NY legal integrally suppressed .50 muzzleloader

[Marine Cpl]

Since there's no definition of 'gun', does that mean a bow with string silencers is a suppressor? How about a crossbow with fuzzy bits on the string?

I understand your paranoia, but typically that's not how laws are interpreted.

If we want to get really nutty, an indoor range is a silencer because it is intended to muffle the sound of gunfire. The definition doesn't say the silencer has to be attached to the gun. So that cluster of evergreen trees planted along the outdoor range is also a silencer.

Your examples are ridiculous. But you know that already. How about this one? If I use a longer barrel, it'll suppress the noise.

There's no paranoia from me. I'm just pointing out how the laws are written by people who don't know guns. They are written how they are written and you are trying to use common sense to interpret them. There's no common sense in them. They are written by people who think barrel shrouds are shoulder things that go up.

Anyone with a basic knowledge of firearms and the ability to read and comprehend English can see that. Yet you are arguing here that a muzzle loader isn't a gun instead of saying to yourself that they wrote "gun" into the definition without defining it. We all know what they meant. They wrote "firearms" into the definition yet rifles and shotguns aren't firearms by their definition.

My point in this is that according to exactly how the laws are written, they inadvertently banned things.

So you can get mad at me and feel the need to defend yourself but in the end if you read the laws without bias and see what is actually written in them word for word, you'd see what they say.

And in case you weren't aware, laws are used to convict someone in a court of law by the exact words that are written in the law. There is no need for interpretation unless it is ruled in their favor and you appeal. That's how it works.

 

[Edwardteach72]

You have to realize something. Just because something isn't enforced, it doesn't mean it isn't illegal as per a poorly written law that was written in a way to not account for other factors.

If an airgun is considered a gun, then the law would apply to it. Just like open carry. According to the law, it is illegal yet you hunt open carrying because there is no other way to do it. It isn't enforced. The same goes with armed guards. The penal law says that they must carry concealed. It's accepted for them to open carry because how stupid would it be for a uniformed guard to conceal a Glock 19 under his uniform shirt. The same goes with threaded barrels. Technically by law they are illegal. But pinning has been accepted. The threads are still there.

My point is that the laws say otherwise. Not that it's accepted.

Wait I haven't been able to find the law stating open carry us illegal?

 

[Marine Cpl]

Wait I haven't been able to find the law stating open carry us illegal?

Read penal law 265 and 400. It'll tell you there.

 

[nortatoga]

No NICS check is required for muzzle loaders?

 

[Edwardteach72]

Read penal law 265 and 400. It'll tell you there.

I have that's why I'm wondering if you could specifically point out because I'm not seeing either state open carry is illegal

 

[freddy]

I have that's why I'm wondering if you could specifically point out because I'm not seeing either state open carry is illegal

I believe the thinking is that it states only concealed carry is allowed - not that it explictly forbids open carry.

 

[freddy]

Love the pics and video shot in California!

 

[Exonautic]

No NICS check is required for muzzle loaders?

No they're not considered firearms. They're considered antiques or replicas. As such they do not have to be run through the nics system. This is why its a ship straight to your door thing.

 

[Marine Cpl]

I have that's why I'm wondering if you could specifically point out because I'm not seeing either state open carry is illegal

Penal law 265 says all firearms are illegal unless exempted by Penal Law 400. You cannot touch one or carry one unless licensed and exempted.

Penal Law 400 lists the types of licenses you can get. As an average citizen, you can get a Premises licence that allows you to possess with no carry or you can get a license that allows you to possess and carry concealed.

It doesn't say that you can't open carry. You can't carry at all unless licensed and your license is only for concealed carry. Further down in Penal Law 400 it says that any deviation from the provisions of this section results in a misdemeanor.

I'm on a phone so I can't copy and paste.

 

[nortatoga]

No they're not considered firearms. They're considered antiques or replicas. As such they do not have to be run through the nics system. This is why its a ship straight to your door thing.

Yes I knew the answer! That is how someone who can't pass a NICS ( Felony DWI and such) can still hunt.

 

[ArmedCorgi]

Dumb. Probably a bitch to clean also. Mostly dumb though.

 

[Edwardteach72]

Not one spot on my license says concealed

And hell this is the letter that comes with our licenses here in chemung (from the judge through the sheriffs office)

 

[Marine Cpl]

Yes I knew the answer! That is how someone who can't pass a NICS ( Felony DWI and such) can still hunt.

Penal law 265 states that you are guilty of possession and subject to Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the 4th Degree if you possess an antique firearm or muzzle loader and are a felon.

You guys really need to read the laws rather than going from memory or scuttlebutt.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Not one spot on my license says concealed

And hell this is the letter that comes with our licenses here in chemung (from the judge through the sheriffs office)

View attachment 18891

That's not the penal law. It's a paper written by a sheriff who incorrectly interpreted the law and has no legal authority to do so. That paper would be inadmissible in a court of law.

Edit. It also incorrectly says that you can't carry in places that sell alcohol.

 

[ManrisFrack]

And in case you weren't aware, laws are used to convict someone in a court of law by the exact words that are written in the law. There is no need for interpretation unless it is ruled in their favor and you appeal. That's how it works.

