Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 5/29/2012 7:35:23 AM EDT
I probably already know the answer, but is this legal in NJ?

Link

Link Posted: 5/29/2012 10:31:17 AM EDT
I believe we have this conversation three or four times a year and the outcome is always "undecided."  If it makes you happy, I have had one for two years and have not been thrown in the hole yet.
Link Posted: 5/29/2012 10:58:18 AM EDT
Everything was all fun and games until someone went and asked the ATF if they would consider this a telescoping stock.  ATF said, "yes".
Link Posted: 5/29/2012 1:06:48 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/29/2012 1:09:36 PM EDT by mak0]
Originally Posted By Tom488:
Everything was all fun and games until someone went and asked the ATF if they would consider this a telescoping stock.  ATF said, "yes".


I've heard that before as well. Even though it makes zero sense since if the PRS was just a fixed stock it would be ok, but since it has a buttpad that can be made LONGER if desired it's not legal. So much in that determination, even for the ATF.
Link Posted: 5/29/2012 2:08:58 PM EDT
Originally Posted By mak0:
I've heard that before as well. Even though it makes zero sense since if the PRS was just a fixed stock it would be ok, but since it has a buttpad that can be made LONGER if desired it's not legal. So much in that determination, even for the ATF.

Note that the ATF didn't say it was illegal - as they don't care about individual state laws.  All they said was THEY would consider it a telescoping stock.  I'll also point out that no one has been charged with violation of the NJ AWB via the "substantially identical" clause (or at least brought to trial) since 1996 (when one judge declared the law unconstitutional) - and there appears to be no appetite for such out there at all.

As for me, I've got a Magpul PRS stock, AND a threaded muzzle brake, on my scary-looking black rifle.  Of course, it's a bolt gun  

Link Posted: 5/29/2012 3:17:00 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Tom488:
Originally Posted By mak0:
I've heard that before as well. Even though it makes zero sense since if the PRS was just a fixed stock it would be ok, but since it has a buttpad that can be made LONGER if desired it's not legal. So much in that determination, even for the ATF.

Note that the ATF didn't say it was illegal - as they don't care about individual state laws.  All they said was THEY would consider it a telescoping stock.  I'll also point out that no one has been charged with violation of the NJ AWB via the "substantially identical" clause (or at least brought to trial) since 1996 (when one judge declared the law unconstitutional) - and there appears to be no appetite for such out there at all.

As for me, I've got a Magpul PRS stock, AND a threaded muzzle brake, on my scary-looking black rifle.  Of course, it's a bolt gun  



I guess I should have phrased that a little different, what I meant was that it would be considered illegal to use on AR's if the federal AWB was still in effect even though it accomplishes the exact opposite of what the law intended to prohibit.
Link Posted: 5/29/2012 3:51:32 PM EDT
IMO, the Magpul PRS stock has a fixed stock with an adjustable butt plate and cheek piece.  In no way does the stock "fold or telescope" per the NJ statutes.  But who am I.
Link Posted: 5/29/2012 6:04:39 PM EDT
Originally Posted By 3690:
IMO, the Magpul PRS stock has a fixed stock with an adjustable butt plate and cheek piece.  In no way does the stock "fold or telescope" per the NJ statutes.  But who am I.


I agree.

Even if it does meet some broad definition of"telescoping", it can be argued that the buttpad is telescoping not the stock itself.
Link Posted: 5/30/2012 5:59:35 AM EDT
As per my local State Police ... NO GO on the stock, I must pin the telescoping part to prevent it from moving at all. They consider this a "collapsible" stock... What a sad state we live in...  
Link Posted: 5/30/2012 8:58:33 AM EDT
It is adjustable not collasping.Max adjustment range is 2.5 inches not 10. It is a grey area thats for sure!
Link Posted: 5/30/2012 10:32:42 AM EDT
It is amazing what the government finds to be illegal. It decreases the stock length by a quarter of an inch and can maximize it by 3 quarters of an inch but I'll be damned that .25" is a recipe for disaster. Can you imagine what an average joe from new jersey could do with a weapon of mass destruction like that buttstock.
Link Posted: 5/30/2012 6:24:36 PM EDT
the state would lose this argument if they tried to prosecute someone.  The stock is fixed, the adjustable piece does not collapse nor does it telescope.  In no way does this stock break the written law which is why you've not seen anyone convicted for it's use.  This stock does not shorten it's length which is the spirit of the law.
Link Posted: 6/14/2012 7:20:36 PM EDT
Originally Posted By RUTGERS95:
the state would lose this argument if they tried to prosecute someone.  The stock is fixed, the adjustable piece does not collapse nor does it telescope.  In no way does this stock break the written law which is why you've not seen anyone convicted for it's use.  This stock does not shorten it's length which is the spirit of the law.


I agree, but to win this case in court will require large amounts of money and legal representation, and it could bankrupt you, lose the wife (hmmm not necessary a loss), and all for what? , who can take the chance?  
Link Posted: 6/15/2012 3:49:16 AM EDT
Link Posted: 6/15/2012 7:48:12 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/16/2012 1:56:56 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Tom488:
Note that the ATF didn't say it was illegal - as they don't care about individual state laws.  All they said was THEY would consider it a telescoping stock . . .


While this is true I know in the case of muzzle devices NJ does not do it's own testing but rather relies on the determination of the ATF whether a device is considered a flashhider or muzzle brake.  I would posit that they would also abide by the ATF rulings of whether a stock is collapsible or not.  While I would love to have a PRS on my precision rifle I am not willing to take the chance.
Link Posted: 6/29/2012 3:22:13 PM EDT
why are you the one ft.dix called cheynne mtn to see if it is legal?range 14 is a total  joke anymore!
Link Posted: 6/29/2012 4:04:48 PM EDT
I'd love to hear that call....."Hi random guy at store, this is a random guy from a range, I wanted to ask you a legal question, I trust you know what I'm talking about, because I don't, I want to take it as sound legal advice"
Link Posted: 6/30/2012 5:22:02 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Jimi:
why are you the one ft.dix called cheynne mtn to see if it is legal?range 14 is a total  joke anymore!


That would explain a lot of the BS that happens at R-14.
Link Posted: 7/4/2012 11:22:40 AM EDT
The person at cheyenne mtn would not answer the question! Then he proceded to tell them never call there again about gun laws!Range 14 is a range  now it seems like they want to enforce firearm laws and ruin peoples live over  it!
Top Top