Looking for an answer here. If you have a registered e cat firearm and put a collapsable/folding stock on it and once folded or collapsed goes under 762mm it's illegal right? A no can do. ?
Printable View
Looking for an answer here. If you have a registered e cat firearm and put a collapsable/folding stock on it and once folded or collapsed goes under 762mm it's illegal right? A no can do. ?
Police policy is to measure with the stock unfolded/extended, but police policy isn't law.
If its shorter than 762mm is it a Pistol ?
Yeah its a pistol under 762mm so you cant legaly have it on your E
First, I don'y know answer to initial question, but if it falls then into pistol category would require "B" endorsement, "E" does not cover pistols.
Might be wrong here but normally allows you to go to around 10.5" barrel on say an Ar with a standard retractable?
They are pistols if they are shorter than 762mm. Those ar15 rifles are actually pistols not rifles.Quote:
Originally Posted by jackson21
Yes looks like would have to be around 12.5" min on a fixed stock to keep under that 762mm length, if brake included in length would have to be fixed type.
Yep. Plenty of people have got them with 10in barrels thinking they are A cat, not realising they have brought a pistol. Anyway, why you would want one with a 10inch barrel is beyond me.Quote:
Originally Posted by jackson21
Unless your into door kicking, 10 inches means lots of flame and noise with quite a drop in MV. I have never fired one but being net to one on the range i have to say they sound nasty and seem to spit out un-burned powder.Quote:
Originally Posted by jim160
Not having one to measure, is a collapsing stock version with 14.5 inch under the legal length when collapsed? Mus t be a lot of those out there.
a 10.5" with a suppressor is a fuck of a lot more handy than a 16" or whatever with a suppressor....
Uh but when Joe Green was in charge of gun matters he openly stated that E category guns are measured with the stock extended. I believe the current guy states the same thing. So basically it is a grey area. There is confusion because there are many E cat registered guns that fall well under 762mm with the stock folded. Also, a folding or telescoping stock is specifically recognized as an MSSA feature.
the arms act only says "under 762mm in length", which isn't defined at all, could go either way, "length" to me in plain english is "the longest possible distance between the ends of an object", i.e., with stock fully extended
That is basically what the English dictionary says. MSSA's also are not made or adapted to be fired with one hand, they are clearly designed to be fired from the shoulder, with the stock extended.
With a bare muzzle, yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by 300CALMAN
And that could be also identified as to how the Police find it. if its fully retracted then that would be the length. Personally I wouldn't want to spend 10K fighting it in Court. Cause you would have to prove it. At the very least they would probably revoke the licence and see what happens in Court. If they determine its a breach, then there goes the licence.Quote:
Originally Posted by gimp
But in your theory, then a folding stock on an AK47 would be fine as its measured at its longest length. I certainly don't see that working out or the Police allowing that.
Considering that 10" is longer than what 300blk was made for, why would you want something even longer again??Quote:
Originally Posted by jim160
Super short .223 I don't understand, 12ish inches is already getting bloody short for that.
I like short, handy guns.
I have a .22 AR with a permanently attached can that is only just over legal min with the stock extended, and unless there is any change it will have a folding stock adaptor fitted next time I'm in NZ-that will actually add over a inch it the in use length.
I have thought about getting the barrel trimed more due to this but as the police could change there mind at any time as to how they measure I don't want to put myself in the position of maybe in the future having a useless barrel
Short handy rifles rule, folding stocks make transport easier.
Most guns would be 'pistols' by that definition.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauser308
There's plenty of precedent for that, i.e. the many folding stocked AKs that are E endorsed, and the fact that the Arms Code actually has a picture of one as an example of an MSSAQuote:
Originally Posted by jim160
Interesting... Well I guess we haven't heard of anyone being "Done" for this (Yet).Quote:
Originally Posted by Banana
No arguments about the handiness of a short rifle, just don't think .223/5.56 is the best cartridge for such a short barrel.
The arms code is a guide. The Arms Act is the law and whats used in Court.Quote:
Originally Posted by gimp
I might look into that with the folding stocks.
Yes, it is only a guide, just thought it was interesting re: what it shows of how the police interpret the law. The law as above doesn't provide much clarity on this oneQuote:
Originally Posted by jim160
The biggest issue of all is that people have asked and senior police have said "measured with stock fully extended". As pointed out, their opinion is relatively meaningless. Some local AO's are of the opinion that minimum length is measured with stock folded/closed, no idea what police officers are actually told to do. It is one of those issues which needs a judge to make a binding ruling either way.
Or not, and we just keep rocking out in the grey area
My only concern is that people who think they know the law giving advice to those who don't have any idea. Much like people on here who say that's the way I read it. That's not the law or how its interpreted.
Opinions are one thing that can get people into court and spend thousands on a "that's how I read it idea".
It can be a grey area and I'm sure the police will fix it by eventuallymaking all ssemi autos an e cat rifle.
Everyone be cautious of the bush lawyers on here who think they know the law.
Yea but if they make all semi autos e cat it still doesn't answer that question.
No-one knows the law on this because it's not clearly defined anywhere, in the act or in case law as far as anyone has been able to show. Safest? Avoid having a gun that can be measured as under 762mmQuote:
Originally Posted by jim160
Some of us "bush lawyers" are going on emails with police, as the law is not clear then us working with police so that we are doing what they think is within the law is all we can do.Quote:
Originally Posted by jim160
I for one have just enough faith in the justice system that if we are seen to be making strenuous attempts be within the law,as seen by those tasked with enforcing it, that if a judge decided that we are actually outside it then we can just change what or how we do things.
As I understand it, the police decided how they would measure it after a judge decided a defendant souls have his rife measured from the two furthest point rather than along the plain of the barrel.
As I don't have this on file I could be wrong.
I've got a 12.5" SBR in .223/5.56 and it's surprisingly accurate. Loud as f#*k though but that's why I have it suppressed :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by 300CALMAN
Short barrel rifles are the shiz.
That has nothing to do with pistols?Quote:
Originally Posted by jim160
Or the legislation just clears it up so no one has to look for case law, but instead can just read the actual legislation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beavis
No question about the accuracy. YES i will not argue with the need for a suppressor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasquatch
How did we get on to all semis being re classified as MSSAs? Just imagine an old Browning .22 tube fed.. Yep that definitely qualifies as Military Style?!:wtfsmilie: