New York Firearms Forum banner
1 - 20 of 48 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
No acording to NYS Police The ak- 47 and copies are on the forbidden list. They cannot be made compliant because they are on the list. Along with Colt AR_15 and copies.Per their interpretation of the law. Along with the Ruger Charger pistol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
(d) any of the weapons, or functioning frames or receivers of such
weapons, or copies or duplicates of such weapons, in any caliber, known
as:
(i) Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all
models);
(ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil;
(iii) Beretta Ar70 (SC-70);
(iv) Colt AR-15;
(v) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, and FNC;
(vi) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9, and M-12;
(vii) Steyr AUG;
(viii) INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and
(ix) revolving cylinder shotguns, such as (or similar to) the Street
Sweeper and Striker 12;
I've honestly always wondered about this section and why it isn't brought up very often. The only explanation I've heard is that as long as it isn't a direct copy, ie some company calling their rifle a colt ar-15, it's alright. Like stag calling their rifle a 'model 1', even though it's clearly an ar-15 pattern rifle, is alright. It honestly seems like a pretty weak defense to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,534 Posts
Can't have an AK-47 any more than you can have a M2 .50 caliber machine gun without a special licence and such.
That which looks like an AK as found in shops, shows and private hands aren't AK-47's or copies to begin with, so the point is moot. They are simply semi automatic rifles that happen to share some bits and bobs.

No worries about the Colt contracted Armalite Rifle model 15 either, unless you've a drop in auto sear, smooth upper receiver (no forward assist, no brass deflector) and a number of other parts specific to said Armilite Rifle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
Can't have an AK-47 any more than you can have a M2 .50 caliber machine gun without a special licence and such.
That which looks like an AK as found in shops, shows and private hands aren't AK-47's or copies to begin with, so the point is moot. They are simply semi automatic rifles that happen to share some bits and bobs.

No worries about the Colt contracted Armalite Rifle model 15 either, unless you've a drop in auto sear, smooth upper receiver (no forward assist, no brass deflector) and a number of other parts specific to said Armilite Rifle.
So that section of the law only applies to EXACT copies(except caliber)? It doesn't matter that it's the same, or very nearly, action? In that case, is ANY semi auto rifle illegal under this section of the law?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
451 Posts
Good thing we all own Saigas, Mak 90's, WASRs, SARS, Stag Arms, DPMS, Busmaster, BCM, Del Ton, S&W...


I know nothing of these ak-47's and m16 rifles you speak of.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
353 Posts
Good thing we all own Saigas, Mak 90's, WASRs, SARS, Stag Arms, DPMS, Busmaster, BCM, Del Ton, S&W...

I know nothing of these ak-47's and m16 rifles you speak of.
You forgot MISR SA's;)

Yes, and what is this AK-47 you speak of? Is that a new (or old) variant of Tupolev aircraft?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,023 Posts
No acording to NYS Police The ak- 47 and copies are on the forbidden list. They cannot be made compliant because they are on the list. Along with Colt AR_15 and copies.Per their interpretation of the law. Along with the Ruger Charger pistol.
Well thank god I don't own any AK-47's!

A WASR-10, which many people in New York have, is not a civilian copy of an AK-47 - it is a civilian version of an AKM, therefore it is not a 'copy' of an AK-47.

Another popular rifle is the Saiga line - these too are not 'copies' of the AK-47, they are in fact, civilian models of the AK-10X series.

AK-47, AKM, AK-74, AK-10X - these are all different rifles.

As for Colt AR-15, and copies....

And in general this term, "and copies," is too general for the law to apply and the recent case in LI is more than likely based off of this wording. So we will know what the state believes, "and copies," means.

Personally, I think it is all an attack on personal liberties, but... here is my interpretation of what, "and copies," means when applied to AR-15's.

First-off, this is based off of the Federal AWB - they decided that this wouldn't apply to EVERY single model of civilian M16/M4 rifles. Reason being, Colt was and still is (for the time being at least) the US military's sole provider of M16's (at that time) and M4's (now). If they were unable to make civilian sales they would have gone bankrupt and therefore unable to supply military contracts so there is a bow by the government to allow these rifles. So, "and copies," means specifically a rifle designated "AR-15".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
353 Posts
The law is alleged to be contradictory in the sense it tries to outlaw an entire class of weapon based on manufacture/model then goes on to detail "features" and limits (e.g. pistol grip, flash hider, etc.).

Recent cases have seized on this alleged contradiction as a means of seeking to completely outlaw the weapons including "ban-compliant" versions which are currently being sold. The goal here is to eliminate any weapon that is considered an assault weapon (AR-15, AK-47) or (and here is the important part) successor weapons (e.g ban-compliant).

