TYR Tactical

NY State Banned Rifle Features

If you thought California gun laws were bad, check out this PowerPoint presentation from New York Governor Cuomo’s office.

NY State – Banned Rifle Features by solsys

35 Responses to “NY State Banned Rifle Features”

  1. JM says:

    vote with your feet

  2. Arrow 4 says:

    Commie Muther Fockers!

  3. semperdanny says:

    PowerPoint…?…wow, now that’s serious. Nothing more deadlier than PowerPoint…maybe we should ban PowerPoint instead…

  4. Weaver says:

    Under the old law, my AR could only have a pistol grip and detachable magazine.

    Under the new law, once I register it, any weapon with one or more “features” besides the detachable mag is an “assault weapon” – so I might as well add a collapsible stock, flash suppressor, bayonet lug, and GL attachment point back on.

    Apparently they don’t actually make the rifles more dangerous after all. Gee, if only someone had made that clear back in 1994, maybe we could have avoided all the subterfuge and gotten straight to banning scary gunz.

  5. SPQR476 says:

    Why don’t they just cut to the chase and put a pair of testicles as a “banned feature”? That’s what really scares them, anyway.

  6. Mr. European says:

    All for arms registrations, here.
    The registration => confiscation paradigm is nothing more than conspiracy theory. If your arm is registered, it’s your legal property, and I doubt your property can be removed from you without due process.
    And if that property is ever misplaced or removed from your possession without consent (i.e. STOLEN), you’d report it to the authorities like with any other stolen possessions. If it’s ever recovered, you’d get it back. Or if you’ve lost it because of negligence, you get punished for that as you should.
    Cars are registered, why not arms?

    However, on this booklet I see a bit of a contradiction.
    “Rifles requiring registration are […] have one more of the following military features” But those features are marked as banned, so is the case that currently owned arms need to be registered, but they won’t be otherwise touched; or that ownership of such features is declared illegal (with or without a grace period)?

    Would the “second grip” part apply also to angled grips? Regardless, I wouldn’t think this rule is all that needed.
    Same for thumbhole stocks. The stock doesn’t allow the length of the weapon to change, so what’s the problem there, except a cosmetic issue?
    Folding or collapsing stocks make weapons take less space during transport or possible concealment, while thumbhole stock is just another version of a traditional buttstock. Can’t think of any justification at all for banning that.

    Bayonet mount…. Bayonets are rendered practically obsolete, but what would civilians need bayonets for?
    How would they handle old Mosins or the SKS, since their bayonets are bolted on the weapons?

    Not gonna touch the flash suppressor issue much, as it’s more ambiguous for me at this point than I’d like. But I will ask if they’re going for this just because of looks or because it reduces muzzle flash?

    • Caleb says:

      Because driving is not a constitutional right and bearing arms is.

      • BradKAK308 says:

        How many people die each year due to vehicles exceding the speed limit? No restrictions on cars.

    • BradKAK308 says:

      It’s all about cosmetics! Muzzle breaks generally add to noise so…

    • Ivan says:

      I get highly annoyed when emasculated European dilettantes presume to lecture us about the reasonableness of arms registration and then proceed to state that because “[c]ars are registered….” that arms should be too.
      Our founding fathers believed that the bearing of arms was a natural right derived from God and NOT the government. The founding fathers chose to enunciate this belief, which was self-evident, into the bill of rights. Please tell me where in the Constitution are cars mentioned? Europeans, with their sordid history of genocide perpetrated against unarmed civilians, should most of all understand that due process means nothing to tyrannical governments that can assume power at any time.

    • Ken says:


    • Is there an ignore feature?

    • Craig says:

      Tell that to the Jews, Gypsies, and other undesirables in 1930’s Europe. Or the Christians and intellectuals in Communist China, Cambodia, or the Soviet Union.

      Registration absolutely leads to confiscation. Just like in Great Britain, Australia, Japan and number of other nations. Luckily those nations haven’t experienced genocide like the others above. . . yet.

