NY Gun Law....Weapons Affected.


PDA






xXxplosive
January 16, 2013, 06:52 PM
http://troopers.ny.gov/Firearms/NYS_SAFE_Act/

If you enjoyed reading about "NY Gun Law....Weapons Affected." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
psyopspec
January 16, 2013, 06:58 PM
Thank you for posting this. I suspect it will be referred to a lot as the actual effects of the legislation continue to crystallize.

One thing of note, there had been some chatter that some duty type semi automatic handguns would be banned as assault weapons. That appears NOT to be case.

Redlg155
January 16, 2013, 07:00 PM
What is sad is that we have traitors in the mist. Not many anti gunners and certainly not the media could come up with a comprehensive.list.

desidog
January 16, 2013, 07:06 PM
So if a new company is started under a new name, those AR types under a new name would be OK?

Hunterdad
January 16, 2013, 07:07 PM
Thank you for posting this. My plan was to buy a new CZ 712 utility and it looks like a still can. Any idea of I can still buy a mag ext for it?

xXxplosive
January 16, 2013, 07:09 PM
Noticed Plainfield Machine .30Cal Carbines.......not listed here.

steveb4c
January 16, 2013, 07:11 PM
didn't see any kel-tec or hi-point sub rifles on that list, think they overlooked them?

GlowinPontiac
January 16, 2013, 07:15 PM
Even if your gun is not on the list what do you do next year if nobody makes a 7rnd mag for it since you can't posess higer capacity mags??

birddog
January 16, 2013, 07:16 PM
I don't know...this is the list of 'assault weapons'.

It really doesn't address the magazine issue, regarding handguns NOT classified as assault weapons.

Still blurry for me.

Also high-capacity revolvers are not mentioned. Could be a sticking point.

Waiting to see.

esheato
January 16, 2013, 07:16 PM
Benelli M-2 Tactical? Craziness.

Grassman
January 16, 2013, 07:19 PM
So Remington 1100 is on that list. Glad I'm not in that mess, I'm mad for you guys. This is outrageous.

ZGunner
January 16, 2013, 07:22 PM
So if a new company is started under a new name, those AR types under a new name would be OK?

Unfortunatly, no.

"This list is intended only as a guide and is not meant to be an exclusive, exhaustive list as there may be additional weapons that will also meet the amended definition under the new law."

Leaves it kinda open ended.

berettaprofessor
January 16, 2013, 07:30 PM
Interesting...the Remington 1100 is only listed as the "Tactical" version. M1 Carbines not on the list...

What would irritate me most is that because it includes 22LR, my S&W MP 15-22 would be banned....and its my favorite gun to shoot.

BHP FAN
January 16, 2013, 07:35 PM
Even the California ban has an exclusion for .22's ... for now.

BHP FAN
January 16, 2013, 07:37 PM
they make five round mags for the M1 Carbine. Might be why it's not on the list, or it's age and C&R status. Let's not give them any ideas.

goldie
January 16, 2013, 07:39 PM
I dont see robinson armament on there,only under the ak part, probably for the vepr, is the m96 & xcr exempt? also, it lists the sig 550 &551, not the 556 . is the 556 scm exempt too?

Zardaia
January 16, 2013, 07:50 PM
I believe thats only ment as examples, not a list. The legal determining factor is still prohibited features just more than 1 instead of 2 now.

Bohemus
January 16, 2013, 07:55 PM
No vz.58 on the list? (troll face)

Cosmoline
January 16, 2013, 08:03 PM
This is not an exhaustive list, so don't assume that if it isn't on this list it isn't covered. The law is so poorly drafted and so vague it could include a great many firearms nobody expected it to.

goldie
January 16, 2013, 08:03 PM
Clicking on the actual laws written by the top of the page is just unbelievable,the jargan used, the wording used, theres professors at M.I.T. that wont be able to understand it,there is a section on page 48 that says 200.00 fine if cought in your home with a magazine that has more than 7 rounds.If cought outside the home, its 200.00 fine & up to six months in jail. that is so insane i cant believe what i am reading.

Rom828
January 16, 2013, 08:46 PM
No mention of the SKS:)

Killian
January 16, 2013, 09:04 PM
I hope the SKS falls outside of the list. But...to quote..

This list is intended only as a guide and is not meant to be an exclusive, exhaustive list as there may be additional weapons that will also meet the amended definition under the new law.

rdhood
January 16, 2013, 09:14 PM
That list looks like it was compiled by a high school student over a weekend. Seriously.

for AR-15... is "Palmetto" the same as "Palmetto State Armory"??? Seems like they would have used LEGAL names instead of nicknames for companies. Further... where does a homebuilt gun fit in here? I built three AK47 rifles from kits/blanks. They are, of course, NOT on this list. One could also build an AR15 from 80% and it does not show up on the list. It is CLEAR that NY rushed this... to the point that someone might successfully challenge in court.