This is obviously a grotesque overreach by prosecutors and anti-gun supporters. It is also not consistent with practices in use by most of the state and counties.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
As for Colt AR-15, and copies....

And in general this term, "and copies," is too general for the law to apply and the recent case in LI is more than likely based off of this wording. So we will know what the state believes, "and copies," means.

Personally, I think it is all an attack on personal liberties, but... here is my interpretation of what, "and copies," means when applied to AR-15's.

First-off, this is based off of the Federal AWB - they decided that this wouldn't apply to EVERY single model of civilian M16/M4 rifles. Reason being, Colt was and still is (for the time being at least) the US military's sole provider of M16's (at that time) and M4's (now). If they were unable to make civilian sales they would have gone bankrupt and therefore unable to supply military contracts so there is a bow by the government to allow these rifles. So, "and copies," means specifically a rifle designated "AR-15".
This is my interpretation as well.

I cannot think of a single case prosecuted on the Federal level against a "Colt AR-15" in isolation. Any prosecutions occurred as ancillary charges to more serious crimes.

The law itself was poorly written in this regard since multiple manufacturers (at least 6 others if not more) made similar AR-style rifles which were, in fact, commercial competitors to "Colt" prior to the federal ban even taking effect (and even more after). Prosecuting only Colt owners would have been at least unfairly discriminatory. Attempting to prosecute non-Colt owners would run afoul of commercial rights issues as I am sure Bushmaster, Remington, DPMS, Knight's etc would all deny that their products are "copies" of anything Colt. Furthermore, simple manufacturing changes would likely remove any grounds for "copy" prosecution (things like the additional bolt release buttons on POF Gen III and Knights SR-15 receivers, and SIG's inclusion of a QD sling mount built into the lower receiver). Finally, if you were to prosecute on the basis of a copy, which Colt model would the prosecutor refer to as "the original" (9mm carbine? 16" Sporter? 20" HBAR?)? Even amongst the Colt line itself, it would be hard to argue that a Colt 9mm CAR is, in fact, "a copy" of a 20" 5.56 Match HBAR.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,534 Posts
Even amongst the Colt line itself, it would be hard to argue that a Colt 9mm CAR is, in fact, "a copy" of a 20" 5.56 Match HBAR.
But if they both have a horsey and thingy that flips up they must be the same thing must'nt they?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,023 Posts
This is my interpretation as well.

I cannot think of a single case prosecuted on the Federal level against a "Colt AR-15" in isolation. Any prosecutions occurred as ancillary charges to more serious crimes.

The law itself was poorly written in this regard since multiple manufacturers (at least 6 others if not more) made similar AR-style rifles which were, in fact, commercial competitors to "Colt" prior to the federal ban even taking effect (and even more after). Prosecuting only Colt owners would have been at least unfairly discriminatory. Attempting to prosecute non-Colt owners would run afoul of commercial rights issues as I am sure Bushmaster, Remington, DPMS, Knight's etc would all deny that their products are "copies" of anything Colt. Furthermore, simple manufacturing changes would likely remove any grounds for "copy" prosecution (things like the additional bolt release buttons on POF Gen III and Knights SR-15 receivers, and SIG's inclusion of a QD sling mount built into the lower receiver). Finally, if you were to prosecute on the basis of a copy, which Colt model would the prosecutor refer to as "the original" (9mm carbine? 16" Sporter? 20" HBAR?)? Even amongst the Colt line itself, it would be hard to argue that a Colt 9mm CAR is, in fact, "a copy" of a 20" 5.56 Match HBAR.
At the time of the ban written Colt AR-15 was a specific model, which intentionally excluded SP1, MATCH HBAR etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
899 Posts
You can be arrested and prosecuted for anything.

In court, an expert witness (e.g. the CEO of Spikes) would refute that his rifle/ receiver is a copy or a duplicate of the Colt AR15. A Colt collector would refute it, and be able to note substantial differences. In fact, this came up in a dispute between Colt and another (I think it was BM) and Colt lost.

Recently, this "copy" and "duplicate" thing came up in a court case, the lower court ruled that it's obvious what it means, while the apellate court said the exact oposite and GVRd it. I don't recall the case or jurisdiction, sorry. AFAIK it's waiting on the lower court to get the decision correctly written this time.

You can be arrested and prosecuted for anything. It costs them nothing. Doing so in error has no detrimental effects. FYI.
 
1 - 20 of 48 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top