New York Firearms Forum banner

1 - 20 of 90 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
299 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So I see a lot of online vendors selling rifles with the ARMagLock installed. It seems that it turns the gun into a top-loader, but of course you could then keep the pistol grip, telescoping stock, flash hider etc, since the rifle doesn't have a detachable magazine.

When I decide to move, I shouldn't have an issue removing the mod, correct? And is it true that it's legal? I guess what I'm talking about is...

Is this mod considered "permanent" enough, for it to be both NY legal, and later reversable? Or should I just wait 'till I get out of this hellhole. Thanks a lot for any information you have.

:)

P.S. Below is a link to an example of what I'm talking about. A Ruger AR-556 that seems to have this mod installed.

RUGER AR-556 5.56mm NEW YORK STATE SAFE ACT LEGAL AR-15 TYPE RIFLE - DD's Ranch
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
183 Posts
I don't see the AR Maglock on that Ruger. Pretty sure it's just a fixed magazine with an epoxied bullet button. The AR Maglock allows you to drop the magazine once you pull the rear takedown pin and pivot the receiver open.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
299 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Hmm... I kind of assumed that calling an AR-15 "fixed magazine" meant it was using the AR Mag Lock. But still... If the magazine is only useful after the gun's been taken apart, that does still make it NY legal, since it's still effectively fixed... Right?

Trying to figure this nonsense out gives me a damn headache...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
299 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Actually, I just found a link on the Mag Lock site... They're basically saying that it follows the laws as written, but technically hasn't been approved by the state.

https://www.armaglock.com/legal_disclaimers/

I suppose it's probably good to go then... Still makes me wonder though. Just trying to do everything I can to protect myself legally. Also, that site DD's Ranch seems to specialize in selling these NY legal AR-15's, so I assume their option is fine as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
183 Posts
The fixed mag ones, i.e. the ones where the magazine isn't removable, are legal. The AR Maglock, as far as I know, does not pass muster in NYS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
892 Posts
The problem I see with the Maglock is that after you open the rifle to remove the magazine, thst unless the Maglock prevents you from closing the rifle, you can close the rifle and THEN insert a detachable magazine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
279 Posts
The intent of the SAFE Act was to ban semi-auto rifles that can take a detachable magazine.

We have to assume the NYSP will not accept any modification to be acceptable if the fixed magazine can be easily undone after a minute or two of tinkering.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
524 Posts
There is no wording that says "permanent". There is no wording on how long it takes to revert or modify. The word "time" does not appear in the law, nor does the phrase "must take at least xx seconds to modify".

Text of the law: "cannot accept a detachable magazine". That's it.

Test: Assemble rifle without magazine attached.

Insert magazine, let go.

If magazine stays, it has accepted the detachable magazine.
If magazine cannot be installed because the catch does not bend out of the way to let the magazine pass, then it has NOT accepted the detachable magazine.

It is that simple.

The opinion of NYSP is irrelevant. There is no such thing as "approved". They will tell you that 50lbs of heroin is "approved". They will tell you that 90mph in a school zone on the way to sell them that heroin is "approved". And then they will arrest you.

If you have an MR2 or other type of mag lock, and it fails the above test, you'll want to replace the catch with one that is rigid. The one you currently have is made from a spring-type of steel; you want to use one that was milled, and will not bend out of the way when the rifle is assembled.

Cheers,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
279 Posts
There is no wording that says "permanent". There is no wording on how long it takes to revert or modify. The word "time" does not appear in the law, nor does the phrase "must take at least xx seconds to modify".

Text of the law: "cannot accept a detachable magazine". That's it.

Test: Assemble rifle without magazine attached.

Insert magazine, let go.

If magazine stays, it has accepted the detachable magazine.
If magazine cannot be installed because the catch does not bend out of the way to let the magazine pass, then it has NOT accepted the detachable magazine.

It is that simple.

The opinion of NYSP is irrelevant. There is no such thing as "approved". They will tell you that 50lbs of heroin is "approved". They will tell you that 90mph in a school zone on the way to sell them that heroin is "approved". And then they will arrest you.

If you have an MR2 or other type of mag lock, and it fails the above test, you'll want to replace the catch with one that is rigid. The one you currently have is made from a spring-type of steel; you want to use one that was milled, and will not bend out of the way when the rifle is assembled.

Cheers,
Hmmm.

"cannot accept a detachable magazine".

That does not suggest extreme permanency.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,835 Posts
The problem I see with the Maglock is that after you open the rifle to remove the magazine, thst unless the Maglock prevents you from closing the rifle, you can close the rifle and THEN insert a detachable magazine.
But that's actaully an attachable magazine, not a DETACHABLE magazine. It can only be DETACHED with the rifle taken down. No?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,835 Posts
The intent of the SAFE Act was to ban semi-auto rifles that can take a detachable magazine.

We have to assume the NYSP will not accept any modification to be acceptable if the fixed magazine can be easily undone after a minute or two of tinkering.
The word "permanent" does not appear ANYWHERE in the wording of the unSAFE act.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
279 Posts
The word "permanent" does not appear ANYWHERE in the wording of the unSAFE act.
cannot accept a detachable magazine.

this means the weapon must have a "permanent" magazine installed.

but just how "permanent" must it be?

simple pin to uninstall it? or must be removed using a screwdriver?

for the NYSP to accept an AR as having a permament magazine, the magazine's installation has to have some umpff to it. It can't be quickly and easily removed, so as to pop in a normal mag.

I think the courts will agree.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
299 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Hm... As far as the "attachable" vs "detachable", I know every word counts, but I wouldn't take that roll of the dice in a court of law. But that's just me...