Edit: Nevermind, I guess this covers it

This list is intended only as a guide and is not meant to be an exclusive, exhaustive list as there may be additional weapons that will also meet the amended definition under the new law.

Onmilo
January 16, 2013, 09:14 PM
Beretta Storm carbines are missing

glennv
January 16, 2013, 09:14 PM
I'm not even from NY and I'm sick.

goldie
January 16, 2013, 09:28 PM
This is outragous, & even police are affected. This is going way too far !

zonzin
January 16, 2013, 09:28 PM
You New Yorkers are so screwed. Sad day. Let’s hope the rest of the Socialist states don’t follow.

ID-shooting
January 16, 2013, 09:29 PM
The big one, notice Ruger is not anywhere on the list.

22-rimfire
January 16, 2013, 09:37 PM
I don't see the Mini 14. The SKS would be similar unless it has more than one military characteristics. Didn't see any 22's, but will have to wait until things get fleshed out a bit. I don't believe the law exempts 22LR caliber rifles.

Ruger is listed as Strum Ruger.

Ohio Gun Guy
January 16, 2013, 09:46 PM
I'm In Ohio but it doesnt matter, this can't stand! :fire: Just read the list and the line about registering them within a year.

It's been feared, but it's surreal to read it. This is a tipping point IMO. We / all of us have to get this defeated! This is a foot in the water toward national registration and eventually confiscation!

goldie
January 16, 2013, 09:52 PM
"New York,New York, a hell of a town, i just got arrested for 1 extra round,Cuomo should go back to that hole in the ground; New York New Yooork, its a hell of a towwwwnnn" :barf:......

Trent
January 16, 2013, 10:21 PM
So, I don't see MG-34, MG-42, PKM, RPD, VZ-39, Browning 1919, or DShK on the list.

:)

Trent
January 16, 2013, 10:24 PM
Oooh M2HB heavy machineguns (converted to semi), are still legal too.

Just feed them 7 rounds at a time.

They don't qualify because they don't take magazines.

jobu07
January 16, 2013, 10:28 PM
Trent,

You missed the catch all phrase. If it isn't on the list te state police will consider it banned anyway. This effectively took the power out of the hands of te extremely liberal legislature and gave it all to the executive branch of state to government. Whatever king cuomo's appointed superintendent of state police decides is banned is banned.

I wish the semi belt Feds were still legal.

the_skunk
January 16, 2013, 10:30 PM
http://www.paintballgunswarehouse.com/userfiles/image/Single%20Feed%20Paintball%20gun.jpg

BobTheTomato
January 16, 2013, 11:43 PM
Saiga wasn't listed in the Ak's. Are they already banned there?

Propforce
January 16, 2013, 11:52 PM
What if you build your own ARs? Then they will not be manufactured by the company on the ban list.

blkbrd666
January 17, 2013, 12:03 AM
I'm curious, where are they going to put all you people if not a single person acknowledges the unconstitutional laws? From what I keep hearing, there's arms and legs sticking out between the bars in every prison due to overcrowding.

baz
January 17, 2013, 12:03 AM
Saiga wasn't listed in the Ak's. Are they already banned there?Saigas are covered in the reference to "Izhevsk Factory - Russia."

Pat M
January 17, 2013, 12:36 AM
I'm still wondering how my State Police are going to process the registration of over a million semi-automatic rifles in the next 364 days. They don't even have the resources to patrol the parkways properly.

Curator
January 17, 2013, 01:04 AM
Sometimes you get the government you deserve. Sorry honest sportsmen and gun enthusiasts. You live in a a corruptocracy where lying lawyers rule. (excuse my redundancy) When the people vote for bread and circuses its time to leave. Cuomo is a chip off the old block (Mario). A complete hypocrite. Note his "southern preacher" style of oratory designed to stir the emotions of the sycophants and fools. Remember this is the same POS that bullied S&W under the Clinton Administration. N.Y. State is doomed as long as people like him are elected to public office.

sidheshooter
January 17, 2013, 01:38 AM
Aside from the obvious fact that it's a terrible law, it also doesn't look to be a very good law. By that, I mean that there are typos and unanswered questions and holes that amaze me, and I'm no lawyer. I don't know that I'd recommend reading the complete text (that's about 45 min of my life that I'll never get back) but if you did, I doubt you'd be impressed by how it's put together. What a slapped-together rush job.

