MERGED THREADS "Bullet Button Assault Weapon" Regs

[cvigue]

All I know is that once (and if) we get the right carry reciprocity laws passed I'll be tempted to get my Oregon carry again and carry my 30 rnd AR pistol in 300BLK.

Let us hope.

[IVC]

But it still comes down to the judges interpretation of the law if you find yourself in court. It doesn't matter what I think, what you think, or what your lawyer thinks. The judge interprets the law. If he interprets it in a manner that agrees with you, bravo! If not, my condolences. But that really is the end of the story.

Yes, we agree.

My point is just that there will be easy picking for DOJ to prosecute gun owners if they wish, and it's not going to be the few of us who might do some quiet protest in the privacy of our home.

[Cokebottle]

Wow, what an absolute mess this has all become.

Think any gang bangers or terrorists are losing sleep over this?

The gang bangers are out there with cheap semi autos and revolvers that will be the last on the ban list.
The terrorists are focused on things that have been illegal since 1923.

[Cokebottle]

Right, but if the stock wasn't pinned it would have been an illegal AW to begin with since the overall length would have been 28.5".



26.25", since according to my measurement the OEM muzzle brake adds 2.25" to the end of the barrel, and the official overall length while folded is 28.5" which includes the OEM muzzle brake.

That looks longer than 2"...

[Smedkcuf]

That's not how I read it. "Or" to me is used as: one way or the other. So if you can use a tool to eject the magazine WITHOUT opening the action, then that constitutes a detachable magazine. A tool can include a bullet. The issue is the opening of the action that separates a detachable magazine vs a fixed magazine.

No, this is how it reads:

"Detachable magazine" means any ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm without disassembly of the firearm action or use of a tool.

The word "or" separates the two actions, so that if you remove the portion in red, you can see the meaning of the sentence when applied to the portion in blue:

"Detachable magazine" means any ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm without use of a tool.

The word "or" does not mean one of the other, it can also mean both. One or the other would be called "Exclusive or".

[Smedkcuf]

That looks longer than 2"...

That is a Scar H muzzle device, not the OEM Scar 17S muzzle device. Also, the end of the device screws on aft the end of the barrel, so the entire length of the device doesn't get added to the end of the barrel, only the part of the device that sticks out past the threads.

[urquhart]

There is one more part to the story as far as practical issues go. There will be millions of people without any registration papers running their ARs at local ranges with BBs. Those will be the "low handing fruit" if the DOJ wants to make an example, not someone who is very careful about avoiding any "imperial entanglements."

When "low hanging fruit" has until Jan.1 2018 to register I think it will be hard to make an example of someone until then. Even if you've been "written up, ticketed, arrested(?)" whatever one still has the option of disassembling, removing or registering the firearm. Yeah it only delays the inevitable as nothing is likely to change in our favor for a long time, I don't see any reason to capitulate immediately.

[JeepFiend]

....My point is just that there will be easy picking for DOJ to prosecute gun owners if they wish, and it's not going to be the few of us who might do some quiet protest in the privacy of our home.

I agree. But (and this is all conjecture) I, personally, see this as the perfect excuse to confiscate through legal means. All the folks that are unaware or ignorant of the changes will the be the method by which they legally confiscate not only guns but gun rights. Those that quietly support at home, when and if caught, will be the impetus to do door to door confiscations. You can argue that it violates both the second and fourth amendment, but that hasn't stopped them yet.

Frankly, I don't see an upside to this. I also don't see a solution anytime in the near future. But then again, I'm a pessimist.

Now back to my popcorn....

[meno377]

No, this is how it reads:



The word "or" separates the two actions, so that if you remove the portion in red, you can see the meaning of the sentence when applied to the portion in blue:



The word "or" does not mean one of the other, it can also mean both. One or the other would be called "Exclusive or".

I disagree. Apples or oranges. They both serve a common purpose. A more appropriate word would have been "including" the use of a tool. Every AR they are targeting for the registration process has a bullet button installed. The new law says that a bullet button constitutes a detachable magazine. I am NOT including the updated bullet buttons (maglocks).

[Smedkcuf]

I disagree. Apples or oranges. They both serve a common purpose. A more appropriate word would have been "including" the use of a tool. Every AR they are targeting for the registration process has a bullet button installed. The new law says that a bullet button constitutes a detachable magazine. I am NOT including the updated bullet buttons (maglocks).

No it doesn't, but it's irrelevant anyway since the new law amended 30515 such that it only differentiates between fixed and not fixed.

[meno377]

No it doesn't, but it's irrelevant anyway since the new law amended 30515 such that it only differentiates between fixed and not fixed.

The wording is poor. Several here agree with that. But I am convinced that the intent is for all original style bullet buttons that DIDN'T require opening the action to eject the magazine is what they are targeting. Whether you call it fixed vs non fixed or detachable vs non detachable, the intent to me is consistent with the original style bullet buttons.

[nicky c]

Posted this earlier, but I just can't stop thinking how dumb this is:

Bullet Button = Detachable magazine
Standard mag release = Detachable magazine
No mag release = Detachable magazine


I want to see the DOJ keep a straight face when the judge asks for an explanation.

[Smedkcuf]

Posted this earlier, but I just can't stop thinking how dumb this is:

Bullet Button = Detachable magazine
Standard mag release = Detachable magazine
No mag release = Detachable magazine


I want to see the DOJ keep a straight face when the judge asks for an explanation.

Bullet button is neither detachable nor fixed, the only thing that is certain is that it is "not fixed". And that's all that matters anyway according to 30515.

[meno377]

Posted this earlier, but I just can't stop thinking how dumb this is:

Bullet Button = Detachable magazine
Standard mag release = Detachable magazine
No mag release = Detachable magazine


I want to see the DOJ keep a straight face when the judge asks for an explanation.

But this is true because in all three examples you presented, you can eject the magazine without opening the action.

[meno377]

Bullet button is neither detachable nor fixed, the only thing that is certain is that it is "not fixed". And that's all that matters anyway according to 30515.

Not true. Can you paste the wording you are referring to?