So if those DD's Ranch guns are not using the AR Mag Lock, is it as Sansfenders said? An epoxied bullet button?

And that would mean later on, I could undo this without too much of an issue when I move to a legal jurisdiction, correct? Actually now that I think of it... I had been wondering why bullet buttons couldn't skirt the NY (un)SAFE Act, but obviously if the thing needs to be epoxied, then a standard bullet button is a no go... But then, who says epoxy is truly legal either?

We're trying to think logically, but then in court, they could pull some nonsense like, "Oh, well it may have been glued to be non-detachable, but any reasonbable person would know that it could be quickly undone and be made into an illegal "assault weapon"' or some BS. I'm trying to think one step ahead, despite really wanting an AR-15...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
825 Posts
Another one of these threads eh?

Just so you know the AR-MAG lock and a regular magazine release button are nearly the same thing. The main difference being, the AR-MAG lock takes longer to detach and except a detachable magazine. It is NOT a locked magazine as the magazine comes out without any use of tools and still is a push button release. Splitting the receiver partially open, is not disassembling the gun either. Absolutely no parts are being taken off, except the magazine itself with the AR-mag lock.

When it comes to a non-detachable magazine, think of "reasonable means" when it comes to a solution, that's all we really have to base off of. When and if it comes time to see to a solution regarding the legality and definition, it will take someone being arrested for the magazine alone, which will be a tricky and unlikely thing to be the focus on of a charge, because what other features does or doesn't the rifle have etc.

Okay, so they recognize it's illegal, but how in depth are they really going to go to define from the details of the case to the public as to what classified the gun as a detachable magazine...AND what other charges did they get along with that one. We've already seen several safe act arrests; I don't believe any were focused on detachable magazines, and that alone, which is what will probably be needed to give us a definition. Having stated that, I believe we have a sooner chance at another stupid ban or safe act part 2 before something like that happens.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,778 Posts
:mad:1) Nobody knows for sure, all the thread has is conjecture (I will give you no better, it's all we can do)
2) Fixed magazine with an epoxied button would make me feel comfortable at night given what we currently know
3) Any device that lets me pull the mag by simply pulling the take down pin and then, after putting the upper back in place with that pin now accepts a mag again would not let me sleep at night
3.b) I wouldn't feel comfortable using it. I am not convinced that removing one pin from the rifle, which can be done quickly if it has a ring on the end, really matches the intent of the law
4) Either go with a truly "fixed" like a button screwed in without a spring, or go the thordsen route. As far as we know both approaches seems okay now, but again nobody has ruled on it in court

At about 2:00 they demonstrate the AR mag lock here. This is what a prosecution could show in court, pretty quick release.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,219 Posts
OK a few key points.

1. There is no guidance to what is legal and what is illegal. The law doesn't state what is legal only what is illegal. Lastly there is no case law to guide us so everything is guess. Read the law (not cuts of it) fine the actual penal code and read it for yourself. This will allow you to make an informed decision on what level of risk your willing to take.

2. There is no mention of permanents in the law so throw that out of your mind. People like to say well then why are they epoxying the bullet buttons. This is to disable the bullet button feature not to make the install permanent.

3. AR Mag Lock- There are two different ways to install one. First WITHOUT the washer. This allows you to release the mag when the rifle is split apart. This is probably the most risky of all the fixed mag routes. Secondly WITH the washer. This makes it so you have to disassemble the Mag Lock in order to drop the mag.

4. My next fixed mag AR I will install the prince 50. Look into those and see if you like them.

5. Lastly for everyone stating what mag fixing options are legal or illegal I look at this way. The shops selling the supposed illegal fixing options are not hiding what they are doing. If they are as illegal as everyone says they are why hasn't charges been brought up against the store for selling an illegal product? My take is they probably realize that they will be considered legal and will set a precedent and they don't want that. They what the common person to live in fear of prosecution.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
769 Posts
...3.b) I wouldn't feel comfortable using it. I am not convinced that removing one pin from the rifle, which can be done quickly if it has a ring on the end, really matches the intent of the law...

...This is what a prosecution could show in court, pretty quick release.

Have you ever used an AR equipped with an AR Maglock? I have. Believe me, it fits the intent of the law. It is very slow and cumbersome relative to the intended operation of an AR. And notice how the guy flags his feet and lower legs with a closed chamber? Either he had a live round in the chamber or his rifle malfunctioned - it's supposed to lock back on an empty mag. Besides, your lawyer just has to show this video of the fully legal Garand right afterward.

Finally, the flaw in the "test" that sbb concocted is that the magazine is no longer detachable once inserted. You MUST break the action to "detach" it. In a mechanical system detach-ability isn't necessarily a function of one particular assembly. One could design a magazine that is fully detachable with the AR Maglock or even the venerated T-nut. Likewise, one could design a receiver that will not only accept a "detachable" magazine but will also retain it until you start cutting or grinding parts. This being the case, I submit that "detachability" is the crux of this particular regulation and that the AR Maglock nullifies said "detachability" until such time as the rifle is partially disassembled.

All that being said, I believe the Thordsen to be a better solution - mostly because it is safer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
299 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 · (Edited)
It does seem that according to the VSO video, this mod does count as a fixed magazine, since the gun has to be "disassembled" for the mag to be removed...

But would a jury know enough to call that AR-15 "disassembled". It is, pretty much. But to them, it's going to be ambiguous. But given the way that people think of guns in this state, I bet a jury could find "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" to convict...

I think my best bet would still just be an epoxied magazine. But I should be able to undo that if I move, correct? I know it'll be a job, but I could probably figure it out. But from what I know, and how it's going to be much tougher to remove epoxy, I'd bet that would fly better in court.
 
1 - 20 of 90 Posts
Top