Posted: 5/25/2006 9:39:00 AM EDT
|
For all the lawyers out there............. I am continually perplexed by the NJ law about "Semi-Auto Assault Weapons" {2C:39-1w(1)} and the NJAG Guideline {2C:39-1w(2)} regarding the "Substantially Identical" provision. Yeah, Yeah, this S*#T again.  The 1990 Law lists certain firearms by name and some firearms by type or series. The 1996 AG Guideline states, "......a firearm is an assault firearm if it is included on the list of banned firearms or if it is manufactured under a different designation than a firearm on the list but is "substantially identical" to a specific listed firearm." IMO, this means that a firearm so named on the list, for example an HK91, is banned even if the evil features are removed, because it is banned by name. AND, a PTR-91 clone that has all or some of the evil features of the HK is also banned because of it being substantially identical. If this firearm does not have these features, it is legal. BUT, and a big BUT, if the firearm is a type or series clone or copy, such as "Avtomat Kalashnikov type semi-automatic firearms", aka WASR-10, it is legal as long as it does not have evil features. Right? SO, why isn't a firearm, that has a model name of "AK-74" or "AR-15", legal if it does not have evil features? These are listed as type or series firearms and not specifically named. Could not the evil features be removed and the firearm be legal? Why does the "Man" look the other way for SARs, CETMEs and WASRs, but will hang you for the model named AR-15s and AKs? |
Whack...That is the hammer hitting the nail on the head. Ambiguity is the key. I deal with it all the time in contracts and such. I have seen people screwed and a lot of lost money and work cause of contracts intentional worded ambiguously. The more precisely something is defined, the less wiggle room an overzealous DA has which they hate. PK90....I agree with everything you say and have had that same question for a while. Another thing is, if the firearm is not in the list...does that mean I can have it with as many evil features as I want? (eg. PS90, Sig 556) To quote the Donger "this a place is so confusing" |
|
1919a4????? |
|
Here is a little clarification from the State Police. > NJSP Home | > Services Related Links Firearms Information Both the Division of Criminal Justice and the State Police Firearms Unit have received a number of inquiries whether the Colt Match Target Rifle and the Springfield M1A are considered assault firearms under New Jersey law. Based on our review of the law and the Attorney General guidelines, we conclude that neither of the two firearms are prohibited under State law. The Colt Match Target Rifle, based on the manufacturer’s specifications, is a new line of rifles and is not part of the AR-15 series, and thus, is not prohibited under N.J.S.A.2 C: 39-1w(1). Although this new rifle, may resemble the Colt AR-15, there have been substantial changes to the firearm, including the receiver which is not identical to an AR-15 receiver. In addition, because of changes in the configuration of the firearm, the Colt Match Target Rifle is not substantially identical to a prohibited firearm and prohibited under this classification. See N.J.S.A.2C:39-1w(2) and Attorney General’s Guidelines Regarding the “Substantially Identical” Provision in the State’s Assault Firearms Laws dated August 19, 1996. The Springfield M1A is not one of the enumerated firearms which are specifically prohibited under the State’s assault firearms laws. It has been prohibited in this State as being substantially identical to a named firearm. However, according to the manufacturer’s specifications, the M1A has been modified. The modified M1A, which became available in 1994, would not be considered to be substantially identical to a prohibited firearm in accordance with the statutory provision and the Attorney General’s guidelines cited above. However, earlier versions of the M1A which contains at least two of the criteria identified in Paragraph B of the Attorney General’s Guidelines, supra, would still be considered to be substantially identical to a prohibited firearm and continue to be banned under our State law. As a result, it will be necessary to clearly distinguish the physical characteristics or lack of physical characteristics when making a determination regarding the M1A rifle. Neither this clarification regarding the classification of the Colt Match Target Rifle and the M1A Rifle, nor the guidelines issued August 19, 1996, regarding the “substantially identical” provision of the assault weapons law applies to firearms that are specifically listed in N.J.S.A.2C:39-1w(2) as prohibited firearms or to firearms which are banned at “types” of named prohibited firearms. If you have any questions regarding the classification of these two firearms, please contact the: State Police Firearms Unit at 609-882-2000 or Deputy Attorney General William J. Zaorski at 609-984-2796. divisional: njsp home | about us | recruiting | division | public info | crime & technology | highlights | faqs | news | sitemap | services | contact us departmental: lps home | contact us | news | about us | faqs | library | employment | programs and units | services a-z statewide: njhome | my new jersey | people | business | government | departments | search Copyright © State of New Jersey, 1996-2002 Department of Law & Public Safety Division of New Jersey State Police P.O. Box 7068 West Trenton, NJ 08628 I am guessing that the lowers are unable to be modified into a full automatic, therefor it is not identical. What ever it means, it allows us to have what we have. I have both an AK clone and a PTR91, along with several AR's, and I am unsure why they are legal unless there have been similiar changes. 
|
True...but I took the A.G guide lines as applying only to clones of the listed banned firearms, were as say the PS90 is a complete new firearm in reference to the list of banned names and not really a clone to any of them......unless it is a clone, cause I don't know the specs on all the firearms in the list 
|
IMO, it is not a direct clone of any named firearm, but what the AG stated is that any firearm that meets the "assault weapon" criteria, i.e. 2 evil features, is "substantially identical" to the named firearms, not a specific one.  Anyway, that is what will be told to you, or something to that affect. The Federal Ban had a specific named list, not types or series, and it included the evil features definition, not a substantially identical clause. This also may be used against you. Here is a portion of the Federal Ban:
|