Evil feature list, NJ AWB

[Dan 177]

I'm unable to reconcile the "logic" in the following:

 

"M1 Carbine Type" is banned therefore even if a "US Carbine ML" or "CAL 30 ML" or whatever the heck, with a 10/15 round magazine, having no "evil features" that would make it fail the features test, it is still illegal because the weapon is similar in type to "M1 Carbine Type"

 

However

 

"Avtomat Kalashnikov Type Semiautomatic Firearms" are banned and yet, if it says "WASR" and does not have enough features to fail the feature test, it is legal, despite being an "Avtomat Kalashnikov Type" and is sold in most NJ gun shops.

 

How does this make sense at all? I simply don't understand either how "ML Carbine" is not legal, or that "WASR" is illegal. I just seriously don't understand that. Does it simply come down to the fact that no one (law abiding) really has M1 Carbines so they stay illegal, but lots of people have AKs and the state doesn't have the desire to come take them? Kinda like a "genie's already out of the bottle, too late" kind of thing?

 

I understand there's been several shitstorms here over this and I'm not trying to start another. But if any legal gurus could please explain to me, how the same law can be interpreted two different ways.

 

This is the issue at hand, as explained in my post before this one.

 

Also, nobody in NJ legally owns an "AK". We have types and models of guns that are not substantially identical to AK type firearms. Please understand the difference.

[The Dark Knight 11]

Also, nobody in NJ legally owns an "AK". We have types and models of guns that are not substantially identical to AK type firearms. Please understand the difference.

 

Yeah, I understand that.

[vjf915 456]

And yet, you contradict your own opinion. You don't own an Avtomat Kalashnikov type, right? You own a Saiga, you say. Yet you post on here in the "AK Section" and on other "AK Forums" so by the simple existence of the "AK Section" that would be enough justification to simply "pull the plug" and call Saigas, WASRs, MAK90s, etc. illegal.

 

Your Saiga is manufactured at the original Izhevsk Arsenal in Russia, the original and main AK factory. The factory staff still includes Mikhail Kalashnikov, designer of the AK and the RAAC openly advertises that the line of Saiga rifles is based on the AK military pattern weapon. I'm not sure why you're ragging on IO for calling it an AK when RAAC calls the Saiga an AK on their site (and youtube videos, and advertisements).

 

 

Yeah, I understand that.

You obviously don't understand that. Just because the rifles are BASED on the AK platform has absolutely NO bearing on the rifle being legal in NJ. You think that Saiga's, WASR's, MAK90's, PAP's and other AK style rifles should be banned simply because we discuss them in a section labeled "AK" It doesn't matter what we call it, what the manufacturer calls it, what factory it was made in, or who is on the staff at the factory. What DOES matter is the markings on the receiver, and the features that the rifle has. Mikhail Kalashnikov himself could autograph a Saiga 7.62, and openly state that the rifle is directly based off of the original AK47 rifle......as long as the receiver is stamped Saiga 7.62, and the rifle does not have two or more "features" then it is legal. Wrap your head around that, and you should do just fine.

[BMWR12 35]

The problem with the AO carbine is that everyone should have kept it quiet. Instead you have people saying they saw a letter that led to speculation and that is why people called the NJSP. If the letter was kept secret or let out right away things could have been different.

[vladtepes 1,060]

go along with the BS program.. get what they let you have... scream from the roof tops that people already have this and that.. cause more scrutiny and lose more choice of firearms.. unfortunately I fail to see the 3rd option.. at the moment at least.. I think it would be far more productive to fight the BAN altogether.. as opposed to the particulars of one VS the other..

[vladtepes 1,060]

THE SAIGA IS AN AUTOLOADING RIFLE with a hunting buttstock and fore end (plastic). The Saiga rifles are intended for hunting big and medium-sized game under different climatic conditions. The rifles are developed on the base of the venerable Kalashnikov assault rifle and chambered for 7.62x39, . 223 Rem (5.56x45), and 5.45x39 cartridges. Additional buttstock available with adjustable cheek rest.

 

spin it how you like.. the flip side is this statement is exactly WHY a Saiga is legal and the AO M1 carbines are not.. here the Saiga is described as a hunting sporting gun that has been created off of the base of the AK design.. meaning they took that design and created a sporting gun.. where as AO does no mention of the intention of creating one from the design (creating a clone) it instead states it IS an M1 carbine..

