Legality of "Featureless Rifles" in NYS

[spat]

But they don't say a semi automatic rifle that has the ability to accept those features. We've been through this before.

You are obsessed with this "ability to accept" thing.

I am talking about whether that featureless rifle you built *actually has* something they would call a pistol grip. No ability, no accepting, but whether that spur grip you think is legal is going to get called a pistol grip when the DA needs a headline.... Whether the DA is going to throw a quick clamp on bayonet on your plain barrel and call that a mount.

 

[SteyrAug]

A rifle with a fixed magazine is NOT an assault rifle per the SAFE act. Has anyone actually gone to the website ?
The FIRST criteria is (drum roll) "semiautomatic rifle capable of accepting a detachable magazine."

If it cannot (drum roll) IT IS NOT !

 

[dsdmmat]

A featureless rifle can be converted to a evil AW with the push of two pins.
A featureless lower assembly can accept a featured upper without any tools.
A straight pull bolt cation AR can be converted to a full out evil AW with the push of two pins.
Is a complete lower assembly an evil AW? It is not semiautomatic, but it can accept a semi automatic upper assembly.

The foolishness of this thread is epic.

 

[freddy]

This is one of those parts of the country if someone can squeeze an 11th round into that magazine....

I have done that with OEM Glock '10 round' mags.

 

[SteyrAug]

Then there's drop in full auto trigger groups. Is my Gatling an assault weapon ? It accepts a detachable magazine. I can add an electric motor.

You read enough of this and you know Sanger had it right !

 

[Marine Cpl]

A featureless rifle can be converted to a evil AW with the push of two pins.
A featureless lower assembly can accept a featured upper without any tools.
A straight pull bolt cation AR can be converted to a full out evil AW with the push of two pins.
Is a complete lower assembly an evil AW? It is not semiautomatic, but it can accept a semi automatic upper assembly.

The foolishness of this thread is epic.

But the law doesn't say the ability to be bolt action or accept features. You really cannot see that? I'm just pointing out what it says to the letter. I didn't write it nor do I agree with it.

Take logic out of the equation for a minute and read California's law then read ours and you'll see what I'm saying.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Then there's drop in full auto trigger groups. Is my Gatling an assault weapon ? It accepts a detachable magazine. I can add an electric motor.

You read enough of this and you know Sanger had it right !

Again. The law doesn't say Ability to convert. It only says if it's semi automatic and has the ability to accept a detachable magazine with one feature.

Ability to accept only applies to the magazine.

 

[Marine Cpl]

What you guys aren't getting is that it wasn't intended to be this way but due to the language used, it bans something they weren't intending to. It was written poorly. Take logic out of the equation and read what it says.

The same thing applies to concealed carry yet how the hell else are you going to hunt concealed? It's fucked up the way it's written.

 

[spat]

But the law doesn't say the ability to be bolt action or accept features. You really cannot see that? I'm just pointing out what it says to the letter. I didn't write it nor do I agree with it.

Take logic out of the equation for a minute and read California's law then read ours and you'll see what I'm saying.

"Take logic out of the equation" is about it.

Yep, our law is written differently than theirs. Theirs is much clearer.

Do you not get that the exact text of the law doesn't matter ? If it did none of this would stand against "shall not be infringed".

You sound almost like the sovereign citizens who go on about fringe on a flag, the point is that *even if they are 100% right* they aren't going to win because the deck is stacked.

You will either be convicted and rot in jail, or never even get asked about your rifle, and the details of the rules don't matter one bit.

 

[Uzi]

Ability vs Capability. No fixed rifle has the ability to accept magazines. Pretty simple still to understand for most people.

 

[Marine Cpl]

"Take logic out of the equation" is about it.

Yep, our law is written differently than theirs. Theirs is much clearer.

Do you not get that the exact text of the law doesn't matter ? If it did none of this would stand against "shall not be infringed".

You sound almost like the sovereign citizens who go on about fringe on a flag, the point is that *even if they are 100% right* they aren't going to win because the deck is stacked.

You will either be convicted and rot in jail, or never even get asked about your rifle, and the details of the rules don't matter one bit.

That's all I'm saying. I've made the point you just wrote in the past.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Ability vs Capability. No fixed rifle has the ability to accept magazines. Pretty simple still to understand for most people.

What is a fixed rifle of rather a fixed magazine in regards to the law?

