Posted: 5/13/2012 8:05:36 AM EDT
|
I'm sure this has been brought up before but I can't find if it has.
Heres the deal. NY's AWB is found in Penal Law section 265. It reads "a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least two of the following characteristics..." As bolded above, MAGAZINE! Later on in the definitions section we find "Large capacity ammunition feeding device - means a magazine, belt, drum...." so on and so forth. So the firearm in question is an RPD. Unlike the SAW, they cannot accept magazines, you can feed the belt from a drum, but not a magazine. PL265 reads "ability to accept a detachable magazine and..." NOT "ability to accept a detachable Large capactiy ammunition feeding device and...." I can find no definition of a magazine in NY's Penal code, nor on the ATF's web site. I always thought the definition of the magazine was a box type ammunition carrying device that feeds the rounds to the rifle via a spring. So, is the RPD considered an Assault rifle or not? I think no, as it cannot feed from a magazine, but only a belt. Sure a drum can attach, but it still feeds from the belt.... Thoughts? |
|
This topic has been discussed in detail twice previously on this forum. It's also been discussed on 191a4.com and MG42.us.
In short, the law is as written. It's squares and rectangles. The law as written, $20,000 and a good lawyer will prove the law as is clearly written. But a bad or stupid cop will cost you that $20,000. Good luck explaining the law to an idiot cop bent on arrest. You won't even be given the opportunity to show him the penal code, and even if you were it would clearly be beyond his understanding or desire to listen. On the good side, what is really quite simple, is the 1919 when one looks at the law is the pistol grip "protrudes below the action." This even a moron can understand and see, as the pistol grip is clearly behind, not below, the action. Ergo, if you want to play the belt-fed game, a 1919 is the easy way out of an expensive court decision. Better yet, try a .50 BMG M2 which has no pistol grip. |
|
Thanks for all the input.
What I don't get is all the concern about the arrest/going to trial. Come on. This is AR15.COM and we live in anti-gun New York. Cop catches you with an AR(whether preban or not but with evil looking comp) - assuming they know anything about PL265 and what defines a gun as preban or even as an assault weapon - you'll get arrested if they don't feel like taking your word on it. when in question, they can arrest and will have no repercussions for being "too cautious" |
|
Quoted:
when in question, they can arrest and will have no repercussions for being "too cautious" LEO's have plenty of resources up the food chain for helping to make a determination. It's been stated many times before: it is almost a certainty that someone being looked at for an AWB arrest is already being looked at for other crimes. 
|
|
Quoted:
I'm sure this has been brought up before but I can't find if it has. Heres the deal. NY's AWB is found in Penal Law section 265. It reads "a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least two of the following characteristics..." As bolded above, MAGAZINE! Later on in the definitions section we find "Large capacity ammunition feeding device - means a magazine, belt, drum...." so on and so forth. So the firearm in question is an RPD. Unlike the SAW, they cannot accept magazines, you can feed the belt from a drum, but not a magazine. Thoughts? By your own research, magazine = belt or drum as per the definitions section of S265 NYS law. If you replace 'magazine' with 'large capacity ammunition feeding device' you get: "a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable large capacity ammunition feeding device and has at least two of the following characteristics..." Sounds like the same thing to me. BTW, the SAW accepts M16 magazines and if you have belted ammunition the links have to be pre ban. Linking together more than 10 rounds without pre ban links is creating a 'large capacity ammunition feeding device'. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm sure this has been brought up before but I can't find if it has. Heres the deal. NY's AWB is found in Penal Law section 265. It reads "a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least two of the following characteristics..." As bolded above, MAGAZINE! Later on in the definitions section we find "Large capacity ammunition feeding device - means a magazine, belt, drum...." so on and so forth. So the firearm in question is an RPD. Unlike the SAW, they cannot accept magazines, you can feed the belt from a drum, but not a magazine. Thoughts? By your own research, magazine = belt or drum as per the definitions section of S265 NYS law. If you replace 'magazine' with 'large capacity ammunition feeding device' you get: "a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable large capacity ammunition feeding device and has at least two of the following characteristics..." Sounds like the same thing to me. BTW, the SAW accepts M16 magazines and if you have belted ammunition the links have to be pre ban. Linking together more than 10 rounds without pre ban links is creating a 'large capacity ammunition feeding device'. not necessarily. if all magazines are LCAFD, and all belts are LCAFD, that doesn't mean that magazines are belt. the words are not interchangeable even in the definition of the law. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm sure this has been brought up before but I can't find if it has. Heres the deal. NY's AWB is found in Penal Law section 265. It reads "a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least two of the following characteristics..." As bolded above, MAGAZINE! Later on in the definitions section we find "Large capacity ammunition feeding device - means a magazine, belt, drum...." so on and so forth. So the firearm in question is an RPD. Unlike the SAW, they cannot accept magazines, you can feed the belt from a drum, but not a magazine. Thoughts? By your own research, magazine = belt or drum as per the definitions section of S265 NYS law. If you replace 'magazine' with 'large capacity ammunition feeding device' you get: "a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable large capacity ammunition feeding device and has at least two of the following characteristics..." Sounds like the same thing to me. BTW, if you have belted ammunition the links have to be pre ban. Linking together more than 10 rounds without pre ban links is creating a 'large capacity ammunition feeding device'. not necessarily. if all magazines are LCAFD, and all belts are LCAFD, that doesn't mean that magazines are belt. the words are not interchangeable even in the definition of the law. If you feel confident representing yourself in court on a felony firearms charge because you want to fence around a definition section that's not fully defined, have at it. You can argue that a belt is not a magazine, and the judge can say they do the exact same thing. Here's a definition from Wiki: A magazine is an ammunition storage and feeding device within or attached to a repeating firearm. Magazines may be integral to the firearm (fixed) or removable (detachable). The magazine functions by moving the cartridges stored in the magazine into a position where they may be loaded into the chamber by the action of the firearm. The detachable magazine is often controversially referred to as a clip.[1][2] Magazines come in many shapes and sizes, from bolt action express rifles that hold only a few rounds to machine guns that hold hundreds of rounds. Since the magazine is an essential part of most repeating firearms, they are sometimes subject to regulation by gun control laws seeking to limit the number of cartridges they hold. Now I don't really like Wiki, but if the prosecution pulls this definition out during a trial I don't see too many judges not accepting it. |
|
Quoted:
Thanks for all the input. What I don't get is all the concern about the arrest/going to trial. Come on. This is AR15.COM and we live in anti-gun New York. Cop catches you with an AR(whether preban or not but with evil looking comp) - assuming they know anything about PL265 and what defines a gun as preban or even as an assault weapon - you'll get arrested if they don't feel like taking your word on it. when in question, they can arrest and will have no repercussions for being "too cautious" I recently asked this question of the police officers here and the consensus was that if you make a felony arrest and it bounced, you look like an idiot, your boss hates you and your prosecuter hates you because you made them idiots, assuming that it even goes that far because the CO and prosecutor know better. Look at what happened to DA Rice in Long Island. She wanted to be a contender and thought she'd make some baseless high profile AWB related arrests. Didn't quite work out how she expected. Hehe. |