New York Firearms Forum banner

1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
129 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I can't honestly say I understand why NYS has this ban in place, or better yet the 30 rd magazines. Chances are that if someone intends to use a high powered rifle for illegal purposes, the muzzle that is on it isn't going to matter much. Then you go into the magazines... Pre ban 30 rounders are ok, but post ban are not... Such a difference between them! Once again, if they are going to use the rifle for illegal purposes, pre/post ban isn't going to matter much! Can someone please elaborate on this? I really just don't have a clue why these laws even exist...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,557 Posts
Simple The communist took over NY Politics a long time ago.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,553 Posts
Good luck getting rational answers. It's the best they could do in their quest to ban all guns at the time would be my guess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
129 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
I'm just trying to look at this from their point of view, and I honestly can't say I can figure out a solid reasoning behind any of it, and I am honestly a fair person when it comes to looking at a situation from both sides...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,238 Posts
Those are EVIL (VERY BAD BAD BABY KILLER ) FEATURES. you see the idea is if you have a grip and a large magazine and a carbine looking like an assault weapon you will be putting silencers and flash hiders, going rambo and start shooting everyone...

The reality is...

The laws do not make any sense. They are designed this way on purpose to get everyone confused and make it look that they are not taking 'too much' or your rights away. So everything is there to deceive and confuse and leave doors open for Nazi Mayors (ie: NYC) and their DAs to charge you and some random anti-gun judge to put you in jail.

A thread you cannot have in an semiauto with a grip and detachable magazine. if so you must weld a thread protector or put a brake or compensator and pin it and weld it as well. All thanks to the old AWB directives that do not make any sense.

That is how antigun nuts look at your glock..

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,553 Posts
I'm just trying to look at this from their point of view, and I honestly can't say I can figure out a solid reasoning behind any of it, and I am honestly a fair person when it comes to looking at a situation from both sides...
Their reasoning is that assault rifles are made for killing and people don't have any business owning them. 30 round mags are made for killing and people don't have any business owning them.

They can't make something retroactively illegal without tons of backlash so preban magazines and rifles were exempted.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,352 Posts
Meketrefe...that is BAD ASS!! Is it a Pre Ban? How much? Will you consider a trade?

[/QUOTE]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,352 Posts
I almost forgot...does it have one of those shoulder things that goes up?

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
129 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
I guess that makes some sense. Write confusing laws, catch good people who made a mistake, arrest, charge, take their money... Now it's beginning to make sense. Next their going to change the laws and allow them, but tax them like they do cigarettes!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
? who know its only illegal if you get caught. i have talked to many dec and police officers all of the ones i talked to and saw never cared about muzzle breaks . its all how you present yourself.

New York's version of the law is very similar to the Federal version, but New York's version does not have a sunset provision. According to the laws of the State of New York, a magazine with a capacity of more than 10 rounds manufactured after September 14, 1994 cannot be legally possessed by anyone other than a law enforcement officer. A provision of the Federal law required the date of manufacture to be stamped on every newly manufactured "large capacity" magazine. Because that requirement is no longer in effect, the New York magazine ban becomes potentially unenforceable except with respect to those magazines manufactured during the ban and marked according to federal regulations then in effect.
NYS Penal Law § 265.02(6) makes it a class D felony to possess "a large capacity ammunition feeding device," which is defined in Penal Law § 265.00(23) as "a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device, manufactured after [September 13, 1994], that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than ten rounds of ammunition." Possession of unmarked "large capacity" magazines made after the sunset of the federal ban thus subject New Yorkers to felony charges. Police and prosecutors may be able to determine actual manufacture dates of seized magazines from information not generally available to consumers, such as the dates of magazine design changes and parts assembly numbers. The New York ban thus leaves possessors of unmarked post-ban magazines at risk of felony charges since they may not know the magazines were manufactured post-sunset and not pre-ban. However, the prosecution must be able to prove that the subject in possession of the magazine had knowledge that it was in fact a post ban magazine.
During the period of the federal ban, ATF would issue rulings as to whether attachment of a given muzzle device on a post-ban rifle was permissible because it acted only as a brake, or impermissible because it acted as a flash suppressor. As with magazines, the New York regulatory scheme implicitly relied upon such federal regulatory determinations for enforcement of the state's ban. With the sunset of the federal ban, ATF is no longer concerned with classifying muzzle devices. New York residents now may acquire or modify rifles attaching what they believe to be muzzle brakes, but which at some point New York police or prosecutors may deem to be flash suppressors, resulting in arrest or prosecution for unwitting possession of a banned rifle. [See NYS Penal Law § 265.00(22) defining "Assault Weapon" to include "a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least two of the following characteristics... (iv) a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor." There is no definition of "flash suppressor" in § 265.00, which contains all definitions for the ban, thus leaving grounds for arrest and prosecution uncertain until what is or is not a "flash suppressor" is resolved by state courts or clarified by statute.]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
982 Posts
Their reasoning is that assault rifles are made for killing and people don't have any business owning them. 30 round mags are made for killing and people don't have any business owning them.
[rhetorical question] But, if you follow that line of reasoning, why are police allowed to have them? [/rhetorical question]