If that were universally true, we wouldn't need lawyers. It's my understanding that when no definition is given in the statute, common definitions are assumed. Because muzzle loaders are basically treated as a separate class relative to all other "guns" (as are airguns) there is an argument to be made that they are outside the purview of this particular statute. Honestly, that's the only reason I can see for retailers carrying suppressed airguns in this state and for Crosman to be manufacturing them. Both manufacture and sale are class D felonies; I can't imagine Crosman's (or Dick's or Walmart's) lawyers haven't gone through this.

 

[Edwardteach72]

That's not the penal law. It's a paper written by a sheriff who incorrectly interpreted the law and has no legal authority to do so.

That was a paper written by the county issuing judge

 

[Marine Cpl]

That was a paper written by the county issuing judge

Regardless, he cannot interpret the law.

 

[Edwardteach72]

That's not the penal law. It's a paper written by a sheriff who incorrectly interpreted the law and has no legal authority to do so. That paper would be inadmissible in a court of law.

Just for shits and giggles which law school did you graduate from? And also when did you join the bar association?

 

[Marine Cpl]

If that were universally true, we wouldn't need lawyers. It's my understanding that when no definition is given in the statute, common definitions are assumed. Because muzzle loaders are basically treated as a separate class relative to all other "guns" (as are airguns) there is an argument to be made that they are outside the purview of this particular statute. Honestly, that's the only reason I can see for retailers carrying suppressed airguns in this state and for Crosman to be manufacturing them. Both manufacture and sale are class D felonies; I can't imagine Crosman's (or Dick's or Walmart's) lawyers haven't gone through this.

Lawyers don't interpret law. I mean they do to the best of their ability to defend you but it's up to a judge or jury to interpret it and convict you. After that, it's up to an Appeals Court to hand down a ruling of interpretation that's binding and either allow the previous decision to stand or reverse the previous decision.

 

[Edwardteach72]

Your

Lawyers don't interpret law. I mean they do to the best of their ability to defend you but it's up to a judge or jury to interpret it and convict you. After that, it's up to an Appeals Court to hand down a ruling of interpretation that's binding and either allow the previous decision to stand or reverse the previous decision.

Previous post you say a judge can't interpret the law now they do?

So you are a judge?

 

[Marine Cpl]

Just for shits and giggles which law school did you graduate from? And also when did you join the bar association?

I graduated from the school of English. The Penal laws are written in English and not in code. The laws stand as they are written and only as they are written until they are interpreted by an appeals court.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Your

Previous post you say a judge can't interpret the law now they do?

So you are a judge?

An Appeals Court judge on an appeal.

 

[nortatoga]

Penal law 265 states that you are guilty of possession and subject to Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the 4th Degree if you possess an antique firearm or muzzle loader and are a felon.

You guys really need to read the laws rather than going from memory or scuttlebutt.

Did I say anywhere that it was legal? All I said was you don't need a NICS to purchase a muzzle loader (as they are not regulated) and the is no back round check to get a hunting license!

 

[Marine Cpl]

Did I say anywhere that it was legal? All I said was you don't need a NICS to purchase a muzzle loader (as they are not regulated) and the is no back round check to get a hunting license!

Ok. You did say that a felon can hunt with one. That's incorrect.

 

[ManrisFrack]

Lawyers don't interpret law. I mean they do to the best of their ability to defend you but it's up to a judge or jury to interpret it and convict you. After that, it's up to an Appeals Court to hand down a ruling of interpretation that's binding and either allow the previous decision to stand or reverse the previous decision.

They certainly do interpret law; and then they persuade judge or jury to accept their interpretation. It's just not legally relevant until a judge or jury agrees with the interpretation. Back to my point, I'm certain that there is either case law or a viable defense planned with regard to airguns. It may be that the same would be applicable to this device, but who knows?

Nothing worse than a jarhead trying to play sea lawyer.

 

[Marine Cpl]

They certainly do interpret law; and then they persuade judge or jury to accept their interpretation. It's just not legally relevant until a judge or jury agrees with the interpretation. Back to my point, I'm certain that there is either case law or a viable defense planned with regard to airguns. It may be that the same would be applicable to this device, but who knows?

Nothing worse than a jarhead trying to play sea lawyer.

Isn't that what I said previous that they interpret law to the best of their ability to defend you and then it's up to a judge or jury?

Don't take this personal. I'm on your side. I'm just stating what should be obvious but isn't.

 

[nortatoga]

Glad I remembered to turn off the email notifications for this thread!!

 

[Robin]

Actually they are written in code, the Penal Code, and in that code, words as interpreted by Merriam-Webster are not always the same. The judge is just that a judge, an unbiased interpreter of the law as held to the Constitution of the United States of America, well they are suppose to be that.
Robin

 

[Marine Cpl]

Actually they are written in code, the Penal Code, and in that code, words as interpreted by Merriam-Webster are not always the same. The judge is just that a judge, an unbiased interpreter of the law as held to the Constitution of the United States of America, well they are suppose to be that.
Robin

It isn't a code that needs to be decoded. It's supposed to be as it stands and is written so that a citizen can read and follow them. But hey. Let's use semantics as an argument to get me. I'm the enemy here and not the actual law as written.

 

[Edwardteach72]

@willyjr75 why do these threads always seem to turn into Willy vs the world lol even when you come in defending people they even seem to turn on you

Sorry man that just has to get old having to take everyone one