We have 6 more years minimum
AR Maglock and Hyperswitch legalities?
- Thread starter RooftopKorean
- Start date
We have 6 more years minimum
Uzi
.308 Win
The maglock is not a confusing one. The maglock is designed specifically to allow the magazine to detach and accept another magazine. You don't need a lawyer to figure that one out. The magazine is never fixed, the release is just activated in a different fashion. Just because you've made it slightly more inconvenient to do your mag changes doesn't make it a fixed magazine. Very simple to be honest.
spat
.950 JDJ
They don't know any more than the rest of us.
Honestly I think the discussions we have here, that never reach a consensus, are probably the most complete answer *anyone* in NY can provide.
Realistically, what is "legal" as far as mag locks go probably depends completely on where in the state you are.
There are options that are probably GTG everywhere, most involve epoxy somewhere in the process. There are other options like a bullet button that might work in some jurisdictions or with some officers, but not others.
Then there is the "do DA's really want to open that can of worms" question. I suspect most of them don't want to have to try to decide what the law means either.
Realistically, if you aren't doing mag changes in front of cops, and don't do something that gets them to want to look very closely at your rifle (like seize it and have to decide if they can give it back or not) the method used to "fix" the magazine will probably never come up.
Yup this right here. Hell NY doesnt even want to actually make a decision on what is or isnt "fixed" there are a few companies that have reached out of thet years to NY to get confirmation on whether or not their products are legal with no response from the state.
It just goes back to, how many people have been arrested with and charged under the safe act with any mag lock? Zero
spat
.950 JDJ
Except as pointed out in many other threads, virtually all magazines can be detached and replaced, including many that are widely considered "fixed".
There currently *is no answer* about how inconvenient a mag change has to be before the mag is "fixed".
For instance I can swap the tubular magazine on virtually all shotguns, does that make all semi auto shotguns in NY illegal ?
Uzi
.308 Win
Well, I do agree with that.
Whether or not a tubular magazine can be taken off a shotgun, or this that and the other gun can be disassembled and changed isn't what is important. All guns can be altered in some fashion to be illegal pretty much. What is the firearm configured to actually do? What features does the firearm have? If a firearm is configured or manufactured in such a way to perform a specific action, then its ability to perform that action is either regulated or not depending on the actual functionality. When you install a button or other device to allow the magazine to come out and to accept other magazines, that design and functionality of that device is primarily to accept detachable magazines and nothing more.
The other option so that this function is gone would be to use a specific component or part to reconfigure the weapon's functionality or manufacture it so it also doesn't have the ability to drop out and accept other magazines. A tubular shotgun does not have the ability to accept detachable magazines unless it is reconfigured in such a manner that would enable that function. Either it is legal or it is illegal. It turns out the tubular shotgun is legal with a magazine that can at some point be taken out because it is not configured to accept detachable magazines. The design element of functionality MUST carry an important factor because that shotgun wouldn't be on shelves. I believe the basis of the firearm's actual functionality is what the law refers to, not hypothetical modifications or how permanent the function is. The maglock's primary function is to allow magazine changes. As stated, Making the release work in a different way doesn't make anything fixed, it was just a work around for california law for their specific definitions. They wanted to also sell to NYer's too, making claims that it is a compliant option of the sort, even though it caused confusion, frustration and stupid ongoing topics like these for people.
A fixed magazine serves the only function of being a fixed magazine. It's not designed to come out. Just because you can modify a part or alter the gun doesn't change that you have a fixed magazine rifle. It's specifically designed to be fixed and therefore the ability to change magazines isn't there.
You're right about there being no law about convenience being a factor, and something that is actually fixed VS something that is designed so that you can do mag dumps one after the other is not a matter of convenience, but a matter of functionality. They should NOT be confused as they're quite different. Anyone with a hacksaw and an oxy acetylene torch can make something into something. Why so many seem to be using that assessment as their way to understand these laws makes little sense to me. I think generally we should be making judgements based on the text of the laws and not make it more confusing than it already is by splitting it apart and adding in hypotheticals. Until the law is amended as to add a definition to what isn't considered "detachable", I would treat a fixed magazine in the same sense that I would understand the difference between a semi automatic vs a bolt action firearm; Two different functions. That would also include all of the other featureless compliant parts avalible that inspire 100% confidence in meeting legal requirements for some. How do we come up of with conclusions that they are legal? Pretty much the exact same way.