This is, of course, totally aside from the fact that the premise sucked to begin with.

mikechandler
January 17, 2013, 02:10 AM
Looks like the civil war will be starting right in NY. I think we should all stand shoulder to shoulder and say , HELL NO, COME AND GET THEM! Individually we are nothing.. but together, we are The People. This government derives any power it has from us, and it exists solely because we allow it to be. Our founding fathers saw this, and made sure we could not have our teeth pulled for this very reason. If we allow them to disarm us, they will next take away our freedom of speech, our freedom of religion, and soon we will be vassals living in fear of a tyrannical state. We cannot let this happen.

gbw
January 17, 2013, 02:23 AM
The law is bad, and very harrassing to lawful owners.

But not quite as draconian as first made out, although all ARs, AKs, other types are really gone. I don't see any loopholes.

Seems that all of the 10 rd. mags existing in NY are ok. Just load 7.

They aren't on the list, but M1 Carbines, M1 Garands, and probably many others MAY BE included in the AW definition. Sec. 37:

ASSAULT RIFLE:
(A) A SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLE THAT HAS AN ABILITY TO ACCEPT A DETACHABLE MAGAZINE AND HAS AT LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING CHARACTERISTICS:
(I) A FOLDING OR TELESCOPING STOCK;
(II) A PISTOL GRIP THAT PROTRUDES CONSPICUOUSLY BENEATH THE ACTION OF THE WEAPON;
(III) A THUMBHOLE STOCK;
(IV) A SECOND HANDGRIP OR A PROTRUDING GRIP THAT CAN BE HELD BY THE NON-TRIGGER HAND;
(V) A BAYONET MOUNT;
(VI) A FLASH SUPPRESSOR, MUZZLE BREAK, MUZZLE COMPENSATOR, OR THREADED BARREL DESIGNED TO ACCOMMODATE A FLASH SUPPRESSOR, MUZZLE BREAK, OR MUZZLE COMPENSATOR;
(VII) A GRENADE LAUNCHER

BUT Garands and Carbines may be exemped by the 50 year language. Not clear to me. Certainly a carbine magazine over 10 rds. is not.

Also, if this 50 year business does not clear Garands and Carbines, it's possible that removing the bayonet mount from the Garand or Carbine would then be legal.

In either case, no more than a 10 rd. magazine and then only load with 7 rds.

Also not clear yet if the Garand clip is considered a 'magazine'. It looks like it is exempted in Sec. 38, but IANAL so don't count on it. However, it should be ok anyway since it's capacity is less than 10, if you only load 7 in it .

A Mini-14 standard version with a 10 rd. or lower magazine should be ok. Only load 7.

A Springfield M1A without bayonet lug or flash hider should also be ok with a 7 rd. mag.

The NY law does not count the heat shroud on rifles as a disqualifying feature.

Several posts also worried that .22 pistols, High Standard, Colt, Ruger, S&W would be unusable because no 7-rd mags exist, or are likely to.

As I read the law, these guns and their 10 rd. mags are OK, just don't load more than 7. It WILL be illegal to buy new 10 rd. mags for them, and for the 10/22. But the exsisting 10 rd. mags are ok. Any new mags will have to be 7 or fewer.

Anyhow, that's what I see. Lot's of harrassment to no purpose, getting rid of cosmetic features, accomplishing almost nothing new of any value.

The only way to make any to change any of this is to cause politicians to lose their jobs. That happened in 1994 and it kept this sort of harrassment away for 20 years. It is the only thing that works, the only thing these politicians really give a damn about.

Trent
January 17, 2013, 02:24 AM
Careful, Mike.

The Civil War cost over 600 thousand lives (estimated), and they didn't have the weapons we have today. A modern civil war in a country with this level of technology? Easily tens of millions of casualties.

We aren't there, yet, man. Even if I agree with your sentiment.

TenDriver
January 17, 2013, 02:35 AM
I don't see how the Garand could be effected. The only evil feature being the bayo lug and the digital gymnastics required to load only 7 in a clip. (Maybe load 7 live rounds and a snap cap on top. Snap/rack, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang/PING. Rinse and repeat.

Or.... even better load a blank. I think that would cycle the action.

Best of luck to my brothers in NYS. This Southern boy has spent a lot of time flying around upstate and it's a beautiful place filled with friendly people. You deserve better.

Anyone know what a muzzle break is? I thought it was a muzzle brake. The devil is in the details.

ATBackPackin
January 17, 2013, 07:01 AM
I have a serious question. Does anyone know when, if, the last time someone was murdered with an affixed bayonet? And I mean outside of an actual war.

NHCraigT
January 17, 2013, 07:08 AM
At the Top Of That Page, it clearly states that the list is not complete, and that there are other firearms that may meet the definitions. So if its not listed, don't assume that it is "safe" - in NY:

..... This list is intended only as a guide and is not meant to be an exclusive, exhaustive list as there may be additional weapons that will also meet the amended definition under the new law......

http://troopers.ny.gov/Firearms/NYS_SAFE_Act/

george d dennis
January 17, 2013, 08:17 AM
i wouldnt talk to much about whats not on the list. the anti s are looking at
gun forums to.

tarosean
January 17, 2013, 08:22 AM
...

