NY compliant AR's & AK's

[Marion]

A wise man once resisted tyranny by burying all of his banned weaponry and telling no one where they could be found. As he lay on his death bed, he asked to see his beloved grandson. He told his grandson where the weapons were hidden and wished him the best of luck carrying on the fight for freedom.

The man passed and the family laid him to rest. The day after the funeral, the grandson called the BATFE and told them to meet him so he could show them where they could find the weapons.

What a jerkoff. The grandson that is.

You Can't Beat My Meat!

Edited March 15, 2016 by The Jerkman

[Grouse]

The indoctrination of the youth is unavoidable.

 

[The_Field_Ager]

The indoctrination of the youth is unavoidable.

 

I feel a sense of fear of authority is also being inculcated. 

[Steve D]

Posted this yesterday in the "safe-act" section

 

 

HOT OFF THE PRESS

NYSP SAFE Act Update 3-11-2016

 

 Effective March 11, 2016 we have been advised by the New York State Police Troop L Gun Investigation Unit that their official determinations have now been made on a number of items and configurations of semi-automatic rifles under the SAFE Act. We have requested they provide a formal notification in writing which we expect to see in the next 30 days. We are working with our attorneys as well as attorneys representing some of the component manufacturers to explore legal challenge options. Below is a summary of what we have been advised:


- Any “featureless” configuration on an AR or AK style receiver is NOT compliant. This includes: the Spur, the Thordsen FRS, the Monsterman, the Boar and all other similar items where the hand is below the action of the rifle.
- “Featureless” rifles including the Mini 14, Saiga Sporter, Ruger 10/22, Ares SCR, etc. where the hand is behind the action of the rifle ARE compliant.
- The AR Mag-Lock mechanism which allows removal of the magazine when the action is open is NOT compliant.
- The DS-15 FX series fixed magazine receiver and rifles which are manufactured as a “fixed magazine” ARE compliant.


This information is subject to change and clarification. No other clarifications have been issued at this time leaving some products still in the grey area. As always, we are not attorneys and do not offer legal advice, we are only trying to pass along information as it becomes available to us.

 

LINK: http://nyfirearms.co...-11-2016-a.html

Ed
Dark Storm Industries, LLC.
Manufacturer of DS-15 NY SAFE Rifles
www.dark-storm.com

 

[ants]

So it sounds like the AR's with the goofy looking stocks should still be compliant, since the hand is behind the "behind the action"  Or ….no??? 

[Elmo]

So it sounds like the AR's with the goofy looking stocks should still be compliant, since the hand is behind the "behind the action"  Or ….no??? 

 

No.  According to Steve D's post they are going to be illegal in this proposal:

 

- Any “featureless” configuration on an AR or AK style receiver is NOT compliant. This includes: the Spur, the Thordsen FRS, the Monsterman, the Boar and all other similar items where the hand is below the action of the rifle.

[ants]

No.  According to Steve D's post they are going to be illegal in this proposal:

 

- Any “featureless” configuration on an AR or AK style receiver is NOT compliant. This includes: the Spur, the Thordsen FRS, the Monsterman, the Boar and all other similar items where the hand is below the action of the rifle.

But it also says that  the Siaga Sporter (and a few others) where the hand is behind the action, is "compliant" They mention the Siaga Sporter as "compliant." The Siaga Sporter is a true AK receiver.  They are just setting the grounds to define them as they want on a case by case basis.

[Marion]

I seriously hope that the appeals court can get this Bologna law overturned. It's so completely absurd it's not even funny. Mind you I don't even own any of these style guns and only shot them a couple times probably 10 years ago at this point.

You Can't Beat My Meat!

[Elmo]

But it also says that the Siaga Sporter (and a few others) where the hand is behind the action, is "compliant" They mention the Siaga Sporter as "compliant." The Siaga Sporter is a true AK receiver. They are just setting the grounds to define them as they want on a case by case basis.

It seems their definition is based on the angle in which the grip attaches to the action. All the ones they've listed as non-compliant are attached like a pistol grip that has been bend back. They go straight down before angling back even if it only goes down just an inch. Where as the ones listed as being compliant such as the Saiga are attached at an angle directly from the action.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Marion]

Does that mean I can have a saiga sporter with lots of scary features?

You Can't Beat My Meat!

[ants]

Does that mean I can have a saiga sporter with lots of scary features?

You Can't Beat My Meat!

nope

[ants]

It seems their definition is based on the angle in which the grip attaches to the action. All the ones they've listed as non-compliant are attached like a pistol grip that has been bend back. They go straight down before angling back even if it only goes down just an inch. Where as the ones listed as being compliant such as the Saiga are attached at an angle directly from the action.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No…….it seems like they want to leave the definitions open to what they want them to be at any given moment. They say that any featureless AR or AK action is not compliant, and at the same time they say that the Saiga sporter is compliant. The Saiga sporter is 100% an AK action.