Last edited:
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Those magazines aren’t designed to be detachable. They are designed to be fixed magazines from the factory that require disassembly to remove for maintenance just like any other integral part like a barrel or bolt. You can’t load them and insert them into an operable weapon. Once you remove that fixed, tubular magazine, the shotgun is inoperable. You can’t keep one loaded ready to attach onto an operable firearm.
An AR magazine is designed to be detachable from the factory ready to be inserted loaded into an operable weapon.
But if you follow the letter of the law since they struck the definition of what constitutes a fixed magazine from the original draft to prevent the use of bullet buttons, those are detachable too.
Cuomo and the NY State Police dodged my question about a magazine lock device by AR MAGLOCK. This device locks the magazine when the AR upper is attached to the lower with the rear locking pin in place. When the rear locking pin is removed and the upper is lifted off of the lower, but leaving the front locking pin in place, the magazine can be released. The manufacturer claims that their device is legal in California so I inquired with Cuomo's office to see if it would be legal in NY under the NY Safe Act. Cuomo's office referred my question to the NY State Police. Here is their reply.
Dear Mr. Ramaglia,
Reference is made to your correspondence directed to New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo, dated August 3, 2018, concerning an assault weapon modification device. I have been asked to respond to your inquiry.
In your correspondence you reference an item, when installed on a firearm, would render the magazine permanently affixed. You also indicate that this item has been approved in the State of California. The item you reference is a modification. As such, there have been no modifications that have been defined in the laws of the State of New York, as this item has been in the State of California.
Therefore, I am unable to provide any technical or legal guidance on the modification in question. Any modifications for the purpose of a firearm or magazine conforming to the current laws of the State of New York would have to be determined by a ruling issued by a court.
I hope that this information proves useful. If you feel that the New York State Police can provide further assistance in this matter, please write this office or call (518) 464-7120.
Chad A. Hunt
Investigator
New York State Police
Pistol Permit Bureau
Dear Mr. Ramaglia,
Reference is made to your correspondence directed to New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo, dated August 3, 2018, concerning an assault weapon modification device. I have been asked to respond to your inquiry.
In your correspondence you reference an item, when installed on a firearm, would render the magazine permanently affixed. You also indicate that this item has been approved in the State of California. The item you reference is a modification. As such, there have been no modifications that have been defined in the laws of the State of New York, as this item has been in the State of California.
Therefore, I am unable to provide any technical or legal guidance on the modification in question. Any modifications for the purpose of a firearm or magazine conforming to the current laws of the State of New York would have to be determined by a ruling issued by a court.
I hope that this information proves useful. If you feel that the New York State Police can provide further assistance in this matter, please write this office or call (518) 464-7120.
Chad A. Hunt
Investigator
New York State Police
Pistol Permit Bureau
What happened to laws needing to be written in plain English so people can understand them?
BDinPutnam
.475 A&M Magnum
Thanks Chad.
camper4lyfe
.308 Win
Just going to leave this here
spat
.950 JDJ
So, if I manufacturer and market a tubular shotgun. magazine that can be attached while loaded, does that mean your 1187 becomes an assault weapon ?
What if I make an a new semiautomatic rifle from scratch, clean sheet design, and I print up a manual that says the mag release button is only for disassembly for cleaning ?
Does a stock SKS have a fixed magazine ?
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
My post above was a common, accepted definition. A definition that manufacturers and average, knowledgeable people in the gun world go by. Unfortunately, common sense definitions do not apply here. We have to go by what is actually written followed by what an LEO and later a DA decides to do. In most cases they’ll just consider an SKS fixed so as not to bring scrutiny to their poorly written law because it wasn’t their intention to ban fixed magazines.
According to how our law is written however , a stock SKS rifle has the ability to accept a detachable magazine since the definition of what is a fixed magazine was struck from the final draft of the safe act.
Vinson57
.475 A&M Magnum
The MR2 would pass the legal test if you 'always" have a magazine inserted and you "never" take your gun apart. The magazine release does not work and the magazine will not come out. Even when the rifle sits at home in a safe or on a rack, the magazine must be in and not out. Found as out, then it would be considered removeable. My test is the button press.
mca90guitar
.357 mag
So how the fuck do they enforce this law if they don't even know what's legal?
It's not law enforcement's job to interpret the law
spat
.950 JDJ
Actually they are the first line in interpreting the law. They do it more than anyone else.
For every time the courts look at an action and determine if it violated the law or not, the cop on the beat has done it 1000 times.
