March 18, 2011, 06:12 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 21, 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 727
|
Bullet Button in NJ
I know that CA residents often use a bullet button to have all of the "evil" junk they want on their semi-autos. My question is would one of these devices make it so my gun would be NJ legal? Do could I have say and AR with the bayonet lug, threading, folding stock, and flash hider if I ave one of these bullet buttons?
|
March 18, 2011, 06:48 PM | #2 |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,459
|
What is a bullet button?
Just a guess, but I suspect that California law is different from New Jersey law and that the short answer to your question is probably going to be "No." |
March 18, 2011, 07:45 PM | #3 | ||
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
BTW it's called a "bullet button" because the tool that can be used to operate the magazine release is most commonly the point of a bullet. Quote:
|
||
March 19, 2011, 12:36 AM | #4 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,459
|
Interesting. I knew that California only allowed ARs with non-detachable magazines, but I thought they were an integral part of the receiver and had a trap door or something for loading.
From the NJ State Police web site: Quote:
As to the original question, to be conservative I would say that New Jersey does not appear to have defined "detachable." I hope fiddletown will concur that in court, if a term is not defined in a statute, it defers to a standard dictionary. To my layman's understanding, "detachable" would have to mean "capable of being detached." And if I can use a bullet to push a button and remove the magazine -- I think there's at least a reasonable supposition that (outside of California, of course) the magazine is "detachable." |
|
March 19, 2011, 12:51 AM | #5 |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Several things --
[1] One issue would be the "substantially identical" language of paragraph 2. Is a rifle that differs from those listed only insofar as its magazine requires a simple tool to detach, different enough so that it's no longer "substantially identical"? [2] I have no idea how a New Jersey court would rule on that question. Personally, unless there were a decision of the highest appellate court for New Jersey saying explicitly, in so many words, that a rifle with a bullet button was not substantially identical, I wouldn't chance it. [3] And I agree that I wouldn't bet against a New Jersey court deciding the a magazine that could be removed by using a simple tool on the magazine release was detachable. |
March 19, 2011, 05:26 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 17, 2010
Posts: 146
|
Not offering any deep commentary, but I hadn't ever heard of the bullet button phenomenon until I started posting on gun forums. If such a device could prevent a firearm from being classified as an "assault weapon" under NJ law then I strongly suspect they would be a lot more popular around here.
|
June 3, 2011, 08:37 PM | #7 |
Junior Member
Join Date: October 4, 2010
Posts: 1
|
CA AG agrees that a Bullet Button has a fixed magazine
The CA attorney general in the response to a bullet button case said that a gun with a BB has a "fixed magazine". Here is the link to the response issued on June 6, 2011. Look at the top of page 12. http://ia600507.us.archive.org/10/it...25676.26.1.pdf
I am no lawyer but that seems to say quite clearly that a gun with a BB now has a fixed (not detachable) magazine. So it is not "substantiality identical", but the magazine used with the BB would need to be 15 rounds or less. So a non-named gun (like say an FN SCAR 16) with a bullet button and a 10 round fixed magazine could have a threaded barrel and a collapsable stock and anything else. But who the he'll knows in this crazy state. |
June 3, 2011, 09:01 PM | #8 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
The California Attorney General and his opinions don't mean anything in New Jersey. Beside, you're looking at a Memorandum of Points and Authorities which really has no application outside the case in which it was filed. So none of what you're pointing to has any application in New Jersey, nor does it help with the OP's question. Last edited by Frank Ettin; June 3, 2011 at 11:05 PM. |
|
June 3, 2011, 09:07 PM | #9 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,459
|
Quote:
|
|
June 4, 2011, 07:25 PM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 5, 2000
Location: AoW Land, USA
Posts: 1,968
|
I am certain that NJ would consider a magazine that is designed to be REMOVED in normal operation of the firearm (even if a simple tool is required) to be a detachable magazine. When considering anything related to NJ simply throw logic out the window, and yes apples are oranges in NJ...
|
June 19, 2011, 05:40 PM | #11 |
Junior Member
Join Date: June 19, 2011
Location: Dandridge TN
Posts: 6
|
The best suggestion is
to get out of The Peoples Republic of NJ like I did.
|
|
|