AirForceShooter
January 17, 2013, 08:29 AM
My question is what is Remington going to do?
They employ 1000 folks in Illion, NY and have made noises about moving out if bans start kicking in.
A number of states have offered them some great incentives to move..

But now Cuomo hasn't a tinkers chance of getting elected POTUS.

AFS

steveracer
January 17, 2013, 08:39 AM
Really, I believe Remington has a great case for a lawsuit. Their business (I assume billions) has been greatly damaged by an unconstitutional bill passed in NY. Why can they not sue the state?

ku4hx
January 17, 2013, 09:16 AM
I feel for you guys in NY; I truly do. I have never been so disgusted with a group of politicians in my entire 66 year life. I realize it's easy to say move out of the state and not so easy to do it, but to me it seems more and more like a state creating freedom loving refugees.

ngnrd
January 17, 2013, 09:42 AM
Wow, there's a lot of bad information in this thread. Let me see if I can clear this up a little.

First, don't bother with the list in the link above, or the links that site contains. If you really want to know what the law says, here's a link to the actual language.

http://open.nysenate.gov/legislation/bill/S2230-2013

Of note is the fact that all "Assault Weapons" must be registered within one year, and may not be transferred to another person residing in New York State, and that "High Capacity Ammunition Feeding Devices" may not be possessed, and may not be transferred to another person residing in New York State. Here's the definitions for those terms. Note that I <snipped> and {paraphrased} some of the extraneous information to make it somewhat easier to read. Also note that there's a list of exceptions at the end of each quote.

By New York State definition, "Assault Weapon" means:

A SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLE THAT HAS AN ABILITY TO ACCEPT A DETACHABLE MAGAZINE AND HAS AT LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING CHARACTERISTICS:

A FOLDING OR TELESCOPING STOCK; A PISTOL GRIP <snip>; A THUMBHOLE STOCK; A SECOND HANDGRIP <snip>; A BAYONET MOUNT; A FLASH SUPPRESSOR, MUZZLE BREAK, MUZZLE COMPENSATOR, OR THREADED BARREL <snip>; A GRENADE LAUNCHER

OR

A SEMIAUTOMATIC SHOTGUN THAT HAS AT LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING CHARACTERISTICS:

A FOLDING OR TELESCOPING STOCK; A THUMBHOLE STOCK; A SECOND HANDGRIP OR A PROTRUDING GRIP THAT CAN BE HELD BY THE NON-TRIGGER HAND;<snip>; A FIXED MAGAZINE CAPACITY IN EXCESS OF SEVEN ROUNDS; AN ABILITY TO ACCEPT A DETACHABLE MAGAZINE

OR

A SEMIAUTOMATIC PISTOL THAT HAS AN ABILITY TO ACCEPT A DETACHABLE MAGAZINE AND HAS AT LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING CHARACTERISTICS:

A FOLDING OR TELESCOPING STOCK; A THUMBHOLE STOCK; A SECOND HANDGRIP <snip>; CAPACITY TO ACCEPT AN AMMUNITION MAGAZINE THAT ATTACHES TO THE PISTOL OUTSIDE OF THE PISTOL GRIP; A THREADED BARREL <snip>; A SHROUD THAT IS ATTACHED TO, OR PARTIALLY OR COMPLETELY ENCIRCLES, THE BARREL <snip>; A MANUFACTURED WEIGHT OF FIFTY OUNCES OR MORE WHEN THE PISTOL IS UNLOADED

OR

A SEMIAUTOMATIC VERSION OF AN AUTOMATIC RIFLE, SHOTGUN OR FIREARM

OR

A REVOLVING CYLINDER SHOTGUN

OR

A SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLE, A SEMIAUTOMATIC SHOTGUN OR A SEMIAUTOMATIC PISTOL OR WEAPON DEFINED {in the 1994 AWB}

BUT DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY RIFLE, SHOTGUN OR PISTOL THAT IS:

MANUALLY OPERATED BY BOLT, PUMP, LEVER OR SLIDE ACTION; OR HAS BEEN RENDERED PERMANENTLY INOPERABLE; OR IS AN ANTIQUE FIREARM <snip>; A SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLE THAT CANNOT ACCEPT A DETACHABLE MAGAZINE THAT HOLDS MORE THAN FIVE ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION; A SEMIAUTOMATIC SHOTGUN THAT CANNOT HOLD MORE THAN FIVE ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION IN A FIXED OR DETACHABLE MAGAZINE; OR A RIFLE, SHOTGUN OR PISTOL, OR A REPLICA OR A DUPLICATE THEREOF, SPECIFIED IN APPENDIX A TO 18 U.S.C. 922; OR ANY FIREARM, RIFLE, OR SHOTGUN THAT WAS MANUFACTURED AT LEAST FIFTY YEARS PRIOR TO THE CURRENT DATE

And, also by New York State definition, "Large capacity ammunition feeding device" means:

a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device, that has a capacity <snip> to accept, more than ten rounds of ammunition, OR CONTAINS MORE THAN SEVEN ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION, OR IS OBTAINED AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF {this law} AND HAS A CAPACITY OF, <snip> MORE THAN SEVEN ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION

[The above] does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition OR A FEEDING DEVICE THAT IS A CURIO OR RELIC.

