Posted: 9/13/2008 10:43:55 AM EDT
|
Has anyone come accross the CT definition for a detachable mag? I know Cali has a definition - "detachable magazine" means any ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with neither disassembly of the firearm action nor use of a tool being required. A bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool. Ammunition feeding device includes any belted or linked ammunition, but does not include clips, en bloc clips, or stripper clips that load cartridges into the magazine. Just thinking about that "bullet button" again and wondering if that would fly in CT (plus it's been kinda dead around here lately). I would rather not ask our friends at SLFU............. |
I've wondered this as well - the bullet button is a neat idea, especially for guys like me who are only going to be in CT for a finite period of time. It sucks to have to buy a preban at a premium price that I won't "need" for too long. It would be much more reasonable to buy a newly-manufactured "evil" firearm, install the bullet button and then just remove it when I leave. Funny that you should ask about the bullet button, as it was only a few months ago that I did some digging to try and find a CT definition for detachable magazine and couldn't. Just to throw a little bit of weirdness into what you would think of as logical thought, during the 1994 ban, BATFE considered the SAFN-49 to be an "assault weapon" because the SAFN-49's had a "detachable magazine" despite the fact that the magazine could not hold ammunition when removed from the rifle. |
|
California AWB: 12276.1. (a) Notwithstanding Section 12276, "assault weapon" shall also mean any of the following: (1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following: (A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon. (B) A thumbhole stock. (C) A folding or telescoping stock. (D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher. (E) A flash suppressor. (F) A forward pistol grip. (2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds. (3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches. But they have a definition of what that actually means. I can't find a definition anywhere in our statute. The bullet button bypasses their law, so I don't see why it wouldn't bypass ours. If not the bullet button, then onw of those kits that uses a hex key or bolt to actually secure the mag in place so that it can't be popped out with unscrewwing the mechanism. |
Unfortunately I don't think that CT went so far as to provide a definition which means that the next step would be to consult SLFU (which is about as effective as using a Magic 8-ball) and get an opinion letter. |
Consulting SLFU =  Does anyone think that asking - "In reference to Sec.53-202a of the Connecticut Statute, how does the State of Connecticut define a "Detachable Magazine?" - could open a can of worms or backfire in any way, shape or form? |
I'm not sure how they'd react, it's so darn hit-or-miss with them that you never really know. On the other hand, I think that the only thing that's being risked is whether or not there's an opportunity to use the bullet button in CT for CT AWB compliance... and nobody else seems to have tried it thus far, so it doesn't seem to be dangerous ground. I'm not an attorney, nor do I play one on TV, but I'd be sure to carefully word any opinion request/question with information specific to how California has theirs worded. That the spirit of "detachable" refers to the ability to quickly, and without any tools or other objects (such as a bullet or a wrench) be able to remove an empty magazine and reload a loaded magazine into a firearm. Afterall, even firearms with "fixed" magazines can have their magazines removed with tools... and that doesn't make them "detachable." Where they could get tricky is by saying that an AR-15-type firearm is designed to have a detachable magazine, but I think that's a pretty weak argument. |
|
I think using a gimmick button is asking for trouble. The magazine still detaches. Plus, you still have the parts to assemble an assault weapon and that's in the statutes (4) A part or combination of parts designed or intended to convert a firearm into an assault weapon, as defined in subdivision (3) of this subsection, or any combination of parts from which an assault weapon, as defined in subdivision (3) of this subsection, may be rapidly assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person. |
The catch is that it requires tools to detach the magazine and at least from a Federal standpoint, that's been a key factor. EXAMPLES: (1) If you've got a post-ban AR with a permanently attached muzzlebrake and you've also got a Dremel on your work desk, couldn't you rapidly remove the brake and restore the use of the threaded muzzle that is designed to accomodate a flash suppressor? So, by the Connecticut standard, does everyone who owns a post-ban AR (with a brake) and a Dremel have an illegal assault weapon? Obviously not. (2) What about collapsible stocks that are pinned open? Does also owning a pair of needle-nosed pliers and a punch constitute an illegal assault weapon? Heck, some of them that I've seen have only required a screwdriver. So why wouldn't that same standard apply to a magazine that's been fixed but can be removed by tools? Ahhhhh... Connecticut... where taxes are high, people are miserable and the firearms laws are poorly written. 
|
I would actually be more interested in using this product instead of the bullet button. This one actually requires a wrench to unscrew the catch and drop the mag out.
This is possibly one of the greyest areas of the statute. If I have a few prebans and postbans. I could pop a few pins and swap over uppers making a postban and illegal assault weapon. That wouldn't even require tools like it would to remove this magazine. Those fixed magazine kits are California compliant and Cali has a similarly written AWB to us. With one exception, they clarify what a detachable magazine is. It may be worth an email to the SLFU, the worst thing that can happen is they can say - no that doesn't fly or we have no answer. It's not like I am asking them about prebans or thumbhole stocks or AK types. |
I think it's a worthwhile pursuit. I see no downside to asking them about this. Worst case scenario is that they say "no, in our opinion that's detachable." I doubt you'd get a "we have no answer" since you're simply asking them state whether SLFU would consider this to be a "fixed magazine" or "detachable magazine" firearm if a magazine requires tools to remove. |
Not sure. Might be hard to convince a Jury that it's not a detachable magazine. Currently it's like the definition of "Loaded" from 53-206d; it's undefined. The Jury has to find as part of a conviction that the weapon was "loaded" as part of the verdict. It could mean "chambered", it could mean bullets in the magazine... all depends how good your lawyer is I suppose. So I guess the question is; how good is your lawyer? 
|
The state DEP states that a loaded firearm is one with a live round in the chamber or magazine, so that may come into play if something like that ever came up in court. To be safe, I always remove the magazine (or empty it) and empty the chamber, when ever an unloaded firearm is needed (transport, pre/post hunting times, etc.) Most of the time I leave the action open, but that is just so I can reconfirm the firearm is unloaded. |
Not true, doesn't affect 53-206d. Definitions in statutes aren't universal. The scope of the definition doesn't apply to other places that it doesn't specify. Jury Instructions: www.jud.ct.gov/ji/criminal/Part8/8.2-17.htm |
Very good. But I'd like to keep him, my real estate team and insurance people seperate from my hobby
|
Not really in this case. There is almost nothing that can be lost from it. But it looks like there is nothing that can be gained from it either so......... |
Not sure....... Don't know where I can go from here. |
I'd love to move to Colorado. You can't have any AK in 7.62x39 in CT. Other than that the law is much like the federal AWB. |
Izhmash (Saiga) AK101 > WASR-3 Bumping some Wolf from my AK101 
|
I'd say the Saiga is WAY better than a WASR. I have three WASRs and one Arsenal. The quality of the Arsenal makes the WASRs look like garbage. The quality of the WASRs can vary greatly, although none of them come close to an Arsenal. You could bring your Saiga back to CT if you pin/weld the brake and grind off any bayonet lug. Can't tell if you have a folding stock on it, but that would be a no-go as well. |