User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 5:52:32 PM EDT
[#1]
don't bother.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 6:03:15 PM EDT
[#2]
Nope, no relevance anymore. And no you can't hand down your heirloom to your children anymore, which by the way pisses me the FUCK off that these cocksuckers think they can tell you and I what we can and can not do with OUR legally obtained private property. FUAC.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 7:38:40 PM EDT
[#3]
If it was legal before, then it is legal now, you just have to register it eventually. If you don't want to register, you can take off all the features in an approved way (we don't know what that is), or sell it out of state. It will probably shake out that pre-94 bans can have all features and 9/14/94-1/14/13 guns will be able to have the one as before, but the law doesn't exactly say that yet either. Just stand by for now, we'll know more in a few months...maybe...great law huh?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 7:57:02 PM EDT
[#4]
Quoted:
Nope, no relevance anymore. And no you can't hand down your heirloom to your children anymore, which by the way pisses me the FUCK off that these cocksuckers think they can tell you and I what we can and can not do with OUR legally obtained private property. FUAC. Hand down what rifle? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 8:01:35 PM EDT
[#5]
So what does it mean where is says now any assault weapon with a detachable magazine and one military style feature?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 8:14:45 PM EDT
[#6]
The old AWB was struck when the SAFE Act went into effect. There is no pre/post ban anymore; it's all ban.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 9:06:03 PM EDT
[#7]
Quoted:
The old AWB was struck when the SAFE Act went into effect. There is no pre/post ban anymore; it's all ban. The new language actually incorporates by reference the old ban language and the two classes of rifles are explicitly referenced, the issue is they are distinguished but then not treated differently. In not treating them differently there is a really good argument for essentially eliminating the prior restrictions such that what was previously known as a ban compliant or post-ban gun can now have all of the features of a pre-ban or pre-94 ban gun so long as it is registered when the registration becomes mandatory. We should be leery of anything that might appear to benefit us at this point though...because it is written poorly, apt to be amended and the legislative intent would seem to contradict the actual language. So, I think we are all just stuck waiting for a while... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 9:29:38 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
Quoted:
The old AWB was struck when the SAFE Act went into effect. There is no pre/post ban anymore; it's all ban. The new language actually incorporates by reference the old ban language and the two classes of rifles are explicitly referenced, the issue is they are distinguished but then not treated differently. In not treating them differently there is a really good argument for essentially eliminating the prior restrictions such that what was previously known as a ban compliant or post-ban gun can now have all of the features of a pre-ban or pre-94 ban gun so long as it is registered when the registration becomes mandatory. We should be leery of anything that might appear to benefit us at this point though...because it is written poorly, apt to be amended and the legislative intent would seem to contradict the actual language. So, I think we are all just stuck waiting for a while... That is to clarify that pre-94's are no longer exempt from classification as Assault Weapons. Your pistol gripped post-94 is an assault weapon. Adding features is irrelevant because it's already an assault weapon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 9:40:01 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The old AWB was struck when the SAFE Act went into effect. There is no pre/post ban anymore; it's all ban. The new language actually incorporates by reference the old ban language and the two classes of rifles are explicitly referenced, the issue is they are distinguished but then not treated differently. In not treating them differently there is a really good argument for essentially eliminating the prior restrictions such that what was previously known as a ban compliant or post-ban gun can now have all of the features of a pre-ban or pre-94 ban gun so long as it is registered when the registration becomes mandatory. We should be leery of anything that might appear to benefit us at this point though...because it is written poorly, apt to be amended and the legislative intent would seem to contradict the actual language. So, I think we are all just stuck waiting for a while... That is to clarify that pre-94's are no longer exempt from classification as Assault Weapons. Your pistol gripped post-94 is an assault weapon. Adding features is irrelevant because it's already an assault weapon. That sure seems to be how it reads today. We'll see what tomorrow brings I guess... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 9:54:38 PM EDT