[The Dark Knight 11]

You obviously don't understand that. Just because the rifles are BASED on the AK platform has absolutely NO bearing on the rifle being legal in NJ. You think that Saiga's, WASR's, MAK90's, PAP's and other AK style rifles should be banned simply because we discuss them in a section labeled "AK" It doesn't matter what we call it, what the manufacturer calls it, what factory it was made in, or who is on the staff at the factory. What DOES matter is the markings on the receiver, and the features that the rifle has. Mikhail Kalashnikov himself could autograph a Saiga 7.62, and openly state that the rifle is directly based off of the original AK47 rifle......as long as the receiver is stamped Saiga 7.62, and the rifle does not have two or more "features" then it is legal. Wrap your head around that, and you should do just fine.

 

 

Wow, you mad bro?

 

I'm not saying it SHOULD be banned. I'm saying the exact same reasons given for why the IO was banned, can be applied to virtually every AK variant.

[DevsAdvocate 112]

So can I buy an AO M1 Carbine or not?

[PK90 3,570]

[Dan 177]

So can I buy an AO M1 Carbine or not?

 

Only if you want to be the challenge case against the AG.

[DevsAdvocate 112]

Ok, so here's the blatant loss of logic in this thread:

 

1. AR-15's, AK's, and M1 Carbines are banned by 'name'.

2. Stag Model-1s, BCM uppers, Saiga, WASRs, MAK-90s are not banned because they meet the 'evil features' criteria, and are not named in a manner that is illegal.

3. Therefor, wouldn't AO 'M1 type' carbines be legal if they too meet the 'evil features' list?

 

Should be a simple legal case, someone contact the NRA/SAF, transfer in an AO M1 Carbine, and then fight the NJ AWB. Tear it to pieces as infringement (which any two year old can do), and set us free.

[DevsAdvocate 112]

Only if you want to be the challenge case against the AG.

 

Is there any evidence to the contrary? ANY? Is it banned by name?

[Dan 177]

Ok, so here's the blatant loss of logic in this thread:

 

1. AR-15's, AK's, and M1 Carbines are banned by 'name'.

2. Stag Model-1s, BCM uppers, Saiga, WASRs, MAK-90s are not banned because they meet the 'evil features' criteria, and are not named in a manner that is illegal.

3. Therefor, wouldn't AO 'M1 type' carbines be legal if they too meet the 'evil features' list?

 

Should be a simple legal case, someone contact the NRA/SAF, transfer in an AO M1 Carbine, and then fight the NJ AWB. Tear it to pieces as infringement (which any two year old can do), and set us free.

 

Yes, just need the volunteer to be the FFL/dealer, and transferee to face NJ AW charges, along with lots of $$ and legal assistance. I'm pretty sure we'll win!

 

This is how Paula is standing firm on this one... game of chicken, but on her side is state funds and gets to go home at night.

[siderman 1,137]

Logic?

[DevsAdvocate 112]

Yes, just need the volunteer to be the FFL/dealer, and transferee to face NJ AW charges, along with lots of $$ and legal assistance. I'm pretty sure we'll win!

 

This is how Paula is standing firm on this one... game of chicken, but on her side is state funds and gets to go home at night.

 

State funds? What state funds? We're in so much debt, it's ridiculous to think they'll go out of their way to prosecute a bunch of gun owners.

 

Also, how exactly is Paula Dowd "standing firm" on this one? Where is her office's direction? I already asked for this btw.

 

http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/cPath/36_589/products_id/46038

 

Any willing FFLs??

[vladtepes 1,060]

Only if you want to be the challenge case against the AG.

 

 

 

if there was money to blow i think the sate would lose....

 

 

Is IOXXXX banned by name?

NO

then it is a clone....

is it substantially identical as defined by NJ standard?

NO

then it is legal..

 

making it illegal even when the gun should clearly be legal shows an obvious unfair bias of the law.. and shows just how arbitrary it can be at times.. and shows that it needs to be revamped....

 

then you are taking your chances..does revamped equate to better for you or them..

