Image 01 Image 03

Gun Class Project

Gun Class Project

Embedded below is the text of the gun law just enacted in NY State. The underlined portions are new wording or sections.

It’s complicated stuff. I’ll be reviewing it to try to figure out the answers to some popular questions — such as what happens to current pistols which are build to accomodate 10-bullet magazines.

But I don’t claim to be a weapons expert, so I’d be interested in hearing from readers about any peculiarities or inconsistencies  based on their reading of this law, particularly the section 37(22) on “assault weapon” (starting at pg. 17) and section 23 on “Large capacity ammunition feeding device” (starting at pg. 20).

NY Gun Law Text by Legal Insurrection

Update:  Is there a “David Gregory Clause” in the New York Gun Law?


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Donald Douglas | January 17, 2013 at 2:07 pm

Off topic, sorry, but I’m live blogging the Algeria crisis: I’ve got a live blog going on the Algeria crisis: ‘Reports: 35 Hostages Killed in Algeria’. Wanted to give you a heads up, William. Thanks.

Ever since a virus got through, I’ve kept my browser’s security setting elevated (though I do accept ads, Bill) and the bill does not display. Here’s a link to the NY Assembly.

The boobs who passed this were surprised to learn that it applied to LEOs, apparently.

They promise to clean that up.

Here’s a serious question or two…

1. if a law-abiding gun owner defends themselves and/or family, and fires…say…fifteen rounds, will they have to prove they reloaded?

2. since wheel-guns (revolvers) are inherently LESS safe than are automatics (which virtually all incorporate safety features that revolvers cannot), will the State of New York be liable for injury or death from their misuse, since they have essentially mandated their use?

3. a 15 rd mag. can be loaded with 7 rounds to comply with the law (apparently). Who is going to inspect, and on what basis that complies with “probable cause”?

Note that friendly family protection guns (aka, “assault rifles”) are NOT banned in NY. Smoke ’em if ya got ’em…!!!

    Hi Rags,

    Any magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds is now illegal to possess in NY. Period. If it can, or could be restored to, accept more than 10 rounds it is just outright banned. The only exceptions I can find are “relics,” “curios” and .22 rimfire drum magazines (which appears to be a REALLY glaring hole in the whole “so you can’t kill lots of people” mentality). I have a feeling that the State of NY will be eating a 5th amendment “takings” challenge to this whole thing, as well as a 2nd amendment challenge that the law is not “reasonable” for gun restriction purposes (Heller and McDonald).

    In fact, you cannot actually even PURCHASE a magazine with more than 7 rounds now, although if you ALREADY own one that can accept between 8 and 10 rounds you may keep it so long as you don’t EVER put more than 7 rounds in it.

    The State will not make itself liable for anything, even the outcome of its own foolish laws.

    The bigger part of this that NOBODY is talking about yet is that it applies to any semi-automatic SHOTGUN that can accept more than 7 rounds (fixed magazine) or that CAN accept ANY detachable magazine. That includes just about EVERY major shotgun manufacturer’s line, and is a MAJOR confiscation of guns in NY, as they are all now classified as “assault weapons” which are illegal to possess.

      Ragspierre in reply to Chuck Skinner. | January 17, 2013 at 3:41 pm

      Hey, Chuck.

      So, my personal cheapo “tactical shotgun” (semi-autos are WAY better if you are wounded and can’t pump that pump) is now an “assault gun”…in Nuevo Ork. Not here in Texas so much!

      Yah, my questions were somewhat tongue in cheek, but the revolver safety issue is real. Just goes to the whole “Collectivists will kill you” theme I’ve posted about before (i.e., with CAFE standards that force you into less crash-worthy cars, nationalized heath care, etc.)

      As was shown statistically in DC, anti-gun laws WILL kill more people. Good piece on that yesterday…

      But the Collective never acknowledges they are killers.

