I wish we had some case law on someone being charged with temporarily blocked NJ defined high cap mags... That's the only thing that would mean anything one way or another.

 

I agree completely.. and generally the lack of a test case in a very pro-prosecution state like NJ would be enough for me to say go for it.. but I am just really unsure about this one instance..

but I completely agree with you... when the law is unclear as it is IMO in this case.. then looking for a case to reference is the way to go..

 

I have always wondered why they would instruct dealers that it HAS to be permanent but ignore the end user.. my assumption is just that it is unintentional.. and that they felt that just saying capable was enough.. maybe not maybe so.. unfortunately as you pointed out.. until there is a case or a letter of clarification, we are just guessing..

Welp I found what the State thinks, they will try to prosecute based on what they feel is a "temporary" block. Appalling.

 

The State recognizes that some of its representatives may have provided

informal advice to the effect that an ammunition magazine may be temporarily

blocked to hold no more than 15 rounds; however, the Attorney General has never

expressly adopted this position. To the contrary, through the promulgation of

this regulation, the State expressly rejects that interpretation of the

statute. Any person who currently owns or possesses an ammunition magazine

which has been temporarily blocked from holding more than 15 rounds is hereby

advised that he or she may retain possession of that ammunition magazine until

the effective date of this amendment, that is, the date the notice of its

adoption by the Division of State Police is published by the Office of

Administrative Law in the New Jersey Register, see N.J.A.C. 1:30-6.6. During

this time period, a person who owns or possesses an ammunition magazine which

has been temporarily blocked from holding more than 15 rounds shall either: (1)

transfer such ammunition magazine to any person or firm lawfully entitled to

own or possess a large capacity ammunition magazine; (2) render such ammunition

magazine permanently incapable of holding more than 15 rounds; or (3)

voluntarily surrender the ammunition magazine pursuant to the provisions of

N.J.S.A. 2C:39-12. After the effective date of this amendment, a person who

owns or possesses an ammunition magazine which has been temporarily blocked

from holding more than 15 rounds shall voluntarily surrender the ammunition

magazine pursuant to the provisions of N.J.S.A. 2C:39-12 or risk prosecution

for unlawful possession of a large capacity magazine pursuant to N.J.S.A.

2C:39-3(j).

 

http://www.state.nj....p/rp010702a.htm

The state uses "readily assembled" language in assault firearms, but only capable for mags. I would argued that capable does not mean readily assembled

Welp I found what the State thinks, they will try to prosecute based on what they feel is a "temporary" block. Appalling.

 

 

 

http://www.state.nj....p/rp010702a.htm

 

your google skills are epic.. lol

 

if they reject temp block.. which is an assembled mag that can only hold 15.. then I am pretty confident a disassembled 30 rounder would be a big bunch of fail as well..

your google skills are epic.. lol

 

if they reject temp block.. which is an assembled mag that can only hold 15.. then I am pretty confident a disassembled 30 rounder would be a big bunch of fail as well..

 

Yup, but it seems there is no case law that I can find regarding "temporarily blocked" magazines. At least we know the State is more then happy with trying to prosecute people with them, they just haven't done so as far as I can tell. edit: Or people plea out to misdemeanors or something when they do get caught... so we never see it go to real court.

Yup, but it seems there is no case law that I can find regarding "temporarily blocked" magazines. At least we know the State is more then happy with trying to prosecute people with them, they just haven't done so as far as I can tell. edit: Or people plea out to misdemeanors or something when they do get caught... so we never see it go to real court.

 

understanding the vagueness of the wording..

understanding the states opinion..

is enough for me to tread cautiously..

I have an easy solution for all ambiguities, that sadly will never be implemented...

 

" In the case of any ambiguity or vagueness in the law, the law shall be interpreted in the favor of the defendant. "

 

Should convince the legislature to write specific laws...

it is a high capacity magazine in parts.. is it not...

 

16 links that can be attached to fire 16 continuous shots without reloading..

16 round glock magazine that can fire 16 rounds without reloading...

 

I see absolutely no difference..

 

YOU don't count.....the Appropriate County Prosecutor/AP, or AG/DAG is the only one who does.

YOU don't count.....the Appropriate County Prosecutor/AP, or AG/DAG is the only one who does.

 

yeah well apparently it is moot because NJ stated in the info quoted above they will prosecute anything short of a permanently modified "magazine" which in their definition is essentially anything that feeds a firearm..

 

people ignore the belt thing.. and that is all well and good..

but pretend you are a defense attorney and the prosecution just explained how magazines in whole or constructive part are illegal if they can feed more than 15 rounds.. then picks up your two 15 round belts and links them in one simple move.. what is your defense at that point.. "yeah well my client wouldn't do that"

 

as I have also stated.. if you are comfortable go for it..

but 16 links in your safe are logically a container that is capable of feeding more than 15 continuous rounds..

unlikely to be an issue? sure VERY unlikely..

but possible? I think so based on NJs posture and the loose wording of the law..

What about two ten round belts of linked ammo?

 

Seems to me, if you had 16 links total in your possession it could be a problem by that logic.