[DevsAdvocate 112]

Wait a second... we've been playing the 'Evil Features' game and it's not EVEN WRITTEN IN THE friggin STATE LAW???

 

So I can have a flash hider, bayonet lug, and collapsible stock??

[vladtepes 1,060]

this is where it is written.. and where I always refer to...

 

http://www.state.nj.us/njsp/info/pdf/firearms/062408_title13ch54.pdf

[DevsAdvocate 112]

this is where it is written.. and where I always refer to...

 

http://www.state.nj.us/njsp/info/pdf/firearms/062408_title13ch54.pdf

 

It's not state law. Where in state law do they have the authority to go beyond what is written in the statute?

[KpdPipes 388]

if there was money to blow i think the sate would lose....

 

 

Is IOXXXX banned by name?

NO

then it is a clone....

is it substantially identical as defined by NJ standard?

NO

then it is legal..

 

making it illegal even when the gun should clearly be legal shows an obvious unfair bias of the law.. and shows just how arbitrary it can be at times.. and shows that it needs to be revamped....

 

then you are taking your chances..does revamped equate to better for you or them..

 

If you're talking about the IO "AK" rifles..guess what, they are MARKED "AK-47" that was a loser from the start..the only surprising thing is that it actually took as long as it did for NJSP to jump on that one.... As far as AK "Type" rifles... I have a homework assignment for someone. Go to Chyenne Mtn Sports, and enquire as to WHY they will no longer carry ANY Ak-type firearm, then report back here.

[KpdPipes 388]

It's not state law. Where in state law do they have the authority to go beyond what is written in the statute?

 

The Administrative code is used to set all kinds of Regulatory rules..while you dont find what types, of, equipment for Breath Tests, or Speed Enforcement listed in the Statute itself, it's the Administrative Code that details exactly WHAT equipment is authorized to be used, also as Caselaw changes it's usually easier to adjust the Administrative Code, rather than change the actual statutes, which actually works in FAVOR of the citizens in most things, other than firearms of course.

[vladtepes 1,060]

If you're talking about the IO "AK" rifles..guess what, they are MARKED "AK-47" that was a loser from the start..the only surprising thing is that it actually took as long as it did for NJSP to jump on that one.... As far as AK "Type" rifles... I have a homework assignment for someone. Go to Chyenne Mtn Sports, and enquire as to WHY they will no longer carry ANY Ak-type firearm, then report back here.

 

 

no... the ao m1 carbine that was not an m1 carbine yet the manufacture called it one.. in the same way a wasr is legal....

[DevsAdvocate 112]

The Administrative code is used to set all kinds of Regulatory rules..while you dont find what types, of, equipment for Breath Tests, or Speed Enforcement listed in the Statute itself, it's the Administrative Code that details exactly WHAT equipment is authorized to be used, also as Caselaw changes it's usually easier to adjust the Administrative Code, rather than change the actual statutes, which actually works in FAVOR of the citizens in most things, other than firearms of course.

 

bs. It's one thing to specify equipment police or some other bs state or townie can do, but it's another to decide what WE the people have access to.

 

This should be easy to challenge. Especially how the state poorly defines some thing. Not to mention that this is a blatant infringement of the US Constitution.

 

Logic following this line: The state would say the AWB is Constitutional by saying it does not infringe on our RKBA, however, since it does not actually affect the firearm's form, fit, or primary function, then it is an infringement based due to the fact that it does not actually make firearms any more or less safer or impact crime, therefor, it is an unnecessary barrier to keeping ones' arms.

[vjf915 456]

This should be easy to challenge.

Stop getting my hopes up. I already dream of a lot of things, you putting this in my head isn't helping!

[Dan 177]

If you're talking about the IO "AK" rifles..guess what, they are MARKED "AK-47" that was a loser from the start..the only surprising thing is that it actually took as long as it did for NJSP to jump on that one.... As far as AK "Type" rifles... I have a homework assignment for someone. Go to Chyenne Mtn Sports, and enquire as to WHY they will no longer carry ANY Ak-type firearm, then report back here.