So, here are some quick observations ...

I think, if I put the wooden stock back on my Mini-14, instead of the folding stock, it would be legal, as would my Ruger factory 5-round magazine. But, my Remington R-15 VTR would be banned, even though it also came with a 5-round magazine from the factory, simply because there is no option to change out its pistol grip.

There are absolutely no references to revolvers, except shotguns with revolving cylinders.

There is a specific exemption for tube fed .22's, but no such exemption for other .22's. So, my Winchester 190 is OK, but the 10-22 may not be, depending on how it qualifies under the "one-feature" rule (target stock with a thumbhole grip? nope... banned).

Another interesting bit... the Desert Eagle is banned, due solely to it's weight (over 50 ounces is banned; the DE weighs about 70 oz.).

And, of particular interest... There is no differentiation between magazines for rifles and pistols. So, while most .45's will be OK due to their 7-round capacity, the vast majority of 9mm pistols are now effectively banned, because there are - to my knowledge - no 7-round magazines for most 9mm pistols. Likewise, many .22 pistols are effectively banned for the same reason.

Yeah... all this passed each house in less than a day (introduced on the 14th, signed into law on the 15th), with no public input, and no debate. Heck, I doubt anybody even had time to read it.

So, I wonder... can somebody that gets arrested for violation of this law claim that their rights have been violated because there was no due process granted when the law was passed?

I must say, I feel bad for the people of NYS. Surely there is a legal challenge in the works, right?

goldie
January 17, 2013, 10:06 AM
Now does this also mean that once all gun stores in new york sell their guns, they cant restock with new ones because they would come with a 10 round mag which cannot enter new york ? Also why is weight in a pistol an issue? its much harder to conceil a desert eagle, its like a brick ? Its the most mindless,senseless rushed lawmaking in the history of this country....

gbw
January 17, 2013, 10:14 AM
And, of particular interest... There is no differentiation between magazines for rifles and pistols. So, while most .45's will be OK due to their 7-round capacity, the vast majority of 9mm pistols are now effectively banned, because there are - to my knowledge - no 7-round magazines for most 9mm pistols. Likewise, many .22 pistols are effectively banned for the same reason.

This is only true for NEW guns, those sold after the bill was signed. Existing 10 rd. mags are OK, just don't load more than 7. And, for example, the 9mm Browning HPs that have 10 rd. mags. in NY are OK, same thing just load 7. At least that's how I read it.

But, if Ruger wants to sell new 10/22s or MkIIIs in NY, or if Browning wants to sell new HPs, they will now have to ship them with 7-rd. mags.

ephraimf
January 17, 2013, 10:26 AM
When does the law take effect? :banghead:

goldie
January 17, 2013, 10:29 AM
(But, if Ruger wants to sell new 10/22s or MkIIIs in NY, or if Browning wants to sell new HPs, they will now have to ship them with 7-rd. mags) So every gun store in new york will not be able to restock,putting them all out of buisness or filing for bankrupcy. nice economic move,too.:cuss::banghead::fire:

22-rimfire
January 17, 2013, 10:31 AM
NY Residents have one year to comply.

ngnrd
January 17, 2013, 11:26 AM
When does the law take effect? :banghead:The bill was introduced on Monday the 14th, and it was signed and took effect the next day, Tuesday the 15th. There is a provision that provides a registration period of one year. At which time New Yorkers will either be neutered by low capacity magazines, disarmed completely, or felons. Hey, at least they have choices, right?

David E
January 17, 2013, 11:39 AM
I'm glad cops agree affected. Points out how stupid and ill advised this is.

But why do I think the armed bodyguards of Cuomo and Doomberg are all still carrying high capacity magazines?

kayakersteve
January 17, 2013, 11:44 AM
http://www.governor.ny.gov/assets/documents/GPB_1_GUNS_MEMO.PDF

Some weapons are so dangerous and some ammunition devices are so lethal that we simply can not afford to keep selling them in our state.

HOOfan_1
January 17, 2013, 11:44 AM
Wonder how many people will refuse to register their guns?

lloveless
January 17, 2013, 11:48 AM
Time to get this to the Supreme court before the big O can pad the court.
ll

ephraimf
January 17, 2013, 11:52 AM
Do I have to get rid of my 8 round magazines within one year?