      Ragspierre in reply to Chuck Skinner. | January 17, 2013 at 4:29 pm

      Hey, Chuck, wanna join me in putting up an ad somewhere in NY offering to buy mags?

      Seriously. Should come pretty cheap.

    wyntre in reply to Ragspierre. | January 17, 2013 at 5:21 pm

    What’s an LEO?

The New York law certainly stands as a classic example of a left think attempt to be seen to be doing something. In fact, until just a few minutes ago I didn’t think that it could be topped for futility and arbitrariness. But I just saw the law proposed by Massachusett’s Governor Patrick. It includes a provision to not only make illegal the purchase of more than one gun a month, but also the rental or lease of more than one gun a month. So if you would like to go to the range and sample different weapon systems without or before buying, you will be allowed one such trip a month. My God, the children are now safe. Halleluja!

WTF does that monstrosity mean? Translation, please. I have not got a clue what it says about 10-round magazines although I tried to read Section 23. The gun dealer I buy from said it’s ok to use those mags as long as you only load them with 7 bullets.

This is insane.

He also said the law won’t be implemented for 60 days. I dunno. I bought ammo today and he did not report it.

Also, FWIW, I just got my NYS pistol permit. I will be sure to buy a firearm with a 7 bullet limit.

There are challenges in the works to the law and Gibson said today he thinks there is room for amendment. An upstate congresswoman now has 40,000 signatures in a petition to repeal the law.

I couldn’t read the text on my Ipad but here goes anyway. A semi auto weapon reloads itself by the energy produced by firing a manually loaded cartridge. One squeeze of the trigger produces one shot and the weapon automatically performs all of the functions (very quickly) to ready for another shot. This continues until the ammunition supply is spent. That supply is provided by a clip, magazine, or in some cases a belt. Clips are simple devices, open on several sides, that clip the rounds together. A weapon fed this way is the M-1 Garand; 8 round clip. The clip can be modified to function with less than eight rounds with a welded or soldered on block.
Magazines are tubular or rectangular tubes, open on just one side. They feed axially, or, I guess you could say laterally through the tube. All the tubes are limited by the physical nature of springs, gravity, friction, cartridge shape etc. Any tube magazine, rectangular, or cylindrical, can be modified to hold any number of rounds, up to its maximum number, usually by using a physical block of some sort. It is common in rifles to merely shorten the magazine.
Belt fed semi autos are literally unlimited in capacity if the belts can be linked together. Conversely, you can also make a belt of ammo as short as you want to.
Finally, a pistol or rifle with a removable blocked or shortened magazine will have the capacity to operate with a normal, higher capacity magazine. The only way to change that would be to make a proprietary magazine shape, of limited capacity, that would fit only your model of weapon. Sort of like a battery pack on a rechargeable drill–a DeWalt will not fit a Mikita. Otherwise that weapon will be illegal. If a manufacturer here in Indiana makes a third party magazine of high capacity to fit the New York legal firearm and markets it, it may conceivably make the heretofore compliant weapon illegal. Instantly.

One of those “unintended consequences” of the “limited” magazine law, will be to have gun totting persons use more lethal ammunition.
We had the story recently about the woman who defended herself and her children, pumping 5 shots into an intruder … and he lived. Next time he won’t.

The futility of “high magazine clip assault ammo” limits, on display.

I’ve seen combat pistol guys change mags between very accurate double-taps without skipping a beat. Bap-bap…bap-bap…bap-bap…

My own double-tap goal is two rounds, covered by a quarter, at 7 meters in two seconds. Cigars mess that up… But not much…

    FreshPondIndians in reply to Ragspierre. | January 17, 2013 at 3:05 pm

    That fellow is quick. With the smaller AR type mags, you can tape them butt to butt so all you have to do is flip it over. Also, you can tape the magazines together side by side with a round in between (at the bottom) so it forms a “V”. Couple helpful tips from a combat vet 🙂

Obama Not The First Gun-Grabbing Tyrant Who Used Children As Cheap Political Props.

