A while back I remember that people were questioning the reasoning for the M1 carbine being banned.

If I remember correctly the owner of arms and ammo was getting ready to be able to sell a new model by auto ordnance that was not called an "M1" and legal "grey area" issues occured.

 

Has this gone anywhere ? Everyone knows this new version rifle does not meet any of the AWB criteria.

Sadly the M1 and its differently named models are still banned, because of the 'Reasonably Identical Clause'. And until the laws change (HA!) it'll remain illegal until we move to a state that isn't 'Reasonably Identical' to Communist China.

Was close, and for a little while they flew under the radar, however the new Auto Ordinance one is still not legal.

If it doesnt have 2 or more features it is not substantially identical to the listed M1 Carbine, regardless of what its called. Even the originals are legal if they dont have the folding stock and bayonet lug.

 

...but since everybody is scared into believing they are illegal, I wouldnt be caught dead with one! You are going to spend $30,000 proving your innocense. So pretend they are all illegal

Technically the auto ordnance AOM130 "should" be legal according to the NJAC AWB evil feature list test. Sad to say, the current AG ignores their own guidelines, and is trying to put teeth back into the previously struck "unconstitutionally vague" via NJ case law AWB statute based on guns being "substantially identical" to the named list.

 

As glennp stated, you won't find a dealer that wants to be the test case on this one, and I don't blame them.

IMHO if there was ever a gun to pick the fight with.. this IS the gun.. someone really needs to run with it..

 

come on.. wood stock.. small magazine size..

 

this is the PRIME example of why NJ gun laws are absurd..

This was what got it all started, it was subsequently reversed by the same person

 

 

 

negative, it was rescinded by the Attorney general, NOT Lt Schuleter. What happened was, that Everyone and their brother started calling the Firearms Investigation unit because they didn't BELEIVE that the lettr existed...to the tune of 50+ calls per day. Eventually someone other then Schuleter answered the phone, and rather than check with Dave, kicked it up to the AG's office. At which time our Esteemed Rabid Antigun Ag issued a counter memo to Dave's after Screaming "OH HELL NO!!!!!!"

This is really friggin' frustrating! I am just scratching the surface and I am incredibly aggravated by this. And ofcourse out of all the things this governor needs to lean left on it has to be gun laws. LAME!!!

negative, it was rescinded by the Attorney general, NOT Lt Schuleter. What happened was, that Everyone and their brother started calling the Firearms Investigation unit because they didn't BELEIVE that the lettr existed...to the tune of 50+ calls per day. Eventually someone other then Schuleter answered the phone, and rather than check with Dave, kicked it up to the AG's office. At which time our Esteemed Rabid Antigun Ag issued a counter memo to Dave's after Screaming "OH HELL NO!!!!!!"

 

+1

mind boggling isn't it..

This is really friggin' frustrating! I am just scratching the surface and I am incredibly aggravated by this. And ofcourse out of all the things this governor needs to lean left on it has to be gun laws. LAME!!!

 

 

yeah... because this stance is New to Tubbo......

 

Check out this new Citadel Carbine coming out. It is in .22LR.

Paul - do you know the price? Where is it made?

totally not cool to post people's email addresses online.

Check out this new Citadel Carbine coming out. It is in .22LR.

Says it is marked like the original.

Says it is marked like the original.

I saw that..even though it is completely different in caliber and operation (Blowback vs gas-operated) I have the feeling that the markings might be a major problem.

I want a real one for my collection but the NJ laws are just are so unreasonable for no reason....

I do not see where they say that it was marked the same.

If it doesnt have 2 or more features it is not substantially identical to the listed M1 Carbine, regardless of what its called. Even the originals are legal if they dont have the folding stock and bayonet lug.

 

...but since everybody is scared into believing they are illegal, I wouldnt be caught dead with one! You are going to spend $30,000 proving your innocense. So pretend they are all illegal

 

I think you're mixing things here just as the state does. The M1 carbine is banned by "M1 carbine type" just as the Colt AR15 is banned. Using yor rationale if you had a AR15 with no bayonet lug or flash surpressor it would be legal. By the statute the AR15 lower receiver is illegal even if you don't have anything attached to it. However, the state does allow firearms with the same features as a AR15 as long as they don't have 2 evil features and they don't say AR15 on them. Go figure

 

M1 carbine type is even broader than "AR15". Its almost like saying "six shot revolver". Basically anything that looks like a M1 carbine is banned when you look at the statute. It doesn't say anything about having a folding stock, bayonet lug, etc it just says M1 carbine type nad further reinforces it by listing Plainfield and Universal carbines. By statute its an assault weapon if its listed no matter what features it has or if its substantially identical.

