|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
February 22, 2011, 11:06 PM | #26 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
This is the applicable law:
S 10. Section 265.00 of the penal law is amended by adding three new subdivisions 21, 22 and 23 to read as follows: 21. "SEMIAUTOMATIC" MEANS ANY REPEATING RIFLE, SHOTGUN OR PISTOL, REGARDLESS OF BARREL OR OVERALL LENGTH, WHICH UTILIZES A PORTION OF THE ENERGY OF A FIRING CARTRIDGE OR SHELL TO EXTRACT THE FIRED CARTRIDGE CASE OR SPENT SHELL AND CHAMBER THE NEXT ROUND, AND WHICH REQUIRES A SEPARATE PULL OF THE TRIGGER TO FIRE EACH CARTRIDGE OR SHELL. 22. "ASSAULT WEAPON" MEANS (A) A SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLE THAT HAS AN ABILITY TO ACCEPT A DETACHABLE MAGAZINE AND HAS AT LEAST TWO OF THE FOLLOWING CHARACTERISTICS: (I) A FOLDING OR TELESCOPING STOCK; (II) A PISTOL GRIP THAT PROTRUDES CONSPICUOUSLY BENEATH THE ACTION OF THE WEAPON; (III) A BAYONET MOUNT; (IV) A FLASH SUPPRESSOR OR THREADED BARREL DESIGNED TO ACCOMMODATE A FLASH SUPPRESSOR; (V) A GRENADE LAUNCHER; OR (B) A SEMIAUTOMATIC SHOTGUN THAT HAS AT LEAST TWO OF THE FOLLOWING CHARACTERISTICS: (I) A FOLDING OR TELESCOPING STOCK; (II) A PISTOL GRIP THAT PROTRUDES CONSPICUOUSLY BENEATH THE ACTION OF THE WEAPON; (III) A FIXED MAGAZINE CAPACITY IN EXCESS OF FIVE ROUNDS; (IV) AN ABILITY TO ACCEPT A DETACHABLE MAGAZINE; OR (C) A SEMIAUTOMATIC PISTOL THAT HAS AN ABILITY TO ACCEPT A DETACHABLE MAGAZINE AND HAS AT LEAST TWO OF THE FOLLOWING CHARACTERISTICS: (I) AN AMMUNITION MAGAZINE THAT ATTACHES TO THE PISTOL OUTSIDE OF THE PISTOL GRIP; (II) A THREADED BARREL CAPABLE OF ACCEPTING A BARREL EXTENDER, FLASH SUPPRESSOR, FORWARD HANDGRIP, OR SILENCER; (III) A SHROUD THAT IS ATTACHED TO, OR PARTIALLY OR COMPLETELY ENCIRCLES, THE BARREL AND THAT PERMITS THE SHOOTER TO HOLD THE FIREARM WITH THE NONTRIGGER HAND WITHOUT BEING BURNED; (IV) A MANUFACTURED WEIGHT OF FIFTY OUNCES OR MORE WHEN THE PISTOL IS UNLOADED; (V) A SEMIAUTOMATIC VERSION OF AN AUTOMATIC RIFLE, SHOTGUN OR FIREARM; OR (D) ANY OF THE WEAPONS, OR FUNCTIONING FRAMES OR RECEIVERS OF SUCH WEAPONS, OR COPIES OR DUPLICATES OF SUCH WEAPONS, IN ANY CALIBER, KNOWN AS: (I) NORINCO, MITCHELL, AND POLY TECHNOLOGIES AVTOMAT KALASHNIKOVS (ALL MODELS); (II) ACTION ARMS ISRAELI MILITARY INDUSTRIES UZI AND GALIL; (III) BERETTA AR70 (SC-70); (IV) COLT AR-15; (V) FABRIQUE NATIONAL FN/FAL, FN/LAR, AND FNC;
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley |
February 22, 2011, 11:42 PM | #27 |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,433
|
I sit corrected.
|
February 22, 2011, 11:51 PM | #28 | |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
Quote:
Answer (until now): When the stock is pinned and cannot readably be made to telescope. DA Rice is going to try and get the Courts to say that having a pin makes it readably convertible. That's giving Rice the benefit of the doubt and it has nothing to do with this. Plausible deniability. |
|
February 22, 2011, 11:59 PM | #29 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 9,137
|
It will never happen but the U.S. Justice Department ought to conduct a criminal investigation for civil rights violations.
|
February 23, 2011, 01:28 AM | #30 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Posts: 438
|
i had a gun store on long island tel me today that they wouldnt do a transfer after what happened in Nassau County.
|
February 23, 2011, 11:41 PM | #31 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2009
Location: Texas Gulf Coast
Posts: 728
|
What's the reasoning behind the "(IV) A MANUFACTURED WEIGHT OF FIFTY OUNCES OR MORE WHEN THE PISTOL IS UNLOADED;"
Anyway, this is probably going to be expensive. |
February 24, 2011, 11:08 AM | #32 | |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
Quote:
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley |
|
February 24, 2011, 11:18 AM | #33 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 27, 2007
Location: Ninja Mall
Posts: 818
|
After reading the potential behind the scenes issues, I hope justice is served. In fact, maybe if we're lucky, there will blow back.
__________________
E Pluribus Unum |
February 24, 2011, 09:32 PM | #34 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,675
|
If the linked blog contains the truth (which the lawsuit will determine) then this clearly appears to be the tyranny of a petty individual in a position of bureaucratic and law enforcement power. A sadly familiar situation, although this example is more extreme than most.
As to the assault weapon law, rumor has it that when they were selecting criteria for the banned features, they got a copy of the Shooter's Bible (some say with the Shotgun News) and picked out the guns that looked "evil" and compiled the ban features to include as many of them as possible. As to the current charges, it will boil down to the court (always the best determiner of technical issues) to rule if the pinned stocks are in compliance with the law, in both fact and spirit. In other words, how "readily comvertable" can something be, and still be in legal compliance. There is nothing you can do to a firearm that still leaves it functional that cannont be "undone" if you are prepared to do enough work, and it can all be done with hand tools, if you are dilligent enough. The tape of the undercover agents being told what they were arsking about was against the law, and so on, seems pretty good evidence in favor of the defense, that the dealer was following the letter of the law. Wonder if it will make it into court?
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
February 24, 2011, 11:35 PM | #35 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,433
|
Quote:
|
|
February 25, 2011, 12:35 AM | #36 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
Read up on the Bullet Button, a CA concept to thwart the removable large capacity ammunition feeding device. Perfectly legal.
I suspect those CA cases will be cited in defense in these LI cases. |
February 25, 2011, 07:46 AM | #37 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 9, 2006
Posts: 191
|
Is there anything on the NRA's website about this situation. It is a serious matter and, in my opinion, the way it gets resolved will have an impact on our rights in the future and the NRA should be following it closely. At last check, however, I couldn't find anything on the NRA's website regarding this however. Maybe I'm not looking in the right place?
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|