 

I know from personal experience a LOT of people in NJ are quite convinced that 15 round linked belts are just fine. And, they act as such, even in the presence of police. Is it an accurate interpretation of law? I don’t know for sure. A lot of non-lawyer firearms enthusiasts in NJ insist other activities are legal that are actually illegal with much greater degree of confidence.

 

I have an easy solution for all ambiguities, that sadly will never be implemented...

 

" In the case of any ambiguity or vagueness in the law, the law shall be interpreted in the favor of the defendant. "

 

Should convince the legislature to write specific laws...

 

 

You just described the "Rule of Lenity" that I pointed out in Post 16

OK, so using that logic if I have 2 10 round PSL mags I have an illegal 20 rounder!

 

They can be welded together and work...

OK, so using that logic if I have 2 10 round PSL mags I have an illegal 20 rounder!

 

They can be welded together and work...

 

not the same..

a manufactured 30 round magazine that is simply dissembled is not the same as something you could build..

When is a magazine not a magazine?

 

When it's a CLIP, obviously!!!

 

Lol (and dives for cover).

 

 

G

not the same..

a manufactured 30 round magazine that is simply dissembled is not the same as something you could build..

 

im talking about 2 15 round belts that can be clipped together

 

If I have a welding machine at home and a bunch of 10 round mags do I now have hi cap mags because I am capable of changing the capacities?

 

No....

 

So why would 2 15 round belts be any different. There is no definition for this kind of stuff. Kinda like how you cant have a folding stock, but you can have it pinned in place. What if you have a punch in your tool kit and you get pulled over with a pinned AR15 stock?

 

Do you now have a folding stock....?

im talking about 2 15 round belts that can be clipped together

 

If I have a welding machine at home and a bunch of 10 round mags do I now have hi cap mags because I am capable of changing the capacities?

 

No....

 

So why would 2 15 round belts be any different. There is no definition for this kind of stuff. Kinda like how you cant have a folding stock, but you can have it pinned in place. What if you have a punch in your tool kit and you get pulled over with a pinned AR15 stock?

 

Do you now have a folding stock....?

 

because there is no mechanical change to link an additional link in a 16 round belt..

 

16 links in itself.. by the way it functions... and by NJ definition.. is a large capacity magazine.. 16 links is a container that is capable of feeding 16 continuous rounds of ammunition..

I didnt say a 16 round belt. I said 2 perfectly legal 15 round belts, of which neither can feed more than 15 rounds continuously.

 

 

There is a mechanical change to make it 16 rounds. You add another one round magazine to it to make it 16 rounds. The links alone are one round magazines.

 

Just like 2 PSL mags. Unless welded together, adding magazines together...

 

Without a clear cut definition as to what changes are required to make something legal or illegal, theres no way to tell and you have to go on what is accepted in other areas. For example, you can have a pinned and welded brake but still remove it with a zip wheel and time. So what defines permenent? Amount of work? No.

 

So basically, does it feed over 15 rounds or not? I dont care if theres 10000 15 round belts in a box, they are just 15 round belts no matter how easy they are to attach together. Because once they say thats illegal because they can be made into hi cap mags, then a box full of conventional mags will be illegal too because you can make those hi caps with a little bit of effort...

I didnt say a 16 round belt. I said 2 perfectly legal 15 round belts, of which neither can feed more than 15 rounds continuously.

 

 

There is a mechanical change to make it 16 rounds. You add another one round magazine to it to make it 16 rounds. The links alone are one round magazines.

 

Just like 2 PSL mags. Unless welded together, adding magazines together...

 

Without a clear cut definition as to what changes are required to make something legal or illegal, theres no way to tell and you have to go on what is accepted in other areas. For example, you can have a pinned and welded brake but still remove it with a zip wheel and time. So what defines permenent? Amount of work? No.

 

So basically, does it feed over 15 rounds or not? I dont care if theres 10000 15 round belts in a box, they are just 15 round belts no matter how easy they are to attach together. Because once they say thats illegal because they can be made into hi cap mags, then a box full of conventional mags will be illegal too because you can make those hi caps with a little bit of effort...

 

the legal defense being "I would not break the law and link these two 15 round belts together" seems like extreme grasping at straws..

 

the thought that 2 15 round belts are somehow mechanically not cable of feeding 30 rounds it absurd.. you can think it all you want because it has become the "standard" that it is "ok"

but fill a jury full of your typical gun blind NJ residents.. and watch a prosecutor turn your 2 15 round belts into a 30 round belts in a matter of second and I bet you would have a hard time arguing against..

 

further if what you say is accurate.. I could put scotch tape over the adjustment lever on my collapsible stock and then all of the sudden be legal.. after all "with the tape on it.. it can not be adjusted, and you would certainly not break the tape and violate the law.." many things in NJ law are common practice.. it does not mean they reflect how the law is literally written..

 

many have argued that as the law is literally written the "evil feature" list ONLY applies to guns and variants of the ban list.. but good luck finding an FFL to transfer a scar with folding stock and flash hider..

 

there is the way the law is practice..

there is NJs intent..

there is the way the law is literally written..

 

unfortunately they are not all the same..