.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
644 Posts
I'm just trying to look at this from their point of view, and I honestly can't say I can figure out a solid reasoning behind any of it, and I am honestly a fair person when it comes to looking at a situation from both sides...
Here's my take: "their point of view" is that it should be very difficult or impossible to obtain an "assault weapon" and anything that moves in the direction of that goal -- even if it is only symbolic in its actual substance, and even if it creates unfair traps for the unwary -- is a step in the right direction. The fact that the 1994 federal AWB met both of these parameters was not a reason for repealing it to the gun control crowd -- it was a reason for "strengthening" it. (You know, "closing loopholes.") The anti-gun faction of the NY legislature would never repeal the NY AWB merely because it was ineffective or was originally justified as an attempt at codifying a federal crime into state law, but the federal crime no longer exists. And obviously our side is not going to advocate making the law more restrictive merely because it is nonsensical.

The term "assault weapon" has no precise meaning outside of statutory definitions -- which vary significantly from each other. At the end of the day, an "assault weapon" is whatever a gun control proponent wants to see taken off the table. It probably ultimately means "any semiautomatic centerfire rifle or shotgun and any magazine holding more than 5 rounds" in the dreams of the gun control folks. So from their perspective, anything that starts chipping away at semiautomatic centerfire long guns or magazine capacity is a step in the right direction, regardless of whether it has any rational impact.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
644 Posts
During the period of the federal ban, ATF would issue rulings as to whether attachment of a given muzzle device on a post-ban rifle was permissible because it acted only as a brake, or impermissible because it acted as a flash suppressor. As with magazines, the New York regulatory scheme implicitly relied upon such federal regulatory determinations for enforcement of the state's ban. With the sunset of the federal ban, ATF is no longer concerned with classifying muzzle devices.
You can still get a letter from ATF making this determination, but you can't get it in the context of the 1994 federal "assault weapon" ban. What you can do is get an opinion about whether or not a given muzzel attachment would be a "flash suppressor" within the meaning of ATF's sporting-purposes test -- e.g. ask about attaching a given muzzle device to an H&K SL-8 or some other imported centerfire rifle that needs to meet the sporting-purposes test.

Of course, there is not -- and never has been -- any firm assurance that NY authorities would "go along with" the ATF determination (as you noted in your post). Ultimately I think the risk/burden would be to present expert witness testimony at trial and hope a jury concluded that the evidence did not indicate a "flash suppressor" was present.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
720 Posts
The simple answer is the AWB laws were made base on emotion and outrage not reason and logic. The outrage over "assault rifles" has far exceeded the threat from them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
291 Posts
The way it has been explained to me is that an "assault weapon" is anything intending solely for the purposes of killing human beings. This is seen as evil by the general population, most of whom reside in big cities (such as mine - NYC) and do not own or understand guns. Therefore, every time a story about a cop being shot or gang warfare comes out, it create the impetus for the gen pop to shake there heads and declare that "Something needs to be done". The politicians are all too willing to oblige because it makes them look like they are doing something. The easy answer is almost never the best, but always popular because people tend to rationalize easy.

Here in NYC it was further explained to me that it is not so much me they are worried about. It is the that once the gun is in circulation they cant guarantee where it will end up - Burglary, "Disappears", borrowed, etc. Again, easier to make it difficult and tightly restricted than to address the core issues of human nature/behavior.

Unfortunately, our society is slowly degrading from the inside out because we are always looking to elect politicians to "Do Something" about everything, for which they are more than willing to feed us the easy answers...
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Top