Sorry if this has been addressed. Looking at an AR15, most online have an adjustable stock, does NJ consider this to be collapsible? Or is collapsible folding.

 

Thanks

Collapsible is telescoping like.. http://store.magpul....oduct/MAG400/82

 

and adjustable stock has means to adjust the length but not to a degree where it can be defined as collapsible into a much smaller form. Usually the adjustable are a little more heavier, and have less choices for the overall length you can adjust the stock. like... http://store.magpul....duct/MAG307/181

 

 

Obviously price is a considerable difference here, but saves you needed to get a stock pinned with the ability to still adjust your stock to your needs.

Collapsible is telescoping like.. http://store.magpul....oduct/MAG400/82

 

and adjustable stock has means to adjust the length but not to a degree where it can be defined as collapsible into a much smaller form. Usually the adjustable are a little more heavier, and have less choices for the overall length you can adjust the stock. like... http://store.magpul....duct/MAG307/181

 

 

Obviously price is a considerable difference here, but saves you needed to get a stock pinned with the ability to still adjust your stock to your needs.

 

Even the difference between those two is questionable. I always assumed that the prohibition on telescoping/folding stocks had to do with ones where the stock would be completely gone. When you fold a stock on the AK, the stock is no longer there, allowing concealment of the rifle. When you telescope the stock on an MP5N, it's also out of the way. In essence, the stock may no longer function as a stock.

 

Whereas, an AR-15, is adjustable. The stock doesn't disappear or lose it's functionality, it is merely adjusted to a shorter length of pull to accommodate users wearing baggy clothing or those who are of smaller stature.

 

There is some case law in NJ in a few counties where the collapsing stock on an AR-15 was found not to be prohibited. Though the details on those are a bit sketchy.

Yes folding stocks also fall into that category, and the purpose (i assume) for their ban was because both folding and collapsible stocks allow better concealment. Its funny though because you can take that same stock and pin it in the first position permanently modding it to its shortest potential and its perfectly legal. It is what it is I guess, however those are the differences as far as legality goes within NJ

Even the difference between those two is questionable. I always assumed that the prohibition on telescoping/folding stocks had to do with ones where the stock would be completely gone. When you fold a stock on the AK, the stock is no longer there, allowing concealment of the rifle. When you telescope the stock on an MP5N, it's also out of the way. In essence, the stock may no longer function as a stock.

 

Whereas, an AR-15, is adjustable. The stock doesn't disappear or lose it's functionality, it is merely adjusted to a shorter length of pull to accommodate users wearing baggy clothing or those who are of smaller stature.

 

There is some case law in NJ in a few counties where the collapsing stock on an AR-15 was found not to be prohibited. Though the details on those are a bit sketchy.

 

You should know better than to try to make sense of Jersey laws.

Yes folding stocks also fall into that category, and the purpose (i assume) for their ban was because both folding and collapsible stocks allow better concealment. Its funny though because you can take that same stock and pin it in the first position permanently modding it to its shortest potential and its perfectly legal. It is what it is I guess, however those are the differences as far as legality goes within NJ

 

I think that was the logical argument used in Court. They challenged the law by claiming that if a stock pinned in the first position was legal, then why would it be illegal to allow it to be longer?

You should know better than to try to make sense of Jersey laws.

 

But in this case, we have actual Court cases! Too bad it's impossible to get more info on them.

the magpul PRS stock is not adjustable.. the butt plate and cheek rest are.. the stock itself is fixed.. I have a PSR on my AR in 308 and if I still lived in NJ that would be my defense..

the actual STOCK is fixed.. IMO of course..

Thanks for the quick responses. I think to stay out of the gray area I'll look at fixed stocks. I'm between building and purchasing off the shelf. Already know the deal with bayonet lugs and flash suppressors. Was a little unclear on the stocks.

 

 

Thanks for the quick responses. I think to stay out of the gray area I'll look at fixed stocks. I'm between building and purchasing off the shelf. Already know the deal with bayonet lugs and flash suppressors. Was a little unclear on the stocks.

 

The ones you on the shelf have their seemingly collapsing stocks pinned into a fix position. You can also get someone to pin a stock for you if you are building your own. Also If you are on the tall side you will probably be better off with a A1/A2 length rifle type stock instead of the carbine type.

Thanks for the quick responses. I think to stay out of the gray area I'll look at fixed stocks. I'm between building and purchasing off the shelf. Already know the deal with bayonet lugs and flash suppressors. Was a little unclear on the stocks.

 

Collapsible stocks pinned to a fixed location is not a gray area and is predominantly used in NJ as the go to AR stock. There is a lot of info on the net about how to permanently pin stocks, and a number of gun shops can do it locally. I wouldnt trade off the aesthetics of the standard collapsible stock compared to a fixed stock.. just an opinion, but totally legal in NJ

This is horrible.

This is horrible.

 

It's quite silly. If a stock is legal in the minimum position, then logically it must be legal in every extending position. Someone needs to find those court cases though... I tried looking, but to no avail.

It's quite silly. If a stock is legal in the minimum position, then logically it must be legal in every extending position. Someone needs to find those court cases though... I tried looking, but to no avail.

 

Why are you using logic? Not only is this law, its NJ law, and NJ gun law at that...