Go to link to see posters of Stalin, Mao, Hitler and Castro posing with kids.

    I’m actually kind of surprised that no one has called Obama out for using children as human shields to protect him from backlash on these Executive Orders. That IS what he is doing.

      Ragspierre in reply to Chuck Skinner. | January 17, 2013 at 3:46 pm

      Rush did. The Mushroom media has the vapors, as you’d expect.

      Pres. Fast&Furious is even getting a little heat from the Collective for his cynicism.

FreshPondIndians | January 17, 2013 at 3:01 pm

I’d imagine a lot of “assault” weapons and assorted paraphernalia will be buried in backyards all across the great state of NY

    Chicago is preparing to put an end to back yard digging with their new law:

    after 48 hours of when the firearm should have been known to be either lost or stolen, the victim of the gun theft is in violation. If a theft of a firearm is not reported to Cook County and local law enforcement entities are not notified within this arbitrary period of time, law-abiding gun owners will have to pay a fine ranging from $1,000 to $2,000

    It seems like perhaps they are anticipating a rash of “lost” firearms.

Henry Hawkins | January 17, 2013 at 3:09 pm

RE: “particularly the section 37(22) on “assault weapon” (starting at pg. 17)”

I saw nothing inconsistent or peculiar – compared to the usual liberal ignorance on weapons, that is. To be an ‘assault weapon’ requires it be a semi-automatic (one trigger pull = one shot) with ‘at least two’ of long lists of style features such as folding stocks, flash suppressors, and pistol grips which do absolutely nothing to increase the lethality of the weapon. These clauses are applied to both ‘assault’ rifles and handguns, and codeify nothing more than add-on features that look scary, but do nothing to make the gun more deadly, in other words, this section is crafted based on the ignorance and fearful emotional reactions of the writers. It’s like trying to lower the rate of high speed automoble accidents by outlawing mag wheels and racing stripes.

RE: “section 23 on “Large capacity ammunition feeding device” (starting at pg. 20)”

It outlaws any magazine with a capacity of more than 10 rounds (line 23, item ‘a’), then item ‘b’ says you cannot have more than 7 rounds loaded in that 10 rounds or less magazine. This is peculiar and appears to try to protect or grandfather in 10 round mags although you can only load 7 or less at a time.

It also specifically protects semi-automatic .22 rifles that are tube-fed, meaning rounds are fed from a long tube just under the barrel, which strikes me as peculiar, an odd set-out, possibly lobbied for by a NY .22 manufacturer? Ithaca brand rifles maybe? Are they in Ithaca NY?

Missing in any of this that I could find is law concerning a round kept in the chamber. For instance, a handgun might be decribed as having an “8+1” magazine capacity, meaning the magazine itself holds 8 rounds plus you could have one already loaded in the firing chamber, so 8+1=9 rounds overall capacity. So, what if you get caught with 7 rounds loaded plus one in the chamber? I saw nothing which addresses this. Oversight via ignorance and a sign that no weapons expert was consulted over the text.

    Ragspierre in reply to Henry Hawkins. | January 17, 2013 at 3:23 pm

    So, the Rugar 10/22 with its ten round rotary mag is an “assault weapon”…!!!

    Just as a grim lil’ thought experiment, I could legally own a lever-action rifle, chambered for a pistol cartridge as most of the old ones were (and a lot being made today still are), that would very efficiently kill people in a confined “gun free zone” in the twenty minutes we saw at Sandy Hook.

    ‘Course, I could do the same with a machete.

    I think that somebody said “well you can’t kill somebody with a .22, so we’ll exempt those so the shooters can’t scream ‘gun grab.'” That’s the only reason I can think of for the inconsistency. It’s especially galling because it allows for 22 DRUM magazines of unlimited size (I know Mossburg makes a 100 round model for about $70).