Can I fully load up my 8 round magazines until then?

GlowinPontiac
January 17, 2013, 11:54 AM
Do I have to get rid of my 8 round magazines within one year?

Can I fully load up my 8 round magazines until then?

If you live in new york yes they have to be gone or destroyed within a year.

No you can only load 7rnds no matter the capacity of the magazine. I believe its a misdemeanor and automatic confiscation of the mag if its loaded to 8.

jamesbeat
January 17, 2013, 12:30 PM
As a NY resident, and something of an 'outsider', this whole thing saddens me deeply but does not surprise me.

I am from England, but I came to live in the States three years ago to be with my wife.
I have not yet been here long enough to apply for citizenship, so I can't yet vote.
It seems that this is no handicap however, since nobody got to vote on this issue.
What a filthy underhand way to make laws!

From what little I've seen, this is the way politicians are in NY. They appear to think that they are superior to the people they represent, and behave like rulers rather than public servants (I'm looking at you too Bloomberg).

Guys, I was there in Britain when they banned semiauto rifles, and I was there when they banned handguns.
We can't let the same thing happen here.

All I can do for now is be an NRA member, but by the time the next election comes around, I'll be able to vote...

In the meantime, I guess I'll have to sell or destroy my standard capacity magazines within a year :(

HOOfan_1
January 17, 2013, 12:47 PM
Guess I also wonder how many will refuse to give up their 7+ round magazines.

I would either refuse to give them up, or be out of the state....no way I would stand for that crap.

goldie
January 17, 2013, 01:12 PM
Just came from a gun store on long island,& they now have to write down all info on ammo sales, with drivers license,& gun stores in new york cannot order any more guns that hold more than 7 rounds.Once their inventory is gone. they are so screwed right now, no one has any idea.Even the state police dont know whats really going on & what to enforce yet.Go to a gun store in new york, the phones are ringing off the hook,its insane here.....

jamesbeat
January 17, 2013, 01:31 PM
I wish it was that easy.
It's all very well saying you wouldn't give them up, but if you don't, like it or not you're a criminal.
Do I risk depriving my kids of a father for however long I would be in prison if I got caught? Should I risk being deprived of all of my Second Anendment rights by having a criminal record over a couple of magazines?
They have us over a barrel.

As to moving to another state, my wife and I would do so in a heartbeat if her divorce papers didn't forbid moving my stepson more than 30 miles away from his father.
Seven years to go until he's 18, then we're out if here.

pseudonymity
January 17, 2013, 02:09 PM
If you live in new york yes they have to be gone or destroyed within a year.

No you can only load 7rnds no matter the capacity of the magazine. I believe its a misdemeanor and automatic confiscation of the mag if its loaded to 8.

Oh man, it is much worse than that.

60 days from 1/15, it will be illegal to possess a mag larger than 10 rounds (aka pre-ban mags in NY). 10 round magazines that were possessed before 1/15 will still be legal.

60 days from 1/15 it will be a violation and fine to load more than 7 rounds in a 10 round mag in your home. Loading more than 7 rounds in a mag outside your home is a misdemeanor. Here is the very worst part - you can load more than 7 rounds in a 10 round mag at a firing range! I could not make this stuff up - you can load your mags up to shoot at targets, but not to protect your family in your own home.

It gets even better - in 90 days from 1/15 you can purchase a mag of any size that is a curio and relic. It has to be 50 years old or older, and only capable of being used in a firearm manufactured 50+ years ago. This probably means we can not keep any AK mags that are 50+ years old, but we can buy Garand en bloc clips that are more than 50 years old.

jamesbeat
January 17, 2013, 02:25 PM
60 days?!
I thought we ad a year to dispose of our >10 mags?

allaroundhunter
January 17, 2013, 02:30 PM
The Benelli M2 Tactical is an "assault shotgun" but the Benelli M4 isn't?.... What about the M1S90?

Heck, my Mossberg 930 JM will do the same thing as the aforementioned shotguns... Sorry, just read that that is not a complete list.

And James, I do believe that you still have 1 year....to move. And 10 round magazines are apparently okay so long as you possessed them prior to the bill being passed.

razorback2003
January 17, 2013, 02:35 PM
This whole law was meant to outlaw half the guns people own. What full sized semi auto pistol has a capacity of 7 or less, except a 1911?

