Legality of "Featureless Rifles" in NYS

[meketrefe]

"Readily", "Easily Reversible"... those are all arbitrary terms.
Most law enforcement around here do not care about SAFE act BS.
Most crimes would have been crimes before SAFE anyway so SAFE doesn't do anything to reduce crime. Most people agree it actually
gives an advantage to criminals and gangs who do not care about magazine limits and assault BS like they do not care about anything else.

 

[Marine Cpl]

"Readily", "Easily Reversible"... those are all arbitrary terms.
Most law enforcement around here do not care about SAFE act BS.
Most crimes would have been crimes before SAFE anyway so SAFE doesn't do anything to reduce crime. Most people agree it actually
gives an advantage to criminals and gangs who do not care about magazine limits and assault BS like they do not care about anything else.

Agreed about law enforcement. They couldn't care less or don't know the laws themselves.

 

[Marine Cpl]

The key words are "ability to accept". If the rifle has the "ability to accept" then putting a device that temporarily stops that doesn't remove it's "ability to accept".

That would be like putting cotton balls in the magwell and saying it no longer has the "ability to accept". That's false. The cotton balls can be removed just like a screw can.

 

[Marine Cpl]

I know a lot of you guys that understand english see the law as it's written but will never admit to it.

Me, I don't give a fuck what anyone thinks of me. I know I can read what's written in a law and I'm not afraid to say what it says no matter if it goes against the rifle I may have in my closet.

Words are clear if you know what they mean and when put together in a sentence.

The law was poorly written and if you remember the first draft, it mentioned that it does not apply if tools are used. They choose to omit that in the final bill.

 

[Uzi]

Laws don't work that way. That may be your problem understanding.

Laws do not say what you can do to circumvent them. They just say what you can't do. So this law says that you can't have a semi automatic rifle that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine with one feature. That's it. Had they made an exception to that law, then you can do it. Had they defined what a non removable magazine is, then you can make it that way. They didn't. So as of now if it can accept, it's illegal assuming you meet other factors.

Thank you for explaining to me what a law is for. On a more serious note, we're brought right back to where we were though, you giving your interpretation on a law that still doesn't exist outside of your brain.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Thank you for explaining to me what a law is for. On a more serious note, we're brought right back to where we were though, you giving your interpretation on a law that still doesn't exist outside of your brain.

That's all you have right now. Deflection. Just be a man and admit that the law doesn't say that temporarily fixed magazines no longer have the ability to accept.

 

[Uzi]

The key words are "ability to accept". If the rifle has the "ability to accept" then putting a device that temporarily stops that doesn't remove it's "ability to accept".

That would be like putting cotton balls in the magwell and saying it no longer has the "ability to accept". That's false. The cotton balls can be removed just like a screw can.

No that's bullshit, it's not like that at all. The magazine lock is not like cotton. Cotton isn't grown for the use to lock magazines in place so they cannot accept detachable magazines. Magazine locks were designed specifically to lock magazines in place and go further to the extra mile of filling in the installation hardware so it's considered "permanent" and not able to be changed, even though it's not necessary by law. You cannot understand that modifying any gun is possible to accept something. You need to understand that your understanding on this matter is narrow and you're misleading yourself greatly.

 

[Marine Cpl]

No that's bullshit, it's not like that at all. The magazine lock is not like cotton. Cotton isn't grown for the use to lock magazines in place so they cannot accept detachable magazines. Magazine locks were designed specifically to lock magazines in place and go further to the extra mile of filling in the installation hardware so it's considered "permanent" and not able to be changed, even though it's not necessary by law. You cannot understand that modifying any gun is possible to accept something. You need to understand that your understanding on this matter is narrow and you're misleading yourself greatly.

Omg. So T nuts were designed to fix magazines? It doesn't matter what you use or what an aftermarket product is designed for. If it can be taken off, it can accept just the same as the cotton balls.

 

[Uzi]

That's all you have right now. Deflection. Just be a man and admit that the law doesn't say that temporarily fixed magazines no longer have the ability to accept.

Boy that comment was cringeworthy. "be a man" haha!

In order for your silly argument to be valid, you'd need to find definitions of "temporary" and "permanent" which don't exist by law relative to a fixed magazine. Your pretense holds no value, because it's only your interpretation.

 

[NY Leatherneck]

Now you are being ridiculous if you think they need to define "has a capacity of". This is why you can't understand the point I've been making assuming you don't know what "capacity of" means.

First off no one brought up magazine capacity until you did...OP was not talking about it....Secondly, as known by all educated here, the law does not say permanent. Non defined terms such as readily, permanent, easily, etc...as stated in the SAFE Act/penal code although defined by the english language are not end all words when it comes to a state of an objects being particularly in court. That my friend is what court is for. When you can tell us just what readily, easily etc...means in the law pertaining to the SAFE Act without a reasonable doubt, all us firearms owners in NY state will be forever indebted to you.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Boy that comment was cringeworthy. "be a man" haha!

In order for your silly argument to be valid, you'd need to find definitions of "temporary" and "permanent" which don't exist by law relative to a fixed magazine. Your pretense holds no value, because it's only your interpretation.

Fixed magazines don't either. They removed it from the original draft on purpose. You don't see that? You don't see that they aren't even acknowledged? The law doesn't say if you fix your mag with tools it cannot accept like it's original draft did.