[#10]
What a shit thread this is. A bunch of guesses put forth as fact.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 9:57:10 PM EDT
[#11]
Quoted:
What a shit thread this is. A bunch of guesses put forth as fact. That's what the resident lawyer-in-training does best. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 10:05:32 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted:
What a shit thread this is. A bunch of guesses put forth as fact. That's where this shitty legislation has left us...the words make sense but I don't want to be the first one to test their limits when they are contrary to what the legislature seems to be trying to do. So we are left in nowhere-land... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 10:05:48 PM EDT
[#13]
Quoted:
Quoted:
What a shit thread this is. A bunch of guesses put forth as fact. That's what the resident lawyer-in-training does best. Oh, now you're following me around again? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 10:16:24 PM EDT
[#14]
Paranoia will destroy ya!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 10:38:26 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted: Two questions here guys... If you own a pre-94 AR15 is it even considered a "pre-ban" with the new laws? If it has bayonet lug, flash suppressor, 6 position stock etc. Just confused because in the new law it states you can only have one feature. Next since they are banned for sale or purchase in NY, is it not possible, several years from now to hand an AR15 down to your kid? Thanks The Pre/post ban issue may be addressed by amendments. I think it is meaningless now, the State Police seem to be threatening to enforce it anyways. Not sure how it matters if you have a Pre ban. You will not be able to give your kid the rifle unless he leaves NY and you send it to an Ffl in the state he moves to. Private ownership of ar15s ends with present owners in ny. Once we all die there will be no legal ar15s in the state
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 5:34:50 AM EDT
[#16]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Two questions here guys... If you own a pre-94 AR15 is it even considered a "pre-ban" with the new laws? If it has bayonet lug, flash suppressor, 6 position stock etc. Just confused because in the new law it states you can only have one feature. Next since they are banned for sale or purchase in NY, is it not possible, several years from now to hand an AR15 down to your kid? Thanks The Pre/post ban issue may be addressed by amendments. I think it is meaningless now, the State Police seem to be threatening to enforce it anyways. Not sure how it matters if you have a Pre ban. You will not be able to give your kid the rifle unless he leaves NY and you send it to an Ffl in the state he moves to. Private ownership of ar15s ends with present owners in ny. Once we all die there will be no legal ar15s in the state Is there any applicability of a revocable trust? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 6:12:49 AM EDT
[#17]
Quoted: I have no ideaQuoted: Quoted: Two questions here guys... If you own a pre-94 AR15 is it even considered a "pre-ban" with the new laws? If it has bayonet lug, flash suppressor, 6 position stock etc. Just confused because in the new law it states you can only have one feature. Next since they are banned for sale or purchase in NY, is it not possible, several years from now to hand an AR15 down to your kid? Thanks The Pre/post ban issue may be addressed by amendments. I think it is meaningless now, the State Police seem to be threatening to enforce it anyways. Not sure how it matters if you have a Pre ban. You will not be able to give your kid the rifle unless he leaves NY and you send it to an Ffl in the state he moves to. Private ownership of ar15s ends with present owners in ny. Once we all die there will be no legal ar15s in the state Is there any applicability of a revocable trust?  |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 6:23:21 AM EDT
[#18]
As the law reads if you legally own an "assault rifle" before the enactment of law there is no limit on features. Nothing in the law says you cant add whatever the fuck you want.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 6:38:20 AM EDT
[#19]
I know this topic came up in another thread and it boils down to "who knows". People have called the NYSP hotline and have gotten conflicting answers. I guess it all depends upon what time of day you call, the day of the week, the alignment of the stars and the flip of a coin by the person answering the question as to what answer you will get. For me, since there really is no hurry at this time, I just leave everything as-is until it can be sorted out. I see no reason to go out today and have a thread cut on a threadless barrel or add a collapsible stock to a post-1994 firearm. Hopefully by early summer the lawsuits will have been filed and we will know whether or not all of this is on hold.
(oops, back to work... the compiler finished...) |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 7:51:46 AM EDT
[#20]
But putting on an adjustable stock and permanently pinning it to a fixed position thats comfortable to the user is still ok correct? Thats the one thing that I had to change on mine because I have short popeye arms and the factory position of the stock had me all sorts of standing weird. I didn't go to the extreme of putting epoxy over the roll pin but it ain't coming out without a drill bit.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 8:02:09 AM EDT
[#21]
Quoted: As the law reads if you legally own an "assault rifle" before the enactment of law there is no limit on features. Nothing in the law says you cant add whatever the fuck you want. That's what I got out of it [shrug] my impression is everything under the new law is "an assault weapon" and can have whatever evil feautures you want, but that might change in the amendment process |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 8:32:50 AM EDT
[#22]
Quoted:
....if you legally own an "assault rifle" before the enactment of law there is no limit on features. Nothing in the law says you cant add whatever the fuck you want. If you legally owned an "assault rifle" before the enactment of the law, it was a Pre-ban (or it wasn't an assault rifle), so there would be limit to features. The Safe Act doesn't say a lot of things, that doesn't make them legal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 8:37:18 AM EDT
[#23]
nobody knows yet.
im still using my pre94 lower as i was before. my 2009 lower sits, until they get this mess figured out. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 8:41:52 AM EDT
[#24]
By that logic I have three features because a forward grip is an added feature now. This is no cut and dry for me
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 8:46:08 AM EDT
[#25]
Quoted:
By that logic I have three features because a forward grip is an added feature now. This is no cut and dry for me Exactly our post bans have 2 features now. Why can't they have 3 4 5 + nothing in the law says they can't |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 9:12:57 AM EDT
[#26]
I would wait on this. I thinlk it would be very cavalier of somebody to add additional features to a post 94 rifle right now.
Possesing a pre-94 30rd magazine will be a misdemeanor soon, but a post-94 30rd will remain a felony. It is pretty clear that the law differentiates these. The term "lawfully possesed prior to..." was used and could very well mean that a post-94 rifle with added features would not be in a configuration that would have been "lawfully possesed prior" The pre-94 and post 94 are referred to differently in some of the text so be carefull. If you have a post-94, I would leave it alone for now. I'd be very carefull with this one. I dont know if this is a good comparison, but a 1994 Automobile must meet 1994 Emissions standards. (It doesnt have to meet 2010, but it doesn't mean that it can be pre-emission either) |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 9:18:26 AM EDT
[#27]
"Lawfully possessed prior to" means transferred to you prior to the SAFE Act. All evil features do is change a legal rifle into an illegal assault weapon. Since your AR-15 is already an assault weapon, the number of "assault weapon" evil features is irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 9:37:53 AM EDT
[#28]
I bought my complete lower back in December and haven't found an upper for it yet. Like everyone I'm confused about what features I'm allowed to have. Whether or not I can buy an upper with bayonet lug and flash hider or if I need what last year was considered post-ban compliant. It would really be cheaper and easier to find if I could just get one with the extras. I'd be happy with a crowned barrel but it's all so confusing and the panic buying has made things scarce.
I hate the "wait and see" attitude but it's all we have right the moment. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 9:39:43 AM EDT
[#29]
Quoted:
"Lawfully possessed prior to" means transferred to you prior to the SAFE Act. All evil features do is change a legal rifle into an illegal assault weapon. Since your AR-15 is already an assault weapon, the number of "assault weapon" evil features is irrelevant. You may be 100% correct. If the definition of "assault weapon" is just simply changed. I am not going to play lawyer. I would wait until there is legal clarification from experts, and/or the state. If you are the owner of a post-94 rifle and you are just can't wait to order that CTR stock, then go ahead. A pre-1994 30 rd mag is only a misdemeanor and is described as a magazine that holds more than ten rounds made before sep 1994. A post-1994 30rd magazine is a Felony and is described as a magazine that holds more than ten rounds made after sep 1994 but before jan 2013. If the law defines the rifles seperately by when they were made, then it will be a problem. It does not just appear to simply replace the text "TWO features" for "ONE feature" |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 10:45:37 AM EDT
[#30]
Well put, this is how I understood it also. I do not have a 'post-ban' AR, it is pre '94. Good grief all this pre, post crap is absurd!! I'm doing what everyone is- stand by and see what unfolds in the coming months.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 10:51:04 AM EDT
[#31]
That is what I thought as well but we'll have to see in the next couple months.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 11:10:10 AM EDT
[#32]
Quoted:
"Lawfully possessed prior to" means transferred to you prior to the SAFE Act. All evil features do is change a legal rifle into an illegal assault weapon. Since your AR-15 is already an assault weapon, the number of "assault weapon" evil features is irrelevant. Exactly the ONLY reason to wait is to see if the amend the law to limit the number of features allowed on a registered assault rifle. You all need to understand that according to NYS law we did not own an assault rifle prior to NY SAFE ACT. If you did it was illegal. According to the old law a PRE BAN RIFLE WAS NOT AN ASSAULT RIFLE. A POST BAN RIFLE WAS NOT AN ASSAULT RIFLE. Now all our Ar-15's are assault rifles regardless of date and the number of features(Unless is has zero features) If you legally possessed a rifle that was NOT an assault weapon and has now been classified into an assault weapon you need to register it. There is no limit on the number of features currently in the law. I have no idea how to explain this in simpler terms. You can put a collasping stock and flash suppressor on your rifle right now and you are 100% legal. If you are prosecuted for doing so then they are wrong and it will not stick because the law does not support it. Legal fees could suck though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 12:56:06 PM EDT
[#33]
Thanks for the responses, keep them coming as we try to sort through this!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 12:57:42 PM EDT
[#34]
Quoted:
What a shit thread this is. A bunch of guesses put forth as fact. Give us some facts then?? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 1:02:32 PM EDT
[#35]
Quoted: Quoted: What a shit thread this is. A bunch of guesses put forth as fact. Give us some facts then?? There isn't any factual info at this point. It's all pretty much useless speculation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 1:18:58 PM EDT
[#36]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What a shit thread this is. A bunch of guesses put forth as fact. Give us some facts then?? There isn't any factual info at this point. It's all pretty much useless speculation. The fact is the law go read it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 2:36:24 PM EDT
[#37]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What a shit thread this is. A bunch of guesses put forth as fact. Give us some facts then?? There isn't any factual info at this point. It's all pretty much useless speculation. The fact is the law go read it. Have you read it? Do you not have any questions about it? I'm trying to gather as much info. and understand it myself at this time... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 2:54:09 PM EDT
[#38]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What a shit thread this is. A bunch of guesses put forth as fact. Give us some facts then?? There isn't any factual info at this point. It's all pretty much useless speculation. The fact is the law go read it. Have you read it? Do you not have any questions about it? I'm trying to gather as much info. and understand it myself at this time... I don't know if that is possible...understanding to a reasonable degree of safety and certainty, at least in some regards. I think this is wait and see for now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 3:08:16 PM EDT
[#39]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What a shit thread this is. A bunch of guesses put forth as fact. Give us some facts then?? There isn't any factual info at this point. It's all pretty much useless speculation. The fact is the law go read it. Have you read it? Do you not have any questions about it? I'm trying to gather as much info. and understand it myself at this time... Yes I have read it. Our rifles have by definition of the law become assault rifles and must be registered. There is no limit on how many features an assault rifle can have. Can I put it in anymore lamen terms? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 3:24:15 PM EDT
[#40]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What a shit thread this is. A bunch of guesses put forth as fact. Give us some facts then?? There isn't any factual info at this point. It's all pretty much useless speculation. The fact is the law go read it. Have you read it? Do you not have any questions about it? I'm trying to gather as much info. and understand it myself at this time... Yes I have read it. Our rifles have by definition of the law become assault rifles and must be registered. There is no limit on how many features an assault rifle can have. Can I put it in anymore lamen terms? Thank you, if I have any further questions about the NY SAFE Act, I'll ask you....... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 3:36:22 PM EDT
[#41]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What a shit thread this is. A bunch of guesses put forth as fact. Give us some facts then?? There isn't any factual info at this point. It's all pretty much useless speculation. The fact is the law go read it. Have you read it? Do you not have any questions about it? I'm trying to gather as much info. and understand it myself at this time... Yes I have read it. Our rifles have by definition of the law become assault rifles and must be registered. There is no limit on how many features an assault rifle can have. Can I put it in anymore lamen terms? Thank you, if I have any further questions about the NY SAFE Act, I'll ask you....... No problem. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 3:43:54 PM EDT
