doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Your sporting shotguns are just as much at risk

I believe that the following belongs on the general board for all to see. This is not a MISFIRES topic. This is about our ability to own sporting guns. Its technical, not political.

If you own a Remington 870, Browning A5 or other pump or semi auto shotgun that you use to duck hunt, shoot sporting clays, trap, skeet etc. read on.

For those on this board that still dot understand the assault on our firearms rights. For those of you who don�t like black guns, who don�t like anything but �traditional hunting guns�. For those of you who don�t see the big deal in some �reasonable restrictions� that are put in place to �protect the children�.
The following is from NYS Penal Law. Read it then see my comments. N.Y. PEN. LAW � 265.00 : NY Code - Section 265.00: Definitions - See more at: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/PEN/THREE/P/265/265.00#sthash.OQqDz20H.dpuf
Large capacity ammunition feeding device" means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device, manufactured after September thirteenth, nineteen hundred ninety-four, that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than ten rounds of ammunition (since changed to 7 rounds when the SAFE Act was passed) ; provided, however, that such term does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition. - See more at: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/PEN/THREE/P/265/265.00#sthash.OQqDz20H.dpuf

The SAFE Act dropped that to 7 rounds total in the tube. Even though the District Court in Western NY ruled that arbitrary, the State Attorney general interpreted that to mean that the court ruling only applied to the counties within the district that the court covered, not the entire state. There is now conflict between the NY AG office and the NY State Police who stated that they will not enforce the 7 rd limit in any part of the state.
Benign you say. Who needs more than 5 rounds anyway?
What this law does is in effect ban Remington 870, Browning A5, Remington 1100/11-87, Winchester 1300, Remington Model 11 and any similar shotgun that has a tubular magazine regardless of its current capacity because anyone of those tubular feed magazines is �readily convertible� to hold more than 5 rounds . Readily convertible means no tools and any one of the above mentioned �traditional� shotguns only needs a simple twist off of the magazine cap and the addition of a magazine extension and it has been readily converted. Note that the law says "readily converted"; you don't have to actually convert it, possession of the firearm in unconverted condition is illegal under the law.
And if you ask law enforcement or politicians about this, they look at you like you are speaking mandarin Chinese; they don�t have a clue. And who here wants to rely on a clueless LE or Politico when your butt is about to be arrested?
The second issue stems from the use of short shells; 1.5� Aquilas which are available through normal commercial channels and in a Remington 870 with standard capacity allow it to hold more than 7 of these without the addition of a magazine extension.
The naysayers will be saying �who would enforce that, no one would arrest you for that�. Well, they said that about the SAFE Act here in NY and the day it went into effect, they made arrests for violations by unknowing gun owners.

And to counter those who say �that�s a minor technicality that wont hold up�; that same judge ruled that the �muzzle break� eliminated by the SAFE act is actually null and void since a �muzzle break� doesn�t exist. A muzzle brake does but not a break. One letter in one word voided that. So don�t think that a minor technical detail wont go against you either.

So the next time one of the left leaning members talks about �reasonable laws� or not caring about those evil looking guns etc. let them explain how your 870 is now illegal under the law of NYS.

The bottom line is that the SAFE Act is another attempt by the government (republicans and democrats in NY) to disarm law abiding citizens.
Yes Republicans also because if the NYS Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos (Republican) didn�t strong arm all of the Republican Senators in that late night signing, it wouldn�t have happened.
As they say, the devil is in the details.

You are so spot on Brian that it's really scary!

And don't forget that prior to the passage of the SAFE Act, GOV Cuomo blurted out "we'll just confiscate them" and then came back and tried to retract that statement. That revealed what his true intentions were and still are. That was no out of context quote.

Long gun registration-ALL long guns, starts in Conn as well,you can hide your head in the sand and use the its not my shotgun for only so long.
"first they came for the black rifles and I didn't stop them .."

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/state-...on-april-1.aspx

Attention Connecticut Gun Owners and Sportsmen - Next Round of Anti-Gun Law Provisions Take Effect on April 1


EFFECTIVE ON APRIL 1, 2014:

Individuals must apply for a �long gun eligibility certificate� through the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection (�DESPP�) to purchase any rifle or shotgun. You are exempt from this requirement if you have a Connecticut permit to carry a pistol or revolver; a pistol or revolver retail sales permit; or a pistol or revolver eligibility certificate.
The fee (tax) for this certificate is $35 and must be renewed every five years.
You must complete a DESPP-approved firearms training course.
You must submit fingerprints with your application and a fee of $50 for state fingerprints and $16.50 for federal fingerprints.

Thanks Brian. That's a good deed for your day.

"Even though the District Court in Western NY ruled that arbitrary, the State Attorney general interpreted that to mean that the court ruling only applied to the counties within the district that the court covered, not the entire state."

Does this mean the Second Amendment applies to counties within one court's jurisdiction, that there could be several/many observances and denials of the Amendment within one state? If so, it's not an inalienable right.

Practically, on this evidence, the Amendment means whatever people choose within a particular court's jurisdiction. In this case, long-gun registration and fingerprints in data banks, as applied to miscreants and sexual deviants.

Why does it take a soldier home from wars to bring this to our attention? Where are the guardians of reason? Sincere thanks, Brian. Beating this back will take more robust thinking than putting police in every school.

And don't forget the NYC magazine limit is 5 rounds. Even if it's a .22 rf and bolt action!! One guy had to modify or remove from NYC a Biathlon trainer!

When are you guys going to move?

Best,
Ted

Well, they can't move to Connecticut because gun owners there are also getting letters telling them to surrender certain firearms.

But maybe this thread should be moved to Misfires so we won't know about these infringments until we have a letter from the police in our own mailboxes.

This might be a good time to either join or renew an NRA membership. It's the cheapest and best firearms insurance policy any of us can buy.

Moving won't do it, Ted. Short term, yes. Joining the board 10 years ago, I said sentiment was going so quickly the other way, our sports would change beyond recognition within my lifetime as rurals fled to the cities for jobs, and reverence for all living things began to take hold.

It's proven impossible to impose one culture on another, yours on ours, ours on yours---or on Iraq and Afghanistan. From Canada's experience, from being outgunned by the cities and wearing the consequences of insane shooters, there's only the appeal to reason.

Brian's shot at Concorde demonstrates that a tiny constituency's injunction against firearms is clearly unreasonable from public safety perspectives. It took years of protest and orderly demonstrations in federal and provincial capitals for our tiny minority of shooters to make that point and reform our laws.

Some here see this as capitulation. From their cultural perspective it may be. But it worked in Canada, with recognition that it could all be for naught tomorrow if again a mental case or couple thugs choose to shoot it out over drugs on the streets of Toronto. That's how ephemeral laws have become.