[gjs4]

Whether they meet the silly criteria or not...most owners havent registered them and i'm guessing that would be an issue dependent on who was interrogating

[Huntscreek]

Safe Act was Horse $hit when it passed and still is. It infringes on rights of free people and its not a privilege to be governed. 

Edited March 17, 2016 by Huntscreek

[Trial153]

This is idiocy.

[Marion]

nope

well then what the hell can I have?

You Can't Beat My Meat!

[Steve D]

What I don't get is how one state police unit located on Long Island gets to basically make all AR's non-compliant by defining the items that could and have been used to make them compliant illegal.

 

Basically one state police unit on Long Island has made ANY AR non compliant with the safe act and no means to make them compliant. There should be some clarification coming ...but somehow I don't think it is going to be very clear!!

[ants]

The big thing to remember is that the head of the NYSP is appointed by and serves under King Andy.

[ants]

No.  According to Steve D's post they are going to be illegal in this proposal:

 

- Any “featureless” configuration on an AR or AK style receiver is NOT compliant. This includes: the Spur, the Thordsen FRS, the Monsterman, the Boar and all other similar items where the hand is below the action of the rifle.

Just read it again…You're right

[The_Field_Ager]

 

 

 today this was released by NYSRPA: 

Gun owners of New York State, 

On March 11, 2016 Dark Storm Industries LLC post a letter that was supposed be an update from the New York State Police, Troop L, Gun Investigation Unit regarding changes to the list of compliant rifles and accessories. There was wide spread panic and fury among the many gun owners of NYS much of which was fanned by individuals and associations to cast blame, incite the gun owners and frankly to use as a money making tool. The NYSRPA refrained from commenting other than to say this was an unconfirmed rumor. Today I can say without reservation after having checked with the NYSP and the Attorney General's Office that there is no SAFE Act update of compliant firearms, accessories or receivers. Why this information was circulated without vetting is beyond comprehension but maybe you should ask Dark Storm and the other organizations that foisted this on us all. 

Tom King 

Basically, this one gun company down on Long Island tried to get everyone to throw their ARmaglocks (and other devices) in the trash and buy their own mag lock system

 

 

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1848645_.html&r=0&qte=1

[Steve D]

New York State Rifle & Pistol Assoc.(NYSRPA) had this to say:

 

Then on Tuesday, Tom King, NYSRPA president, hit back publicly against Dark Storm in a post to social media.

“Today I can say without reservation after having checked with the NYSP and the Attorney General’s Office that there is no SAFE Act update of compliant firearms, accessories or receivers. Why this information was circulated without vetting is beyond comprehension but maybe you should ask Dark Storm and the other organizations that foisted this on us all,” wrote King.

Which minutes later brought Dark Storm’s reply that they held back some information due to potential litigation but then chose to share it with King.

“We have been in touch with Tom King from NYSRPA and have provided him with additional details that were not made public,” said DSI. “We expect that NYSRPA will support us once all of the facts come out.”

 

If the rules for non-compliance have been changed by the state police how is the average "gun owner" suppose to know?

  Seems to me since they know there are a estimated one million non-registered  so called "assault rifles" in NY their goal would be to make them all "non-compliant" which would require registration or the risk of a felony charge.

   Once they are able to get them "all" registered then they can declare them all illegal and confiscation can begin.

[The_Field_Ager]

NRA: Garland Confirmation Will Lead To Gun Confiscation

 

 

The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action warns that confirming DC Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court would likely lead to a nationwide gun confiscation via judicial fiat.

According to the NRA-ILA, Garland played a key role in several decisions intended to restrict gun rights to American citizens.

In 2007, Garland voted to allow Washington D.C. a second chance to allow its handgun ban to be upheld after a three-judge panel struck it down. Three years earlier he voted against rehearing a Second Amendment case, Seegers v. Gonzales, where the plaintiff challenged the city’s firearm ban.

Additionally, in 2000, Garland voted in favor of the federal government’s proposal to keep Americans’ private information via gun purchase background checks despite federal laws banning national firearm registration and mandating the destruction of these records.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/16/nra-garland-confirmation-will-lead-to-gun-confiscation/#ixzz43AgXaq8Z

 

 

[Steve D]

I knew Garland was anti-gun and expected any nominee he (Obama) made to be anti-gun. Just think what will happen if Hillary gets elected and gets to pick the next judge(s).

 

Can't say I agree with the republicans vowing not to have hearings on Obama's choice but think they should have the balls to say we are turning him down based on his outlook on gun control and just maybe the message would start to get through.

[The_Field_Ager]

 

 

Can't say I agree with the republicans vowing not to have hearings on Obama's choice

 

 

They're all slowly capitulating on this now. That is what the GOP does these days, caves in. Historically it is very rare to have a Judge nominated in an election year. It would be quite normal to have the nomination denied.

Edited March 17, 2016 by Papist

[Grouse]

LOL!!

 

I just heard Liberals are having a fit because Garland is white!

 

Maybe they'll sink his ship for us.

 

You can't make this stuff up.