That is basically what they do all day every day, determine if there is probable cause that a law was broken.
spat
.950 JDJ
So far, for the most part they *aren't* enforcing it.
mca90guitar
.357 mag
Have to love it when the answer is " we won't know until we arrest you"
I dont agree with the state not giving an answer or clarification, but.no the police wont know anything until there is a case with a result and a ruling on an arrest or the state actually gives a definition (they wont)
mca90guitar
.357 mag
Not saying you did, I know most on here find everything about our situation messed up. Just blows my mind that is the answer, we need to arrest you first to find out if it's legal.
spat
.950 JDJ
It was written by the same party that completely upended the healthcare for the entire country with a bill that "we need to pass it to find out what's in it".
It doesn't surprise me at all.
It saddens me, but it does not surprise me.
I wonder if the NRA-ILA would take a stab at gaining clarity on the matter.
But we all know that's probably a long shot like seeing FuAC getting booted out of office.
But we all know that's probably a long shot like seeing FuAC getting booted out of office.
spat
.950 JDJ
So, you are saying that if I market a bullet button like device and print in the manual that its purpose is only disassembly for cleaning and to clear malfunctions, maybe I add a line that only empty magazines should be reattached then loaded only after being attached, that it would be legal ?
Uzi
.308 Win
You should not need to pull out the magazine during a malfunction or cleaning. The floorplate should be easily able to come off along with the spring and follower allowing double feeds and jams to loosen up and fall out either the ejection port or through the magazine itself. All you should need to do is take away the tension applied by the spring. If you're not able to clear malfunctions, you should get a better magazine for the application. Cleaning can be done with the same process. The inner workings of the magazine come out for routine maintenance. I think you're pushing hard, but what I still believe is most important is what a firearm's ability and configuration is, not what it once was or is capable of being.
With that said, when someone buys a lower to build a fixed magazine rifle, depending on what features the lower already has, it may or may not be an assault weapon already in NYS. The person building the pistol or rifle should understand that. FFL's don't need to worry about it when they build their fixed mag firearms. It's the technicalities, not a real risk of being enforced IMO. If you put everything together on a lower first and don't already have a locked magazine, you may have a firearm with the ability to accept detachable magazines. I say you "may" because there are variables, a lot of them. I can build a rifle or pistol with a pistol grip, flash hider, detachable magazine, telescoping stock (rifle), and it would be perfectly legal provided the upper is built for bolt action. Technically all you should have to do to avoid that shit would be to install your lock and magazine before it's actually regulated.
It's no different than a stripped lower, it's cable of having all the features in the world when it's sold, but that's NOT regulated until all of those components are actually installed, or at least enough of them to meet the criteria. So to answer your question, NO I don't think if you plan on making fixed magazine devices you should bother with any of that legal bullshit.
spat
.950 JDJ
It doesn't matter that you don't *need* to drop the mag for cleaning or clearing in the context of my argument, only that that is the only purpose for which it is advertised.
I am saying that many firearms that are generally considered to have fixed magazines actually have the ability to accept a detachable magazine if your definition of detachable magazine includes magazines that require tools to remove.
In fact, many firearms that are generally considered to have fixed magazines *don't* require tools to remove them.
If your definition of "ability to accept a detachable magazine" goes away if another magazine is attached, then you don't need to do anything for compliance beyond leaving a mag in place all the time.
The bottom line is that there is no good way to write that law, they are destined to fail every time they try.
Uzi
.308 Win
Not sure what your point is anymore? This topic always seems to end in a big cycle of repetitive explanations. I didn't provide you with any definition of a fixed magazine, and I don't need to, and NYS doesn't have one. All I'm doing is trying to simplify what is already in practice. Not so much an opinion.
spat
.950 JDJ
Ahh, I misunderstood your point then.
If you want to simplify what's actually in practice, then the answer is people don't seem get arrested for this at all, so have at it.
As for what you might get arrested for ? Who knows.
Phazer
.450/400 Nitro Ex
The goal isn't necessarily enforcement. The goal is intimidation of law-abiding citizens. Those law-abiding people will twist themselves in knots in order to comply with vague rules and regulations. The mere threat of legal entanglements is enough to get most law-abiding people to avoid even the semblance of appearing out-of-compliance with a law.
I am not sure that we've ever actually seen a single case testing the need for a permanently fixed AR solution. After all, the word "permanent" never appears in the statute.
The state is probably loathe to pursue such a case because if they lose, portions of the statute will fall for all.
Last edited: