Long Island Shooters Forum banner
1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
590 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The New York state rifle and pistol association recently posted information on their facebook that seems to indicate that we may have won back the ability to have brakes on our rifles in court. I just wanted to see if I could get confirmation that I'm understanding that correctly.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,083 Posts
i am trying to figure that out too. people are cheering over being allowed to put 10 rounds in again. which is good news, but i would like to know the status of the muzzle device as well
 

·
Lousy Shot
Joined
·
16,248 Posts
Not according to the latest guidelines (page 3, item g).
http://www.longislan...not-to-enforce/

Not that guidelines have the weight of law; they don't.

I don't know what the current status of the wording of the law is, but the only reason it was thrown out was because the law spelled brake "break", causing confusion. It will only be a matter of time before it gets "fixed". If you want to install a brake until then, go ahead. Compensators, flash hiders, suppressors or any threading have always been and are still banned.

Who cares anyway, all they do is piss off the guy at the next bench.
 

·
The Sysop
Joined
·
36,800 Posts
Its not on the books, at this time from what I read. Maybe in the next revision.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,119 Posts
There is debate as to whether or not the judge's decision applies state wide or just to the district in which the judgment was handed down. My perception of the consensus was proceed at your own peril.

Edtied to add...

NYSP Troopers are being directed to not enforce some provisions...

4. Possessing a magazine loaded with more than 7 rounds / New PL section 265.37
New PL section 265.37 had made it a crime to load any magazine with more than 7 rounds of ammunition, regardless of the capacity of the magazine. On December 31st, the United States District Court for the Western District of New York issued a decision as a result of challenges to various provisions of the New York Safe Act. While the federal district court upheld most of its provisions, the Court held that this section, "Unlawful Possession of Certain Ammunition Feeding Devices," was unconstitutional. As a result of the Court's decision members are instructed not to enforce PL 265.37 at this time.


This means nothing to say a county police officer, a sheriff or some other LE entity that just wants to charge and see what sticks. This is guidance from the state. Rice could easily say that the ruling was in the NYS Western District and doesn't apply here and charge away. Again....at your owen peril...you wanna be the test case...yadda yadda yadda..
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,423 Posts
It was my understanding (and I could be wrong) that they spelled it wrong (break) in the original and that is was corrected in the revision to the proper spelling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
590 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
This is actually the second time I'm hearing that brakes may be ok, the first was in a video of a presentation on ways of making rifles compliant. This is the problem with such a poorly written piece of legislation. There is all this gray matter that will probably get good people arrested. Who's to say if an AFG or hand stop is technically a vertical foregrip? what if you use a grip pod, is it a bipod, or forward grip? So ridiculous...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
171 Posts
Just stick to a rifle that does not have a removable magazine and then you can have all the goodies you want.

Built up a Norinco SKS in a ATI Strikeforce stock w/ aluminum upgrade kit, scope, bi-pod, break, forward grip, and some other goodies.

With the stripper clips you can reload in a matter of moments (not as fast as changing mags, but close with practice) and they cost under $1 each so you can buy more than you can use for the cost of a few mags.

The stuff that needs to be registered will be disassembled and stored until this madness comes to an end.
 

·
Lousy Shot
Joined
·
16,248 Posts
Just stick to a rifle that does not have a removable magazine and then you can have all the goodies you want.
...
You mean something that was the state of the art back in the 19th century? No thanks. If I have to trade a muzzle device for a removable magazine, there's no contest. Lever actions and bolt-actions are fine for recreational use ('cause I love shooting them) but for a go-to gun, I couldn't care less if it's lacking a muzzle brake. I want slap-in mags filled with ... well ... no more than 10 rounds, of course.
 

·
Clinger
Joined
·
4,824 Posts
The Judge ordered that all reference to "Muzzle Break" be struck from the law, meaning it is out of the text. The safe act does not prohibit muzzle brakes............at this point i time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: beachbumm

·
SASI Firearms Chairman, LISAPA Training Committee
Joined
·
6,483 Posts
The Judge ordered that all reference to "Muzzle Break" be struck from the law, meaning it is out of the text. The safe act does not prohibit muzzle brakes............at this point i time.
As Crashguy says, the law only prohibits muzzle "breaks," a nonsense item, not muzzle brakes, which is why it was thown out, by the Western District federal court. Technically, only that part of the state, which is under the jurisdiction of that court, is bound by that decision. NYS comes under the separate and mutually exclusive jurisdictions of three federal court districts.
However, having said all that, it would be very hard for somone to be convicted of the crime of having a broken muzzle, in any part of the state.
Gary
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
171 Posts
You mean something that was the state of the art back in the 19th century? No thanks. If I have to trade a muzzle device for a removable magazine, there's no contest. Lever actions and bolt-actions are fine for recreational use ('cause I love shooting them) but for a go-to gun, I couldn't care less if it's lacking a muzzle brake. I want slap-in mags filled with ... well ... no more than 10 rounds, of course.
I agree with you, but until NY SAFE goes away, I want to be able to still enjoy the range without having to worry about any B.S. BTW, the SKS is a semi-auto that has a 10 round box magazine (non-removable). And to be fair, mine was made in 1956, so 20th century, but not 21st like the tacticool AR. It's basically and AK with a fixed mag that cost me under $500 to build and it shoots the cheapest ammo other than .22LR - 7.62x39.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,130 Posts
I agree with you, but until NY SAFE goes away, I want to be able to still enjoy the range without having to worry about any B.S. BTW, the SKS is a semi-auto that has a 10 round box magazine (non-removable). And to be fair, mine was made in 1956, so 20th century, but not 21st like the tacticool AR. It's basically and AK with a fixed mag that cost me under $500 to build and it shoots the cheapest ammo other than .22LR - 7.62x39.
Pics?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
128 Posts
...REJOICE and BE HAPPY, oh boy, whoptee Do........we can still use 10 round mags, don't buy this crap they are duping us, the political trick-- ask for more than you are willing to accept and the children will relent; FOCUS..this SAFE act must go, ALL OF IT.......if the Albany is forcing us to be less armed than the law-breaking criminals then, Albany itself is facilitating the acts of criminals, NOT helping law abiders; Skelos must go....... we were alseep at the switch, WAKE up, use your votes wisely..............
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,742 Posts
Help me here....under what possible scenario would someone feel insecure or under-gunned if all they had to rely on was "the best technology of the 19th Century?" All I own in NY are "19th Century" rifles -- Mausers, Enfields, Swedes, Swiss Schmidt-Rubins, and Finnish Mosins, and I feel perfectly secure knowing I have a ton of firepower, in serious calibers, that are perfectly capable of defending my home and my family against most everything but a Korean-war style Chinese human wave attack. The five/six rounds in my rifles (10 in my Enfields) seem like enough for even the most dire SHTF emergencies. If I need really up-close protection, my Mossberg 12 should fill the bill. I can't think of a situation that could take place in little ole Riverhead where I would need a ditty bag filled with +10 round slap-in mags.

I guess it's fun to rip off a 30 round mag as quickly as possible, but I get a lot more satisfaction one shot at a time, putting them just where I want 'em. And I'm not sure I can foresee a situation where I would need the skill to accurately shoot a mag full at one go. Certainly not in a home defense situation. A DA would have a field day in court with some who put ten or fifteen rounds into an
intruder...it's tough enough in NY justifying one shot.

Different strokes, etc. I know...and each to his own. But let's not sell short turnbolt rifles for defense short....they clearly did the job for a whole lot of years.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,423 Posts
Help me here....under what possible scenario would someone feel insecure or under-gunned if all they had to rely on was "the best technology of the 19th Century?" All I own in NY are "19th Century" rifles -- Mausers, Enfields, Swedes, Swiss Schmidt-Rubins, and Finnish Mosins, and I feel perfectly secure knowing I have a ton of firepower, in serious calibers, that are perfectly capable of defending my home and my family against most everything but a Korean-war style Chinese human wave attack. The five/six rounds in my rifles (10 in my Enfields) seem like enough for even the most dire SHTF emergencies. If I need really up-close protection, my Mossberg 12 should fill the bill. I can't think of a situation that could take place in little ole Riverhead where I would need a ditty bag filled with +10 round slap-in mags.

I guess it's fun to rip off a 30 round mag as quickly as possible, but I get a lot more satisfaction one shot at a time, putting them just where I want 'em. And I'm not sure I can foresee a situation where I would need the skill to accurately shoot a mag full at one go. Certainly not in a home defense situation. A DA would have a field day in court with some who put ten or fifteen rounds into an
intruder...it's tough enough in NY justifying one shot.

Different strokes, etc. I know...and each to his own. But let's not sell short turnbolt rifles for defense short....they clearly did the job for a whole lot of years.
If you think that 5 rounds in a bolt action rifle is enough firepower to counter 30 rounds in a semi-auto with rapidly changed mags......well, I wouldn't want to be at your house in a SHTF scenario.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
163 Posts
Help me here....under what possible scenario would someone feel insecure or under-gunned if all they had to rely on was "the best technology of the 19th Century?" All I own in NY are "19th Century" rifles -- Mausers, Enfields, Swedes, Swiss Schmidt-Rubins, and Finnish Mosins, and I feel perfectly secure knowing I have a ton of firepower, in serious calibers, that are perfectly capable of defending my home and my family against most everything but a Korean-war style Chinese human wave attack. The five/six rounds in my rifles (10 in my Enfields) seem like enough for even the most dire SHTF emergencies. If I need really up-close protection, my Mossberg 12 should fill the bill. I can't think of a situation that could take place in little ole Riverhead where I would need a ditty bag filled with +10 round slap-in mags.

I guess it's fun to rip off a 30 round mag as quickly as possible, but I get a lot more satisfaction one shot at a time, putting them just where I want 'em. And I'm not sure I can foresee a situation where I would need the skill to accurately shoot a mag full at one go. Certainly not in a home defense situation. A DA would have a field day in court with some who put ten or fifteen rounds into an
intruder...it's tough enough in NY justifying one shot.

Different strokes, etc. I know...and each to his own. But let's not sell short turnbolt rifles for defense short....they clearly did the job for a whole lot of years.
Umm...how about under the scenario where the other guy has an AR or an AK or any number of superior weapons to what you mentioned? Is that a likely scenario? Perhaps not, but I am also not sure what your definition of "even the most dire SHTF emergencies" is either.
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top