      Ragspierre in reply to Chuck Skinner. | January 17, 2013 at 3:51 pm

      A .22 is historically a favorite weapon for assassination at close range. The people who write these laws are ignorant asses.

      The round fired by a…dun-dun—da…Bushmaster is a .223. Same diameter bullet. In some states you can’t use them legally on deer.

Not trying to hijack the thread away from New York, but trying to add the ridiculous Massachusetts proposed law as amplification on why these laws are futile. Here is additional on the Mass law proposed:

– Seven round mag limit – Magazines are now limited to seven rounds. Current 10 round mags are grandfathered. Owners of so-called “pre-ban” Mass mags (magazines with more than 10-rounds which were allowable under existing law) have one year to ditch them
– One Gun A Month – Sales – Bay Staters may not purchase more than one firearm per month. To exceed that rate is a felony. (2.5 years in prison, $1000 fine)
– One Gun a Month – Rental/Lease – Citizens may not rent or lease more than one firearm a month (2.5 years in prison $1000 fine)
– Universal background checks – All firearms sales (including private sales) must be preceded by a NICS criminal background check
– Gun show registration – Gun shows must report every seller at a show to the Department of Criminal Justice Services and pay a $500 fee to same
– No Bail for Gun Offenders – If a gun is used in a violent crime the offender may be held without bail until trial
– NERF-free schools – Airguns, BB guns, paintball guns, air rifles and yes NERF guns may not be possessed on school property ($500 and a year in jail)
– “Rat Rule” – Any staff or administrators who fail to report a violation of the above law are criminals ($500 fine)

So, if a law abiding citizen forgets that the month he is in has 31 days rather than 30, he goes to a range and rents a handgun,also forgetting that he celebrated the beginning of the month at a different range with a rental of an AR15, he has committed a felony and certainly must suffer the 2 and 1/2 years in prison and the fine. It is only right-society demands it-unless of course he is David Gregory, then never mind, its alright.

Henry Hawkins | January 17, 2013 at 3:11 pm

Um, when do I get my grade?

Here’s a link to the NYS Troopers site listing guns that are now outlawed. I’ve read that being caught at home with more than 7 rounds in a 10 round magazine is a misdemeanor. Caught at home? Does this mean random gun searches and is this a 4th ammendment issue?

myveryownpointofview | January 17, 2013 at 3:19 pm

A rally/protest has been proposed for this Sat., the 19th, at the State Capitol Building in Albany NY, to protest against this new gun law.

It begins at noon. More info:

“Received news that the good men & women of Remington Arms Company from Ilion NY will be standing strong with us! Let me just say how HONORED we are to have them with us!”

As far as I know there are no buses “organized”, but I have asked the folks that are organizing the protest to look into that if possible.

More information~

There is a lot of on street parking all around the capitol, and there are several parking garages and small lots within walking distance of the capitol building.

Meeting Place:
The organizer of this event will be positioned in front of the capitol building in view of the stairs. This is a good place to meet as we can spread up and around the capitol building as our numbers increase.

As of now we have representatives from Oath Keepers, Assemblyman Steve Katz, and Senator Kathy Marchione that will be speaking.
There are a few more speakers that are unable to confirm at this time due to scheduling conflicts, but they still may attend.”

    I think it might be too late for “demonstrations” to get anywhere. The Governor won’t sign it. It’s too big of a win for the Liberals who want to outlaw guns entirely.

    However, I think if the owners of Remmington, Mossburg and other NY firearms manufacturers went down to the legislature and told them they have 3 days to repeal this monstrosity or they will move their MANUFACTURING plants that employ hundreds of people and have an economic impact upon TENS of thousands more, the legislature would at least perk up an listen.

      myveryownpointofview in reply to Chuck Skinner. | January 17, 2013 at 4:06 pm

      It’s always too late when we protest against a “progressive” action. They’ve had this stuff in the works for years. I saw a (D) NYS Sen. saying that very thing on a news show the other day. They’ve had this gun law thing sitting around for years – working on it a bit here and there to keep it up to date, so it was all ready to be slammed through when Cuomo gave the go ahead.

