Probably easier to make a list of what isn’t banned. Might be a shorter list.
Probably easier to make a list of what isn’t banned. Might be a shorter list.
Welcome to Sako club.
I have a Browning BL22, first rifle I bought and have shot thousands of bunnies in central otago with it over the years. A very trusty reliable friend. It would break my bloody heart to have to give it up, I would liken it to taking the dog to the vet to be put down. Bloody hard thing to do.
GUN CONTROL IS A TIGHT 5-SHOT GROUP.
Would it be fair to saw that any centrefire with a detachable mag will be gone.
Shortening a tube mag on the likes of a BL22 is not something that can be undone. And I have seen nothing that would suggest that would be unacceptable. they stated that you cannot modify a semi auto to less than 5 rounds to make it legal in the OIC, but that seems to be because once the law was pushed through, the rifle was gone anyway even if it only had 4 shots. And they were not accepting action alterations to make them non-semi auto because those mods could be undone....
I have seen nothing regarding not being allowed to shorten 22 magazines and if you may think it sacrilegious to do so, it is better than the crusher.
Are there any revolver rifles out there? A cylinder holds 6 rounds and fires every time you pull the trigger... Rossi Circuit Judge, is just one example.
@tetawa it is only the magazine that is prohibited, except for pump action shotguns that are capable of being used with a detachable magazine. For every other non-prohibited firearm so long as the magazines you have in your possession hold 10 rounds or less you are fine.
What's the score with bolt actions that take the same mags as a semi? Mossberg MVP and AR mags or Ruger American Ranch and mini 30 mags for example. Are the mags still legal or are these rifles basically gone without (imaginary)compensation?
That is where there is a conflict in the proposed laws. The firearm itself is OK, but it contains a banned part.
There are only three types of people in this world. Those that can count, and those that can't!
It's so open to interpretation. I have multiple chassis rifles. Pistol grips per se aren't a problem... but if it's compatible with a prohibited firearm, technically no. As are the buffer tubes, castle nuts, stocks... and suppressors, and scopes.
Part of me thinks maybe modofying the chassis to make it incompatible with AR furniture is an idea. Fill the buffer tube with epoxy. Mill the interface for the pistol grip flat and make my own grips. Good luck using them on an AR.
But then there's still an AR out there somewhere that'll be compatible with the scopes and suppressors I have. So unless the intention is to ban them too, it's unreasonable to consider them AR parts, in which case it's also unreasonable to consider the furniture as AR parts.
One great big grey area.
Bookmarks