I'd hate to own a gun store in NY right now with a good chunk of my inventory illegal to sell.

steveracer
January 17, 2013, 02:42 PM
^ this applies to one of my best friends. He's already packed up 600 pounds of inventory to send to me to sell for him here in Free America.

tarosean
January 17, 2013, 02:44 PM
I thought we ad a year to dispose of our >10 mags?

the year is to register that evil people killing rifle of mass destruction (or whatever they called it)

Ole Coot
January 17, 2013, 03:10 PM
Now all Ruger 10/22s are illegal and all Ruger 22 pistols. A 1911 model 45 is legal. A Bushmaster 223 that wouldn't exit a shot center mass of a criminal is illegal yet a Remington 700 in 30-06 that would exit a couple of people is legal. Who came up with these safe/not safe firearms.

jamesbeat
January 17, 2013, 03:10 PM
Aw nuts :(

Am I able to 'neuter' a magazine so I can still use it for display?
If so, what would I have to do with it to ensure it complies?
Would it be enough to remove and destroy the spring and follower?

goldie
January 17, 2013, 03:10 PM
I cant see how the desert eagle is banned, just on weight alone.There is no way this gun is commonly used in a crime, its like carrying a brick, ammo, especially 50ae is too expensive, & the gun is too expensive too.Maybe they banned it because its in every movie,like they did here with the butterfly knife.This is mindboggling.its outragous,these desicions are clear violations of gunowners & citizens rights, as was the way it was bulldozed into law with no say or opposition.

jamesbeat
January 17, 2013, 03:18 PM
Surely you don't really think that this has anything to do with preventing crime?

bhesler
January 17, 2013, 03:28 PM
Can't people just convert their AR's to be featureless, like some folks have done in California?

I won't comment on the upper, but I actually like the stock in this article, in comparison to some of the others. (I still think the one feature test is ridiculous)

http://www.guns.com/2012/12/12/thordsen-customs-frs-15-featureless-rifle-stock-for-californian-ars/

Claude Clay
January 17, 2013, 03:28 PM
-----------^ Paul, you & me both

rdhood
January 17, 2013, 03:38 PM
Can't people just convert their AR's to be featureless, like some folks have done in California?

Uh... no. the law states: "A SEMIAUTOMATIC VERSION OF AN AUTOMATIC RIFLE, SHOTGUN OR FIREARM", or some such nonsense.

An AR with this butt stock would still be a semi automatic version of an AR-15. The REAL question is: how much difference does their have to be before they are considered different guns? Would modifying the receiver in some way make it different?

goldie
January 17, 2013, 05:12 PM
Heres something in the gun owners favor;In a 2008 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court seemed to indicate that guns protected by the constitution are those in common use. New York could face a challenge from someone arguing there are probably close to 10 million AR-15 type semi-automatic rifles in common use in the U.S.

Trent
January 17, 2013, 05:16 PM
Further than that, US vs. Miller ruled that the second amendment protects "arms in common use by the military" - not just "common use", generally.

(They made that flippant remark when ruling that a sawed off 12 gauge does not meet the protection of the 2nd amendment because it's not a type in common use by the military)

goldie
January 17, 2013, 05:31 PM
^Trent, you posted in another thread they want to include the 1911,Luger, Beretta 92 & Glock ?Well most of them are in common use,too,& just because there was a class 3 version of it at one is another excuse to expand & erradicate.

jamesbeat
January 17, 2013, 05:40 PM
I don't really think that the NY politicians pay any attention to the law when legislating against guns.
It would give the NRA something to take them to court over however...

It would be nice if this nonsense got overturned in the SCOTUS, they need to be told that they can't trample all over the Second Amendment.

Trent
January 17, 2013, 05:47 PM
With the number of Supreme Court cases out there specifying that the second amendment is:

A) An individual right,
B) applied to the states through the 14th amendment,
C) applies to arms in common us by the military

While the Supreme court never specifically identified a class of weapons, they HAVE only ruled to exclude weapons "not in common use by the military".

A prohibition on military-style rifles in ANY state is unconstitutional.

Period.

This needs challenged.

goldie
January 17, 2013, 10:02 PM
Some of the guns on this list are rare & expensive,like the FNC, Galil,Swiss Sig 550; i would bet almost anything that no U.S. civilian has ever been killed with any of these guns;Does anyone know how rare the Sig amt & Sig 57 are? they are almost non existant,& should be in some kind of collector class or something.there should at least be a category that puts rare guns that were limited in this country, no longer imported into a different class.Just trying to find some kind of reason & logic,but look who we're dealing with.:confused:...

HOOfan_1
January 18, 2013, 11:03 AM
What is the likelihood that this law gets shot down? Hardly any guns have magazines that small. I can't imagine manufacturers would bother making magazines that small just for 1 state either.

goldie
January 18, 2013, 11:23 AM
I bet when prohibition went into affect, everone who had alcohol in their home hoarded it, they sure didnt turn it in..

steelerdude99
January 18, 2013, 11:40 AM
I bet when prohibition went into affect, everyone who had alcohol in their home hoarded it, they sure didn't turn it in..