    2nd Ammendment Mother in reply to myveryownpointofview. | January 17, 2013 at 4:23 pm

    Wow…. While ya’ll are protesting you might point out to the fine folks at Remington Arms Company that they’re subsidizing the government that is impeding their business through their payroll, property and inventory taxes. If they feel the need to make a change, they would be welcome with arms wide open in Texas where taxes are low and we love the 2nd Amendment.

Unfortunately the NYS gun manufacturers are all upstate and Andrew Cuomo threw Upstate to the wolves months ago. His Dad toyed with running for president and he appeased the environmentalists by opposing the Shoreham Nuclear Plant in Long Island. The just started plant was scrapped, Lilco was bought out by the Long Island Power Authority (LIPA) that performed so abysmally during Hurricane Sandy. Andrew is now opposing the Indian Point Nuclear Plant, natural gas drilling upstate, and guns to win progressive donations to his 2016 aspirations.

As Mayor Koch said of Andrew “What a Schmuck!”

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | January 17, 2013 at 4:29 pm

When I read this line in the New York Post yesterday, it became crystal clear that this law is a gigantic political stunt that will have virutally no impact on reducing murders but will severely curtail the liberty of law abiding gun owners and the liberty of the owners and employees of firms that manufacture the guns Cuomo just made illegal.

“The law focuses heavily on rifles, for example, never mind that rifles were used in all of five murders in New York state in 2011; fists killed 28.”

I will never understand why Democrat voters hate freedom so much.

    myveryownpointofview in reply to MaggotAtBroadAndWall. | January 18, 2013 at 12:00 am

    Hammers killed 30 some. Stabbing over 130. Handguns over 300.

    They officially “estimate” 1 million “assault” rifles in NY, and that (apparently) the majority of the gun deaths in NY were from guns brought in from out of state, sooooooooooo statistically only one-ish of those murders by rifle was done by a NYer who owned the gun in NY. The other four were committed by out of state guns. Our one in a million.

    Saw it on a rebroadcast of the “session” on this law about an hour ago. There is a LOT of really bad stuff in this law BTW.

Kimber is not upstate, they have corporate offices in Elmsford and I believe that their manufacturing facility is in Yonkers.

Also, is supposed to have buses to go to the rally in Albany.

Freddie Sykes | January 17, 2013 at 5:10 pm

I heard one interpretation was that, if the police are interested enough to visit your home, they may have the right to count the bullets in your mags and bust you if they are more than seven.

Remember this scary speech from The American President: “You cannot address crime prevention without getting rid of assault weapons and handguns. I consider them a threat to national security, and I will go door to door if I have to, but I’m gonna convince Americans that I’m right, and I’m gonna get the guns.”


The Times Union has page up trying to answer questions about the gun law. Some great comments, questions and FAQS.
Sampling of posts:

Jimmy Vielkind, Capitol bureau

As of yesterday, 10-round magazines are prohibited for sale. You have two months (well, 60 days) where the possession and use of a 10-round magazine, loaded with more than seven rounds, is lawful. Once that window passes, it will be unlawful to possess a 10-round magazine loaded with more than seven rounds.
Thanks for the confirmation, I was afraid of that. I hope people realize that the 7 round limit is really a backdoor ban – there are very few handguns (and to a good extent rifles of various calibers) with magazines that are 7 rounds or less. Gun manufacturers are not going to start making 7 round magazines just for NY. As a result, the majority of weapons sold in stores today are now illegal which in essence is a ban on more than just “so-called assault weapons.”
Great you can buy the gun with no way of shooting it! Please go back to my post at #39. If you can’t obtain a 7 round magazine, your 15 round magazine that came with the gun is now illegal and you don’t have a pre-effective date 10 round magazine your gun can now be used as an expensive door stop. Pretty slick on the Governor and his cronies, putting that gem in the law. How to ban a gun without banning the gun. Hitler would be proud!
Glock, Sig, H&K, Springfield Armory, Remington, FN, Ruger, Browning etc.. will all have to decide whether or not they will re-tool to start producing 7 round magazines for a single state market (for pistols which may be discontinued) who’s law will be challenged in what will most likely be a lengthy legal battle.

So my rights now depend on these companies deciding to spend the money to invest in making 7 round magazines for a few years to serve a small segment of customers to comply with a law which may be thrown out in 2-4 years. A process which will take place over an unknown time frame if it happens at all. That also assumes the manufacturer for the particular gun I own will make 7 round magazines available. Placing an undue burden on me to spend hundreds of dollars or more to buy a new pistol which complies with the law. Much like how microstamping would amount to if not a de-facto ban but a severely reduced consumer market for years, the same thing will happen with the 7 round magazine requirement. I do not believe this arbitrary limit was done out of ignorance. They knew it would severely limit consumer choice and make the small number of guns that do come with 7 round magazines much more expensive.

This is like saying no one is trying to take your right to vote away. We’re just going to limit the time the polls are open to 1 hour and have one machine per precinct all while shutting down public transportation for the day

Typical leftie sloppiness.

As mentioned upthread the NYS Law banning more than 7 rounds per magazine does not exempt cops.

NEW YORK (WABC) — It appears someone forgot to exempt police officers from the ban of ammunition clips with more than 7 bullets in New York State’s new gun control law.

It’s a big oversight that apparently happened in the haste by the Cuomo Administration to get a tough package of gun-control measures signed into law.

On Tuesday, Governor Andrew Cuomo signed the sweeping gun measure, the nation’s toughest. It includes a ban on the possession of high-capacity magazines.

Specifically, magazines with more than 7 rounds will be illegal under the new law.

The problem as the statute is currently written does NOT exempt law enforcement officers.

The NYPD, the State Police and virtually every law enforcement agency in the state carry 9-milli-meter guns, which have a 15-round capacity.

More on NYC police officers violating new gun law.


A New York lawmaker says that the state’s recently passed gun control law stunningly fails to include any exemptions for law enforcement officers, and technically prohibits police from ever bringing guns on school grounds or possessing extended ammo magazines.

The NY SAFE Act, which was championed and signed into law by Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo, bans all magazines that hold more than seven bullets and pre-1994 high capacity magazines, and prohibits the carrying of guns on school grounds.

But because no loophole for law enforcement was included in the law, every police officer in the state is technically in violation of the statute even though the prohibition is unlikely to be enforced, according to New York Assemblyman Al Graf.

Graf — a former New York City police officer and the ranking Republican member of the assembly’s powerful Codes Committee — says that the ban could even impede the efforts of officers to respond to a school shooting.

“The language is unclear, and to go further, a cop cannot go on school property with a gun,” Graf told The Daily Caller. “They weren’t exempted from that, either.”

“There was actually a story that was relayed to me the other day about a New York City police officer who went to a school the other day to pick up his kid, and the security guard told him that if he came to the school with his off-duty gun he would be arrested,” Graf continued.
Graf says that the exemption was not included in the bill because Cuomo, a rising Democratic star and possible 2016 presidential candidate, rushed it through the legislature via a shortcut known as a “message of necessity.” This allowed for little public scrutiny of the bill, which was easily passed by the legislature and signed into law on Tuesday.

“I got my hands on the bill at 11:30 at night,” Graf said, adding that he only had an hour to go through it before a meeting of the Codes Committee.

“Nobody was really able to look the bill,” before it was passed, according to Graf.

“It doesn’t exclude retired police officers, so all of them have to turn in guns and magazines and stuff like that,” he said. “What they did is disarm the good guys and make sure the bad guys outgun them.”

“There are so many problems with this bill it’s unreal,” Graf said.