[#42]
Quoted: Thank you, if I have any further questions about the NY SAFE Act, I'll ask you.......  You might want to wait until the SAFE Act is amended (actually re-written in some respects) and the NYSP have published the rules/regulations and registration procedures first. Just sayin'. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 4:57:48 PM EDT
[#43]
 "
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 5:41:46 PM EDT
[#44]
Why bother owning them? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 7:07:26 PM EDT
[#45]
NON COMPLIANCE = WINNING |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 9:14:52 PM EDT
[#46]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What a shit thread this is. A bunch of guesses put forth as fact. Give us some facts then?? There isn't any factual info at this point. It's all pretty much useless speculation. The fact is the law go read it. Have you read it? Do you not have any questions about it? I'm trying to gather as much info. and understand it myself at this time... Yes I have read it. Our rifles have by definition of the law become assault rifles and must be registered. There is no limit on how many features an assault rifle can have. Can I put it in anymore lamen terms? Sometimes being right isn't just being right. If NYS suddenly passed a law that made it legal to sell cocaine to children under the age of 10, would you run out and buy a kilo and hit up your nearest elementary school or wait and see if someone fucked up? The thing is, there is the law as written, and the intent of the legislature, and when those two things diverge (and seem to contradict each other), it deserves some pause. So while I agree that your reading has a basis in the text, my opinion is that the prudent thing to do would be to wait to see what shakes out in amendments, don't you think? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 9:18:52 PM EDT
[#47]
The above is going to become my default answer in any threads asking about "pre-ban status", "neutering your already neutered rifle to be UNSafe compliant", "modifying my 30 round mags to hold 10" and so on. Don't; just move them.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 9:22:03 PM EDT
[#48]
Fuck my head hurts just reading this shit.
Can't we all just say/think eff you to Andy Hitler and wait until shit falls in place? I'm still hoping that each county moving with resolutions may actually mean something. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2013 10:07:12 PM EDT
[#49]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What a shit thread this is. A bunch of guesses put forth as fact. Give us some facts then?? There isn't any factual info at this point. It's all pretty much useless speculation. The fact is the law go read it. Have you read it? Do you not have any questions about it? I'm trying to gather as much info. and understand it myself at this time... Yes I have read it. Our rifles have by definition of the law become assault rifles and must be registered. There is no limit on how many features an assault rifle can have. Can I put it in anymore lamen terms? Sometimes being right isn't just being right. If NYS suddenly passed a law that made it legal to sell cocaine to children under the age of 10, would you run out and buy a kilo and hit up your nearest elementary school or wait and see if someone fucked up? The thing is, there is the law as written, and the intent of the legislature, and when those two things diverge (and seem to contradict each other), it deserves some pause. So while I agree that your reading has a basis in the text, my opinion is that the prudent thing to do would be to wait to see what shakes out in amendments, don't you think? Are you comparing adding features to my rifle the equivalent to selling cocaine to children? That's how the dem's think 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/16/2013 7:40:14 AM EDT
[#50]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What a shit thread this is. A bunch of guesses put forth as fact. Give us some facts then?? There isn't any factual info at this point. It's all pretty much useless speculation. The fact is the law go read it. Have you read it? Do you not have any questions about it? I'm trying to gather as much info. and understand it myself at this time... Yes I have read it. Our rifles have by definition of the law become assault rifles and must be registered. There is no limit on how many features an assault rifle can have. Can I put it in anymore lamen terms? Sometimes being right isn't just being right. If NYS suddenly passed a law that made it legal to sell cocaine to children under the age of 10, would you run out and buy a kilo and hit up your nearest elementary school or wait and see if someone fucked up? The thing is, there is the law as written, and the intent of the legislature, and when those two things diverge (and seem to contradict each other), it deserves some pause. So while I agree that your reading has a basis in the text, my opinion is that the prudent thing to do would be to wait to see what shakes out in amendments, don't you think? Are you comparing adding features to my rifle the equivalent to selling cocaine to children? That's how the dem's think
The law permits something that the legislature very well may not have intended, and something which is subject o change. I made an analogy, calm down. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