 

I'm not defending the law by any means. Just saying that $30,000 spent on a test case would only get you convicted.

Technically the auto ordnance AOM130 "should" be legal according to the NJAC AWB evil feature list test. Sad to say, the current AG ignores their own guidelines, and is trying to put teeth back into the previously struck "unconstitutionally vague" via NJ case law AWB statute based on guns being "substantially identical" to the named list.

 

As glennp stated, you won't find a dealer that wants to be the test case on this one, and I don't blame them.

 

You could always buy one through a PA dealer and get it that way. This way you can keep the NJ FFLs out of this in pursuit of the 'test case'.

IMHO if there was ever a gun to pick the fight with.. this IS the gun.. someone really needs to run with it..

 

come on.. wood stock.. small magazine size..

 

this is the PRIME example of why NJ gun laws are absurd..

 

Get the ANJRPC to talk to the SAF about it... Even using your run of the mill AR-15 neutered to NJ standards can make a good case. Especially when you present to SCOTUS two rifles side by side and explain that none of the features that NJ bans makes the rifle any more dangerous, and is quite unreasonable to carry out.

 

All that's left is the 15 round limit... that to me is more of a PITA than the other AWB stuff...

I do not see where they say that it was marked the same.

 

http://www.legacysports.com/products/cit_m1.html

 

The way it is written is implying that it is marked the same in my opinion. I guess you could call and find out Paul?

http://www.legacyspo...cts/cit_m1.html

 

The way it is written is implying that it is marked the same in my opinion. I guess you could call and find out Paul?

Nah, I will just get one and look at it myself.

Paul, if that is goood to go please put me down for one asap.

 

You could always buy one through a PA dealer and get it that way. This way you can keep the NJ FFLs out of this in pursuit of the 'test case'.

If it's not NJ legal, PA dealers aren't going to sell it to you.

If it's not NJ legal, PA dealers aren't going to sell it to you.

 

Yes they will. PA dealers don't give a hoot if what your buying is in violation of NJ law. As far as they are concerned, when you buy out of state, it's on you to make sure your firearm is compliant with local laws prior to going back home. How do you think those folks who have homes in PA but are residents of NJ can buy guns and keep guns that are not compliant outside of NJ?

 

Not to mention: NJ law ends at the Delaware, so even if they did "violate" it by selling you a non-compliant weapon, then there isn't much the state could do about it.

There is one catch Adam, per ATF guidelines. the dealer is supposed to follow the laws of both states.

 

LINK

a licensee may sell a rifle or shotgun to a person who is not a resident of the State where the licensee’s business premises is located in an over-the-counter transaction, provided the transaction complies with State law in the State where the licensee is located and in the State where the purchaser resides.

Cabelas wouldn't sell me a wasr-3. Becuase it came with a 30 round mag. I told them to keep the mag and they still wouldn't sell it to me.

This whole M-1 carbine look-alike business has nothing to do with the named list or the evil feature list. It is nothing more than bullying by the AG's office. Just like the IO rifle scam they pulled off. Now some dealers are afraid to sell anything that shares AK-ish or M-1ish styling for fear of AG reprisals even if the rifles aren't named and meet the NJAC evil feature list (which is the rule for how "substantially identical" can be used).

 

Just look at this .22. It is nothing more than a 10/22 that shares styling to a m-1 carbine, and we're all scared its defined as a AW. This is part of the AG's brainwashing campaign to slowly re-empower the "substantially identical" clause in the statutes even though there is case law and NJAC rules wrapped around how it can be used constitutionally.

There is one catch Adam, per ATF guidelines. the dealer is supposed to follow the laws of both states.

Which is why so many Online retailers will NOT Sell any firearms to those of us in Ban states, they just dont want the hassles.

http://www.legacyspo...cts/cit_m1.html

 

The way it is written is implying that it is marked the same in my opinion. I guess you could call and find out Paul?

 

Just found some pics of one, looks like its marked "Citadel M1-22" http://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=421735&page=4

I may have to try to find one of these, looks pretty close to the original too .