If there’s anything funny about that gun law, it’s the prohibition against pistols weighing more than ‘fifty ounces when unloaded.’ The left is taking the war on obesity to firearms? I still can’t figure out the rationale behind that one.

Frighteningly, no magazine can contain nor more than 7 bullets. Next year, 6. The year after that, 5. And so on and so on, until it is 1. Then it’ll be illegal to keep the bullet in the chamber unless there is a life-threatening emergency (defined in the bill, of course).

Gun buybacks are now illegal in New York.

Article 39-DDD states that, notwithstanding any previous law, all transfers and dispositions(except to close family) must be done through an FFL with an instant background check. My understanding is that under federal law, FFLs have to do all their work at their place of business. I saw no exemption for police department purchasers. Even if the law doesn’t apply to government purchasers, it seems to apply to private party sellers (or disposers, if trading a gun for a gift card is not a sale).

To comply with the law, a gun buyback must be at a gun store and the FFL has to keep a log of every purchase.

“Any person who violates the provisions of this article shall be guilty of a class A misdemeanor”, so both the cops buying the guns and the sellers go straight to jail.

The statute effectively eliminated private party sales. It sets a maximum fee of $10 for an FFL (gun dealer) to do all the paperwork, but they don’t have to do them. Paperwork takes at least an hour, it takes a skilled employee, and if a mistake is made the FFL risks losing his license. Only an idiot would do that voluntarily for $10. In California, the fee is $20, FFLs are required by law to do it for $20, and they really don’t like to do it.

What if you passed a law saying nobody could charge more than $10 for an abortion?

For extra credit, compare and contrast Walters v. National Association of Radiation Survivors, which limited attorney fees to $10 in veterans benefits cases.

There’s certainly a few things that jump out…

I note that page 8 lines 36-38 do not allow transfers between siblings. I guess you could transfer to a parent and then back down to the other child, but if there’s no living parent, there’s no option to gift your brother or sister.

As others have pointed out, the transfer rules require that all non-immediate-family transfers be mediated by an FFL, and the federal FFL rules prevent anonymous transfers, so “no questions asked” gun buyback programs are prohibited under the law.

As reported by others, Page 10 – section 9.46 calls on Physicians, Psychologists, RN’s and LCSW’s to report to the director of community services when they think there’s a rick of harm to self-or-others. Then, that person (the director or his designee) can forward to criminal justice services the name and id of the person. — I have some problems with this, since a single professional, with no second opinion can strip your gun rights, and the director that the LCSW reports to is under no requirement to conduct their own investigation in any way.

The hard stuff of course, begins on page 17, section 37.

The definition of an “assault weapon” is as we all know, entirely cosmetic. The exact same gun with no pistol grip and a fixed wooden stock somehow magically isn’t an assault weapon. On the other hand, if I take a gun, and drop it into an adjustable stock with a pistol grip, it magically turned into an assault weapon. This is just weird.

Another thing that’s weird is, apparently only detachable magazines are limited as to rounds, unless the weapon is a shotgun in which case there’s a five-round-limit.

On page 19, starting at line 54, paragraph vi, am I reading this correctly that semi-auto rifles with external magazines with capacities over 10 rounds, but which were made prior to January 1963 are exempt from being called assault weapons?

So, a C&R eligible 13 round CZ-82 or Browning Hi Power is legit????

I note that on page 20, lines 31 and 32 says “or_a
32 feeding_device_that_is_a_curio_or_relic” — so unless I mis-read this the magazines for the CZ-82 or a 13 round Browning Hi Power from pre-1962 are legit as well. This seems to be a somewhat giant loophole.

Does the term “current date” continue to move forward, or is “current date” the date of passage of the bill? If it moves forward, then there are “rather a lot” of interesting hi-cap weapons that were produced in the early 1960’s…..

Is page 24, section 265.36 in contradiction to the section above since it doesn’t mention those exceptions? Which rules?