 

This is the question at hand. I do not have the entire story, but obviously they were bullied by the state into no longer carrying anything that looked like an "AK". This is the root of the issue. Besides the IO issue where it was stamped "AK", where I admit they crossed the line; other styles of firearms that may or may not share cosmetic looks with an AK are permitted under the current NJAC guidelines that the state, dealers, and gun owners have been following for the past 13 years. Who knows what was really said behind closed doors that has forced Cheyenne to put their tail between their legs and institute their own selective judgment on what to sell and not based on cosmetics regardless of the state law and code.

 

The original "named list" and "substantially identical" sections of the NJ AWB already have legal precedence as to being deemed unconstitutionally vague. The state's band-aid was to include the evil feature list in the NJAC to guide prosecutors on how to enforce the NJ AWB in a manner that would stand up in court (aka not unconstitutional as it stands in the Statutes). The state chose not to appeal NJ v Robert D. Merrill for a reason, they knew it would eventually lead to a battle over the NJ AWB ban and its constitutionality with the result of it being stricken out of law. You think they wouldn't appeal if they knew they would win, and strengthen the state's stand on the AWB? Highly doubtful.

[DevsAdvocate 112]

This is the question at hand. I do not have the entire story, but obviously they were bullied by the state into no longer carrying anything that looked like an "AK". This is the root of the issue. Besides the IO issue where it was stamped "AK", where I admit they crossed the line; other styles of firearms that may or may not share cosmetic looks with an AK are permitted under the current NJAC guidelines that the state, dealers, and gun owners have been following for the past 13 years. Who knows what was really said behind closed doors that has forced Cheyenne to put their tail between their legs and institute their own selective judgment on what to sell and not based on cosmetics regardless of the state law and code.

 

The original "named list" and "substantially identical" sections of the NJ AWB already have legal precedence as to being deemed unconstitutionally vague. The state's band-aid was to include the evil feature list in the NJAC to guide prosecutors on how to enforce the NJ AWB in a manner that would stand up in court (aka not unconstitutional as it stands in the Statutes). The state chose not to appeal NJ v Robert D. Merrill for a reason, they knew it would eventually lead to a battle over the NJ AWB ban and its constitutionality with the result of it being stricken out of law. You think they wouldn't appeal if they knew they would win, and strengthen the state's stand on the AWB? Highly doubtful.

 

Word. SAF may be looking into this now, waiting on the CCW case first before moving into this territory.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Who knows what was really said behind closed doors

 

while I have NO idea I'll take a stab at it...

 

"we have you selling a gun marked AK which is banned by name.. if you ever sell anything ever again that so much as looks like an AK we will shut you down completely"

 

that would send my tail between my legs.. I think if they really wanted to make an example they would have pursued it.. at least they are still open...

[Dan 177]

while I have NO idea I'll take a stab at it...

 

"we have you selling a gun marked AK which is banned by name.. if you ever sell anything ever again that so much as looks like an AK we will shut you down completely"

 

that would send my tail between my legs.. I think if they really wanted to make an example they would have pursued it.. at least they are still open...

 

That's exactly what I'm thinking.

[vladtepes 1,060]

That's exactly what I'm thinking.

 

 

and if that was the case... who can blame them.... I would do the same thing...

 

livelihood VS fighting an losing fight

[raz-0 1,259]

It's not state law. Where in state law do they have the authority to go beyond what is written in the statute?

 

Well, it's the administrative code, and it reflected the wording of the statutes plus the addendum about the colt match and m1a when it went into effect. However, it expires in 2012.

 

The Administrative code is used to set all kinds of Regulatory rules..while you dont find what types, of, equipment for Breath Tests, or Speed Enforcement listed in the Statute itself, it's the Administrative Code that details exactly WHAT equipment is authorized to be used, also as Caselaw changes it's usually easier to adjust the Administrative Code, rather than change the actual statutes, which actually works in FAVOR of the citizens in most things, other than firearms of course.

 

EXCEPT, the state statute has been magically morphing itself on the state legislature home page since that version of the administrative code went into effect. i witnessed at least three revisions of it in that time. One where the removed the conflicting definition of an assault weapon for shotguns, and one where they removed the assault weapon definition for pistols, and one where they removed the evil features bullet points for rifles.

 

So....

 

 

I have no idea WTF they are doing, or who they are. it'll be interesting to see what gets put in the administrative code on the expiration date. But as of right now, it exceeds the language of the statute in restrictions.