthusiasts are held over barrell anyway, while manufacturers and speculators are laughing all the way to the bank.

I am new to the scene, so please forgive my ignorance, but what indicates that he'll come up with some truly draconian anti-gun regulations if/when he's voted in for his 2nd term? Is there anything he couldn't already have done (but didn't) during the present 3 years while in the office?

Which kind of coincides with my point, doesn't it? Nooone bothers invading Switzerland not because they have a gun in every household, but because there is nothing there worth invading it for. A comparison to Afghanistan doesn't stand on many levels: We (and Soviets before us) had no problem whatsoever invading Afghanistan. The problems begin when you engage into nation-building and try to lift that godforsaken country out of a feudal status and build some order that is not tribes-based. Conversely, a modern fighting force would have no problem whatsoever knocking Switzerland back into feudal order. With that said, it's worth remembering that Afghanistan is about 10 times as big and 4 times as populous as Switzerland. I think it was Richard Feynman who said that if you multiply the complexity of a given problem by an order of magnitude, you get a fundamentally different problem. In short. It's easy to romanticize that guns make everything better. And maybe, for the sake of argument, they actually do. Sometimes. It's just not one of those cases.

My PD wanted to see the birth certificate, not a passport. Since I am a naturalized citizen, I brought my naturalization certificate, and, just in case, a copy of my foreign country birth certificate, plus its notarized translation to English. They took everything.