People confused over whether this or that mag or linked ammo they are trying to make follow NJ law might actually land them in jail and nobody can figure it out for sure. For trying to follow the law and go to the range.

 

My head is going to explode.

 

Don't give me the nuclear football. I like you guys, but you gotta crack a few eggs. I'd give you a heads-up with enough time to escape if you run for your lives on command, of course.

I agree with PizzaBob.

OK, take your pinned stock to court and watch the judge tap the pin out with a drift pin.

OK, take your pinned stock to court and watch the judge tap the pin out with a drift pin.

 

how many tools does it take to link an extra link to that 15 round belt?

how many tools does it take to link an extra link to that 15 round belt?

 

How many tools does the law say you need in order for something to be permenent?

How many tools does the law say you need in order for something to be permenent?

 

NJ defines high capacity magazine as simply a container that is capable of feeding more than 15 rounds..

 

y. "Large capacity ammunition magazine" means a box, drum, tube or other container which is capable of holding more than 15 rounds of ammunition to be fed continuously and directly therefrom into a semi-automatic firearm.

 

NJ has stated specifically that ONLY a feeding device that is PERMANENTLY altered to ONLY hold 15 or less would be acceptable..

this means that if a magazine has the capacity to feed more than 15 rounds (as the definition states) they consider it illegal..

I am not sure how much more clear it could be..

 

The State recognizes that some of its representatives may have provided

informal advice to the effect that an ammunition magazine may be temporarily

blocked to hold no more than 15 rounds; however, the Attorney General has never

expressly adopted this position. To the contrary, through the promulgation of

this regulation, the State expressly rejects that interpretation of the

statute. Any person who currently owns or possesses an ammunition magazine

which has been temporarily blocked from holding more than 15 rounds is hereby

advised that he or she may retain possession of that ammunition magazine until

the effective date of this amendment, that is, the date the notice of its

adoption by the Division of State Police is published by the Office of

Administrative Law in the New Jersey Register, see N.J.A.C. 1:30-6.6. During

this time period, a person who owns or possesses an ammunition magazine which

has been temporarily blocked from holding more than 15 rounds shall either: (1)

transfer such ammunition magazine to any person or firm lawfully entitled to

own or possess a large capacity ammunition magazine; (2) render such ammunition

magazine permanently incapable of holding more than 15 rounds; or (3)

voluntarily surrender the ammunition magazine pursuant to the provisions of

N.J.S.A. 2C:39-12. After the effective date of this amendment, a person who

owns or possesses an ammunition magazine which has been temporarily blocked

from holding more than 15 rounds shall voluntarily surrender the ammunition

magazine pursuant to the provisions of N.J.S.A. 2C:39-12 or risk prosecution

for unlawful possession of a large capacity magazine pursuant to N.J.S.A.

2C:39-3(j).

 

this shows that the intent that ANY ammunition feeding device that can potentially feed more than 15 rounds is a potential prosecution...

this conclusion is drawn by the emphasis on the words "capable" in the law itself.. and the wording or "permanent" as being the ONLY means of altering a high capacity magazine..

a "30 round belt" split in 2.. is NOT permanent.. a 100 round belt split into 1 is not permanent..

the ONLY modification they accept to ammunition feeding devices are those which are permanent..

 

we will simply agree to disagree at this point..

 

as far as stocks.. I fail to see the term collapsible stock defined.. if it is defined somewhere.. then that would be how you would need to modify the stock..

How many tools does the law say you need in order for something to be permenent?

 

 

Two tools.

 

One named Glenn and the other Anthony.

 

 

 

Two tools.

 

One named Glenn and the other Anthony.

 

 

lol

Two tools.

 

One named Glenn and the other Anthony.

 

 

Lmao. +1 to you sir

how many tools does it take to link an extra link to that 15 round belt?

 

So what your saying is that if you have a 1919, you can only own enough links to link 15 rounds together and not a single one more?

So what your saying is that if you have a 1919, you can only own enough links to link 15 rounds together and not a single one more?

 

I am not saying it.. but what I am saying.. is

 

in NJ if you have a ammunition feeding device capable of feeding more than 15 continuous rounds.. it is illegal..

in NJ making a temporary modification to limit to 15 is not acceptable... (refer to the statement up top)

in NJ for a high capacity ammunition feeding device to be legal it must be PERMANENTLY altered to ONLY accept 15 rounds.. I do not see how you can modify 16 links to satisfy that..

 

in practical application.. I assume you are fine.. I know quite a few people with belt fed guns and multiple belts..

BUT I am more pointing out the absurdity that is NJ..

in that in practical application MANY have FAR more links than 15... but 16 links is the same as a disassembled 30 round magazine.. which in NJ is illegal (high capacity magazine MUST be permanently altered or you risk prosecution (again see above quote))

I agree with vladtepes and glennp that if one possesses all the parts to assemble a high capacity magazine, they are violating the law.

 

However, I think that some of you are putting the cart before the horse regarding disintegrating links for belt-feds.

 

First, one must establish that any number of links is even a "container" per the law. IMHO, I do not believe that they are. So there is no need to determine if one, fifteen, sixteen, or even one-hundred links is a large capacity magazine.