But in NY state, do they not know who has what firearm by make, model and s/n? They can then make their way to each person of a firearm that WAS legal and is now illegal.

chuck

Trent
January 18, 2013, 11:45 AM
Isn't it now possible for the State of NY to inspect bound books as part of this law? I thought I remembered reading that in the law, for ammo sellers.

If so, they'll be able to find out exactly WHO bought WHAT, and WHEN, and compare that to their registry.

Kind of a smorgasbord of people to get warrants for, waiting there in those bound books.

"Oh look, Mr. Doe at 123 Patriot Lane bought an AR15 in 2005 at Dicks Sporting Goods, but didn't register it."

HOOfan_1
January 18, 2013, 11:51 AM
Isn't it now possible for the State of NY to inspect bound books as part of this law? I thought I remembered reading that in the law, for ammo sellers.

If so, they'll be able to find out exactly WHO bought WHAT, and WHEN, and compare that to their registry.

Kind of a smorgasbord of people to get warrants for, waiting there in those bound books.

"Oh look, Mr. Doe at 123 Patriot Lane bought an AR15 in 2005 at Dicks Sporting Goods, but didn't register it."

Oh I am sure they expect a lot of of neighbor tattle tales as well...

Maybe they can put cameras into the homes of those who own firearms too, just to make sure they don't load more than 7 rounds in a magazine.

Trent
January 18, 2013, 12:08 PM
Question.

Someone who owns a rifle, elects not to register it, and later is "found out" by a neighbor (say a child's friend learns of it, children talk you know).... is the owner then considered mentally unbalanced because he fears his government?

What about affiliation with certain political groups?

The mental health issue, without any defined conditions, appears to be a serious downward spiral.

20 years ago we disciplined children who misbehaved. Now an astonishing amount of them are judged to suffer from some ailment or another, and shoved full of pharmaceuticals.

I worry the same thing is beginning with firearms owners.

Demonize them. Make them paranoid. Declare them mentally incompetent over "delusions", and prohibit them from owning arms.

I'm not far off the mark, I fear. They're already starting the process with social media.

"Why do you need an AR-15?"

"To protect my way of life from a tyrannical Government."

"That rifle is going to protect you when Uncle Sam sends an Apache to knock on your front door? You're delusional and shouldn't be allowed to own firearms."

(I literally heard this argument just last night, arguing with an anti-gunner with the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence organization)

mikechandler
January 20, 2013, 10:43 PM
In NAZI Germany there were rewards offered for information leading to arrests. Oh yes, there will be lots of tattle-tales.

I really wish that NY gun owners would simply refuse, let their jails overflow, and let it get pushed to the SCOTUS. The whole state could be shut down while they sort it out, if there's enough incarcerated individuals (like a million or more).

If it came to AZ, and I doubt it ever would or could, I would be willing to be jailed for my rights. Because I firmly believe that our 1st amendment rights are hanging by a thin thread -> our right to bear arms. The Socialists know they need to disarm The People in order to fundamentally change our government. It's been written in history time after time after time.

And even still, none of this will stop another mass shooting, because the real problem is gun-free zones; constitutionally prohibited areas that turn citizens into targets for criminals and the insane.

goldie
January 20, 2013, 10:52 PM
^Trent; loose lips sink ships; you would have to wind up living a double life as a gun owner....

vtail
January 20, 2013, 11:32 PM
What about Pez dispensers? Don't they hold 10? Can they be modified for 7?

MICHAEL T
January 21, 2013, 01:04 AM
The link take you to a page that has now been removed . Guess they want to add more,

HOOfan_1
January 21, 2013, 07:05 PM
Looks like there is a push by gun advocates to refuse to register. Unjust laws should be protested...

http://www.newser.com/story/161344/assault-weapon-advocates-boycott-ny-gun-law.html

friscolatchi
January 21, 2013, 08:34 PM
Firearms and amunition manufacturers! Do not sell to LE in NYS. Do not sell at all in NYS. Boycott NYS.

matt35750
January 21, 2013, 10:57 PM
are ar15 22lr like the mp 15 affected?

Tom from WNY
January 22, 2013, 12:05 AM
I looked at the photos - images. OH WOW! The misidenifications were astounding. Those alone could get you in trouble!

The comment that it was put together by a high school student was not inappropriate. Heck, when I was in high school (a NY rural publik scrool), I could identify guns better than that!

Go with the characteristics.

HOOfan_1
January 22, 2013, 09:53 AM
Anyone who refuses to see the wisdom in that, is a fool. History is replete, with examples of exact such foolishness.

The sleeper has awakened

Or as your father said

"Let us not rail about justice while we have arms and the freedom to use them"

If you enjoyed reading about "NY Gun Law....Weapons Affected." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!