 

[SteyrAug]

Nice to be in WY & FL at least for now.

 

[Uzi]

What is a fixed rifle of rather a fixed magazine in regards to the law?

Unless you can prove otherwise, for the most part, unregulated.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Unless you can prove otherwise, for the most part, unregulated.

I agree. Unregulated because I'll ban fixed magazines which wasn't their intention just like the open carry issue while hunting, at the range, or participating in matches. Hell it's illegal for Armed Guards to open carry yet it's unregulated because it's stupid to have them in uniform with a concealed weapon.

 

[freddy]

Ability vs Capability. No fixed rifle has the ability to accept magazines. Pretty simple still to understand for most people.

Okay, but is a non-epoxied bullet button rifle a 'fixed rifle'? Why?

 

[SteyrAug]

Willy is what called an "agent provocateur ". He would be happy to argue the earth is flat to pass the time. Back in the day Marines had better things to do ...... like guard the Navy's ships........ while we killed the enemy.

 

[freddy]

I agree. Unregulated because I'll ban fixed magazines which wasn't their intention just like the open carry issue while hunting, at the range, or participating in matches. Hell it's illegal for Armed Guards to open carry yet it's unregulated because it's stupid to have them in uniform with a concealed weapon.

All cops in turks and caicos carry concealed.

 

[Uzi]

I agree. Unregulated because I'll ban fixed magazines which wasn't their intention just like the open carry issue while hunting, at the range, or participating in matches. Hell it's illegal for Armed Guards to open carry yet it's unregulated because it's stupid to have them in uniform with a concealed weapon.

I'm not concerned about the other stuff.

 

[Uzi]

Okay, but is a non-epoxied bullet button rifle a 'fixed rifle'? Why?

I would say yes. Why? Go ahead and reread the entire thread again. It's pointless repeating the same things continuously.

 

[Marine Cpl]

I'm not concerned about the other stuff.

Neither am I. Nor am I concerned about Fixed Magazines. I may do one myself in the future. All I'm doing is pointing out how it's written.

Unfortunately, you guys know that yet are trying to make sense of a poorly written law. You cannot. It says what it says no matter if I'll be enforced or not.

 

[Pissed Off Patriot]

Ability vs Capability. No fixed rifle has the ability to accept magazines. Pretty simple still to understand for most people.

Just so we are clear, what do you mean by fixed rifle? Do you mean a rifle with a fixed magazine?

 

[Marine Cpl]

I would say yes. Why? Go ahead and reread the entire thread again. It's pointless repeating the same things continuously.

And why would you say yes. Because it works for you or because the law actually says it is?

All a bullet button is is a cover for a standard magazine release with a hole in it. It still drops magazines with just as designed.

 

[Uzi]

Neither am I. Nor am I concerned about Fixed Magazines. I may do one myself in the future. All I'm doing is pointing out how it's written.

Unfortunately, you guys know that yet are trying to make sense of a poorly written law. You cannot. It says what it says no matter if I'll be enforced or not.

They are unconstitutional laws. None of them make sense because they shouldn't ever exist. They were essentially anomalies in a system that was supposed to protect against them entirely. Now they're common and accepted enough to avoid retaliation. We're debating the loopholes really.

 

[Uzi]

Just so we are clear, what do you mean by fixed rifle? Do you mean a rifle with a fixed magazine?

Yes.

 

[Uzi]

And why would you say yes. Because it works for you or because the law actually says it is?

All a bullet button is is a cover for a standard magazine release with a hole in it. It still drops magazines with just as designed.

I am and never was referring to a bullet button.
Like you stated, they are designed to allow magazines to come out only to bypass a california definition. It's still a magazine release button, absolutely.

 

[Pissed Off Patriot]

Yes.

Does that include an SKS in it's original configuration?

 

[Uzi]

Does that include an SKS in it's original configuration?

Sure, why wouldn't it?

 

[Pissed Off Patriot]

Sure, why wouldn't it?

Then I would have to disagree with this statement

Ability vs Capability. No fixed rifle has the ability to accept magazines. Pretty simple still to understand for most people.

There are plenty of people who have converted their original configuration SKS to accept (detachable) magazines.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Does that include an SKS in it's original configuration?

Yes. Don't try to make sense of it. The SKS now has the ability to accept detachable magazines.

Whether an LEO will arrest you for it or a FFL will transfer it is an entirely different matter.