Searching for an M1 by specific Serial Number - INLAND 6841484

[BrianQ]

"Assault rifle", in quotes.
I bet they don't. Got a link showing they do?

You'd lose that bet. NJ banned M1 Carbines decades ago. Just search New Jersey Administrative Law to see for yourself.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[tenOC]

You'd lose that bet. NJ banned M1 Carbines decades ago. Just search New Jersey Administrative Law to see for yourself.

I bet it's an assault "weapon". Now how am I doing? Huge difference.

An Assault "rifle" is defined by the DOJ as being able to fire fully automatic or select fire. That's the general description. Notice I used no quotes.

---------- Post added at 08:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:31 PM ----------

“M1 Carbine type” is specifically listed as a banned weapon under New Jersey law.

https://www.state.nj.us/njsp/firearm...itle13ch54.pdf

An assault rifle is an assault weapon to NJ. An Assault Weapon is not an Assault Rifle. I'm still challenging Sunray that it's not as he quoted, an "assault rifle".

[fjruple]

I bet it's an assault "weapon". Now how am I doing? Huge difference.

An Assault "rifle" is defined by the DOJ as being able to fire fully automatic or select fire. That's the general description. Notice I used no quotes.

---------- Post added at 08:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:31 PM ----------



An assault rifle is an assault weapon to NJ. An Assault Weapon is not an Assault Rifle. I'm still challenging Sunray that it's not as he quoted, an "assault rifle".

Gents-- You are mixing terminalogy between NJ Law (which is confusing to begin with) and Federal Law. An assault rifle is prohibited in NJ as it has the capability of full automatic fire. An "assault weapon" is defined within NJ law as any semi-automatic pistol, rifle or shotgun that within each of those categories as features that make them "assault weapons". The idiot NJ law makers forgot that as defined by Federal law there is a fourth category called "Other" which they forgot to include in the law and you can all of the "evils" on a weapon defined as "Other".

[tenOC]

Gents-- You are mixing terminalogy between NJ Law (which is confusing to begin with) and Federal Law. An assault rifle is prohibited in NJ as it has the capability of full automatic fire. An "assault weapon" is defined within NJ law as any semi-automatic pistol, rifle or shotgun that within each of those categories as features that make them "assault weapons". The idiot NJ law makers forgot that as defined by Federal law there is a fourth category called "Other" which they forgot to include in the law and you can all of the "evils" on a weapon defined as "Other".

Your statement would read that NJ has a definition and legislation for an assault rifle then.

I'm not the one confused nor mixing terms so you're quoting the wrong person which adds confusion. I'm clarifying. Quotes were used in Sunrays post, therefore the source document must be available to prove the quote. So, no. I'm not confused having already stated the difference between the two.

We can assume the quote is another false statement or he would've posted the document if he had one. He could also acknowledge he made a mistake I suppose.

I searched NJ/gov's site and find no definition for "assault rifle" anywhere, hence the initial question. The M1 Carbine is not defined as an asault rifle. It's defined as an "assault firearm" which is a semi-automatic with a detachable magazine and having some additional features. Legal terms/definitions are all that matter when quoting legal declarations. Your attorney is limited to them.

[fjruple]

Your statement would read that NJ has a definition and legislation for an assault rifle then.

I'm not the one confused nor mixing terms so you're quoting the wrong person which adds confusion. I'm clarifying. Quotes were used in Sunrays post, therefore the source document must be available to prove the quote. So, no. I'm not confused having already stated the difference between the two.

We can assume the quote is another false statement or he would've posted the document if he had one. He could also acknowledge he made a mistake I suppose.

I searched NJ/gov's site and find no definition for "assault rifle" anywhere, hence the initial question. The M1 Carbine is not defined as an asault rifle. It's defined as an "assault firearm" which is a semi-automatic with a detachable magazine and having some additional features. Legal terms/definitions are all that matter when quoting legal declarations. Your attorney is limited to them.

There is no definition of "assault rifle" in NJ state statutes. An assault rifle is a rifle capable of both semi-auto and full auto fire. Under the NJ definition of "machine gun" any weapon capable of full auto fire is prohibited. There is also several presumptions that are in play here in regards to NJ firearms statues. First, you are guilty until you can provide that you are innocent. Second, there is no reason to assume there is any logic to the statues. For example, The M1 Carbine and other models like the "plainfield carbine" are banned by name. but if you produced an exact copy and call it the "NJ carbine" it would not be ban. The second part of that equation is firearms that are "substantially identical". The interpretation of that part of the law is not in the statutes themselves but a ruling by the NJ Attorney Generals Office. Confused enough yet. Given that it an interpretation by the Attorney General's Office that interpretation can change with each administration that comes into office. Well, if you want to fight it in the NJ courts get your bank roll out as the courts are in lock step with the antigun administration until you get to the Federal court system. In the meantime you are spending hundreds of thousand of dollars on bail and lawyers fees. That's is the reality of the NJ justice system. NJ is NOT a gun friendly place to be.

[browningautorifle]

Quotes were used in Sunrays post, therefore the source document must be available to prove the quote.

That'll never happen. He just throws thing in like that and leaves...

He could also acknowledge he made a mistake I suppose.

Never happen...