 

[Uzi]

Omg. So T nuts were designed to fix magazines? It doesn't matter what you use it what an aftermarket product is designed for. If it can be taken off, it can accept just the same as the cotton balls.

Of course you can take or break ANYTHING apart, that's been well established. It doesn't mean anything though. If a magazine is fixed in it's current state, it simply doesn't accept detachable magazines because it is fixed in place. You're only deining that is true when you bust open the gun or take away a complaint part. No shit, that's why you have the complaint part on it..... and why the hell do you keep bringing up cotton, what is wrong you?

 

[Marine Cpl]

First off no one brought up magazine capacity until you did...OP was not talking about it....Secondly, as known by all educated here, the law does not say permanent. Non defined terms such as readily, permanent, easily, etc...as stated in the SAFE Act/penal code although defined by the english language are not end all words when it comes to a state of an objects being particularly in court. That my friend is what court is for. When you can tell us just what readily, easily etc...means in the law pertaining to the SAFE Act without a reasonable doubt, all us firearms owners in NYS state will be forever indebted to you.

No one mentioned magazines but they mentioned permanence. I brought up the magazines because they have to be permanently not able to have the capacity to accept more than a certain number of rounds. So yes. It's relevant. It's not to you unfortunately because you don't know what capacity means.

A court would never explain that. That's ridiculous.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Of course you can take or break ANYTHING apart, that's been well established. It doesn't mean anything though. If a magazine is fixed in it's current state, it simply doesn't accept detachable magazines because it is fixed in place. You're only deining that is true when you bust open the gun or take away a complaint part. No shit, that's why you have the complaint part on it..... and why the hell do you keep bringing up cotton, what is wrong you?

So I can keep a regular magazine in there with a regular mag release and say it doesn't have the capacity to accept another one?

 

[NY Leatherneck]

No one mentioned magazines but they mentioned permanence. I brought up the magazines because they have to be permanently not able to have the capacity to accept more than a certain number of rounds. So yes. It's relevant. It's not to you unfortunately because you don't know what capacity means.

A court would never explain that. That's ridiculous.

So tell us what it takes to make a permanent capacity in a magazine is? I'm sure there is no way to undo it (sarcasm). Ever look at a legally sold in NYS manufactured 10/30 mag?....are you telling me there is no way to make it non-permanent?

 

[GUNSICK]

Fixed magazines don't either. They removed it from the original draft on purpose. You don't see that? You don't see that they aren't even acknowledged? The law doesn't say if you fix your mag with tools it cannot accept like it's original draft did.

Original draft? Bullshit, no such thing.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Original draft? Bullshit, no such thing.

Huh?

 

[Uzi]

So I can keep a regular magazine in there with a regular mag release and say it doesn't have the capacity to accept another one?

Oh dear, I forgot to mention locked* and fixed, you got me Will! lol

To answer your question though, you can do and say whatever you like, I won't lose any sleep over it.

 

[Uzi]

So tell us what it takes to make a permanent capacity in a magazine is? I'm sure there is no way to undo it (sarcasm). Ever look at a legally sold in NYS manufactured 10/30 mag?....are you telling me there is no way to make it non-permanent?

YES! EXACTLY!

 

[GUNSICK]

Huh?

You mentioned an original draft of the law in 2 posts and I say your full of shit.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Original draft.

Section 265.00 subdivision 24. "DETACHABLE MAGAZINE" means any ammunition feeding device, the function of which is to deliver one or more ammunition cartridges into the firing chamber, which can be removed from the firearm without the use of any tool, including a bullet or ammunition cartridge.

 

[GUNSICK]

Original draft.

Section 265.00 subdivision 24. "DETACHABLE MAGAZINE" means any ammunition feeding device, the function of which is to deliver one or more ammunition cartridges into the firing chamber, which can be removed from the firearm without the use of any tool, including a bullet or ammunition cartridge.

Just because you put original draft before the section doesn't make it an original draft. There was no original draft of this shit show so don't keep saying it. It's bullshit.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Just because you put original draft before the section doesn't make it an original draft. There was no original draft of this shit show so don't keep saying it. It's bullshit.

Ok. Buddy. It's out there to search for yourself. Hint. The whole draft was posted by the divorce lawyers on the other site.

 

[Deplorable Me]

This is a total non-conversation in PA, OH, WV, VA, NC, AZ, NW........

FUAC, thank your local FUDDs and piss on all the NY RINOS.

 

[GUNSICK]

Ok. Buddy. It's out there to search for yourself. Hint. The whole draft was posted by the divorce lawyers on the other site.

http://scopeny.org/2AC_White Paper_12032014.pdf

There was no 1st draft it was all created in secret and pushed through as a law. No revisions no 1st drafts or 2nd drafts or modified by anyone.

 

[Marine Cpl]

http://scopeny.org/2AC_White Paper_12032014.pdf

There was no 1st draft it was all created in secret and pushed through as a law. No revisions no 1st drafts or 2nd drafts or modified by anyone.

Ok. Buddy. Sure looks like there were original drafts to me that were since modified.

 

[Marine Cpl]

But none of that matters anyway. It was deliberately stricken from the final bill that was passed.

 

[MikeyCNY]

Nothing in the law says permanent!

Nothing in the Constitution says any of this shit is okay either. In fact it is the total opposite.

 

[Deplorable Me]

Sounds like some people have come to accept the Snake Act.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Sounds like some people have come to accept the Snake Act.

Some registered from the get go.