 

The length of the stock is not the illegal factor (so long as overall length is met), its the folding or telescoping of the stock that is illegal.

It seems to me that the folding or telescoping is only illegal if it represents you 3rd or more illegal feature. If you have a non removeable mag, and no flashider, then pistol grip, and fold/tele stock are your only 2 and then legal. At least according to how the law is written.

^ who has a non-removable mag on an AR?

It seems to me that the folding or telescoping is only illegal if it represents you 3rd or more illegal feature. If you have a non removeable mag, and no flashider, then pistol grip, and fold/tele stock are your only 2 and then legal. At least according to how the law is written.

 

Or you have an Exile Hammerhead, which allows you to build an AR-15 without a pistol grip. I bought one from them when they first came out, but have yet to put it into a rifle. Maybe that's what I'll do with my NJGF lower. Build one with the hammerhead, but with some wicked normally forbidden in NJ flash hider....

 

https://www.exilemachine.net/shop/exile-machine-hammerhead-ar-15-grip-black-1.html

^ who has a non-removable mag on an AR?

 

Think SKS with collapsible stock.

^ who has a non-removable mag on an AR?

 

Everyone in California? Or, at least, a magazine requiring a "tool" to remove....

ahh ok. a cali build would work i guess.

 

Dont know much about the SKS, why type of mag does it have?

ahh ok. a cali build would work i guess.

 

Dont know much about the SKS, why type of mag does it have?

 

Fixed 10-rd internal mag.

Is there a place where I can look up all court cases in the state of New Jersey? I could've sworn in some counties, collapsible AR stocks are de-facto 'legal' because precedents were set where county judges didn't deem them as part of the 'evil parts' list.

Is there a place where I can look up all court cases in the state of New Jersey? I could've sworn in some counties, collapsible AR stocks are de-facto 'legal' because precedents were set where county judges didn't deem them as part of the 'evil parts' list.

 

I've been dabbling around too trying to find precedent to go on but I prefer to say adjustable vs collapsable. Seems so f'n moronic that the powers that be are making us drill holes in our ARs if we dont need to.If there are court cases that over-ruled the pinning you'd think they would be shouting it out from the rooftops and spreading the word! Maybe it is urban myth?

Is there a place where I can look up all court cases in the state of New Jersey? I could've sworn in some counties, collapsible AR stocks are de-facto 'legal' because precedents were set where county judges didn't deem them as part of the 'evil parts' list.

 

I've never heard of anything of the sort..and even if they did it wouldnt mean jack unless the decision came from the Appellate Division of the STATE court System..Counties cannot supplant State law, that has to be done at the next level up.

I've never heard of anything of the sort..and even if they did it wouldnt mean jack unless the decision came from the Appellate Division of the STATE court System..Counties cannot supplant State law, that has to be done at the next level up.

I agree that counties cannot supplant state law. However, to be clear, trial level courts located in the various counties are state courts. They are just located in the various counties for administrative purposes. The judges and staff are state employees. To my knowledge, there are no county judges in New Jersey.

 

With that said, any trial level decisions are certainly probative, even if they are not binding on the courts. One could determine the local prosecutors' and judges' proclivities and be guided accordingly. Chances are, if there is a record of it, you already know what the prosecutor's position was.

 

Aside from searching for opinions on reporting services like Westlaw and Lexis, you will probably have to do some OPRA legwork.

Counties cannot supplant State law, that has to be done at the next level up.

 

Interestingly, that remains to be seen as we are about to have case in Illinois about that. http://www.theoutdoorwire.com/story/1332500234f30qvjvkjjm

 

Also the collapsible stock thing is not state law is AG interpretation of state law, via some twisted logic. It won't make much difference to getting arrested, but it is an important distinction.

Hmmm very interesting, I wonder if some of the southern NJ counties could pull that off?

There was a case awhile back where somebody was arrested for possession of an AW because it had a M4 style "movable" stock on it. His defense argued successfully that the stock was not "collapsible" as real "collapsible stocks" means they can fold completely away from the rifle. In this case they argued to the jury that the movable M4 style stock was in fact an "adjustable" stock. I forget the details as it wasn't really publicized.

 

It doesn't help us, as the only way this case can help you is to act as precedent / example if you ever get charged with AW possession and happen to have the same "movable" stock on your rifle. You will still be arrested, and taken to court, and would have to prove yourself innocent.

 

Don't get me started with the NJAC AW evil feature list. It is a band-aid approach that allows NJ to keep the unconstitutionally vague AW ban on the books. It is a compromise, NJ gets to say they are still the ultimate nanny state, and we get to have our tacticool guns and just have to follow a bunch of stupid nonsensical rules (NJAC EFL). Theoretically , both anti's and pro-gun rights people are both semi-happy about the situation... well that was the plan anyway.

Just a thought...

 

The money you would spend for an attorney to defend yourself would be way way way more expensive than buying 6 lowers and pinning an m4 stock on each one in each position. Sure it would take more time to adjust the length, but you would have every length available to you, and never run afoul of the NJAC.

Just a thought...

 

The money you would spend for an attorney to defend yourself would be way way way more expensive than buying 6 lowers and pinning an m4 stock on each one in each position. Sure it would take more time to adjust the length, but you would have every length available to you, and never run afoul of the NJAC.

 

Thats funny, sad, and true, all at the same time.