      • Mr. European says:

        1. German 1920s gun laws were designed to curb various armed factions that spawned from the fall of their empire. Such as communists, royalists, ultra-nationalists, etc.
        1a. The NSDAP was a master of populism (they quite successfully portrayed themselves as a messianic group), so any attempted armed resistance from the groups persecuted by the regime would only have fed fuel to the fire (dear GOD, no pun intended) in the national fervor against these groups. They attained power by exploiting the situation around them and winning the ballot.
        1b. 1938 gun laws in Germany largely freed up firearms for the general populace (except the ones NSDAP marked as “undesirable”) and militarism and the hunting culture were promoted. Indeed a long-term goal would have been to completely merge and replace law enforcement with the military.

        2. By my understanding asian culture had for long been stratified in the sense that the common people did not question their leaders.

        3. The soviet union started with a largely unarmed populace of, except for their civil war. Any undesirable after that would have been easily discredited and detained by the state as being “on the other side.” I’ll need to find further material on the gun politics of the post-Stalin USSR to debate this further.

        Japan has always had a weird relationship with firearms. Some might say that the entertainment industry and sports have so much japanese martial arts (and melee weapons) because firearms stagnated in the Tokugawa Shogunate for over two centuries until Commodore Perry.
        Today a very strict licensing procedure limits firearm ownership and use.

        In Britain there’s a requirement for certification and they have weapon feature restrictions.

        Australia yet again has a licensing and registration requirement, and the mentally unfit or previously convicted cannot get a license.

        The underlying thing is that most other developed nations in the world require certification and licensing for firearms. One must prove that they are responsible with firearms. Generally only troubled regions allow licensing for “self-defence,” like N. Ireland in the UK.

        Buybacks can hardly be called confiscation. Voluntary surrender of banned arms could be called that, but if it doesn’t carry any further legal actions by the authorities…

        • Bushman says:

          In post-Stalin era everything was pretty simple. Civilians had the right to own shotguns and rifles for hunting (and they had to proof that they hunt by giving some mandatory number of hides to hunting association). Pistols and automatic guns was prohibited. The only exception was pistols received as award. Laws did not changed until the fall of USSR, when civilians got the right to own shotguns for self-defense.

          • Mr. European says:

            Well, currently AFAIK five years of spotless shotgun ownership gives the right to get pistols or rifles.

        • Bushman says:

          Still no pistols anyway.
          Traumatic pistols (with rubber bullets) does not count – you can get it for self-defense right from the moment of getting the license.
          And no rifles with self-defense license – you still have to get a hunter’s license to buy rifle after five years of legal ownership of shotgun. But currently you don’t have to proof that you are actually hunting to keep the hunter license, so many people have both self-defense and hunter license.

      • Mr. European says:

        Let me ask you this, though: what do you think of Israel’s firearms policy?

    • Patrick Gaskill says:

      If a gun has a telescoping stock that can’t colapse far enough to make the rifle shorter than the leagal minimum what’s the point of banning it.

      • Mr. European says:

        That’s a good argument.
        But I think for your deciders it’s simpler to make a blanket statement than go into minutiae.

    • SGT Rock says:

      Quit trolling on SSD.

    • BlackLion says:

      Some points to consider;
      This very law was enacted without “due process.”
      A Report of Loss/Theft already allows the Return of Recovered Firearms.
      Driving in NY is a privilege, Not a Constitutional Right.
      Owners have one year from the date of enactment to Register.
      “Second grip” applies to AFGs.
      A Thumbhole Stock design could have been used to circumnavigate the Pistol Grip feature and avoid Registration.
      “Old-Mosins” and other Bolt-Action Rifles are Exempt from the Restrictions on Semi-Automatic Rifles with Detachable Magazines.
      Flash Suppressors are another standard feature on most “Assualt Weapons. “

    • The Stig says:

      Actually, New York has already used the registration => confiscation. In November of 1967, New York City passed a law requiring the registration of all long-guns (rifles and shotguns).

      On July 30th, 1991 New York City then passed a law banning assault weapons based on a one feature test (much like the one just passed for the rest of NY state a couple of weeks ago). They then used the registration rolls to go door to door to verify that the firearms that no longer complied were sold or destroyed. Those that were not were confiscated on the spot under threat of criminal penalties for those who didn’t immediately turn their firearms over. Those firearms were then destroyed.

      So, yeah, if I was a New Yorker, I’d be a little concerned as to why they want you to register your firearm. Especially seeing as confiscation is what the NY Democrats originally wanted when they began their push for this legislation. It doesn’t take a conspiracy theorist to wonder if following the next tragedy they simply ban assault rifles all together, and then they have a record of you owning one.

    • bobX says:

      Conspiracy? Check out how the movement against pit bulls has unfolded. The registered ones have been confiscated. Registering makes the eventual round up that much easier. And this is about an eventual banning of everything. Not that you need to care, being from an entirely irrelevant part of the world in relation to US policy. I guess I’ll go hand my guns in now since you seem to be fine with it. My vehicle is registered because it is operated on state and federally funded roads by the way.

    • Batman says:

      ” it’s your legal property, and I doubt your property can be removed from you without due process.”

      You’re completely ignorant. Not only has this happened over and over again throughout history, but you must be completely oblivious to what is currently happening in this country.

      NY residents currently have less than a year to sell any magazine that holds more than 10 rounds. This is forced forfeiture of legally owned property without individual due process.

      Also, you apparently did not pay attention to Hurricane Katrina where US citizens had their lawfully owned firearms confiscated, and were left defenseless in an unstable environment littered with looters, murderers, and rapists.

  7. Slushy says:

    Mr. European is a troll. He always posts his opinion on here just to get an argument out of us. The right to bear arms was written, because from the second ancient man picked up a rock and killed his dinner with it, we have used tools to find food, and defend our claims and livelihood, and no government should tell is otherwise. Cars can be limited, and taken away, and no bad would come of it. In fact, it would end up being nothing but a good thing to the overall good of society. The list of benefits is too long to type from my phone, but trust me. The reason we still have then though, is this is America, where we have the right to do whatever the f*** we want within reason. As long as we hurt no one and nothing (for the most part). This country was founded as the LAND OF THE FREE, because that’s what the people wanted. John Smith (generic name not historical) came here because he wanted to shoot some GD bears in the face with a musket, sell or trade the furs and meat, and not have the government take it all or what they thought was their share of it. We can learn a lot from Europe when it comes to certain parts of our way of life, but rolling over and being dependent on the government is not one of them. I am disgusted at the people I meet that mooch of the government teat, contribute nothing in return, and whine when their free f***ing cell phone breaks. This country gets weaker every day because we allow weakness to breed and thrive. “Stop the bullies because it hurts my kids feelings”. Whaaaaa, get a pair and kick that bully in the dick. When the time comes, those people will regret being leeches and pond scum, as we who stand up and fight for our rights to stay free, walk tall with our heads high because we still have a spine attached to us.

  8. Aj says:

    time to buy a bullet button, at least in cali we still have 10rds

  9. Paul says:

    So you bought a AR from a guy who bought it from a guy, etc, etc. You have no intention of ever selling it, so why register? Cause its the law? Ok, got it. LOL

  10. Gregory says:

    You New Yorkers need to overturn that shit. It’s unconstitutional.

  11. SGT Rock says:

    Gov. Cuomo is nothing but a vote pandering shill for the far left liberals. NY needs to wake the fuck up and vote this cock in the mouth out of office, unless they like living in a nanny state that decides what is right for them.

  12. Luke says:

    so are the cali-style no-thumb-hole stocks still OK?
    cause everyone knows a gun can’t hurt anyone if you can’t use your thumb.

  13. BlackLion says:

    BTW, the Governor’s “Common Sense” legislation also failed to include a Law Enforcement Exemption from the new 7-Round Rifle and Pistol Magazine Restriction.

    Some may also be interested in reading the NYS Sherriffs Association’s Official Response to this legislation: http://www.nysheriffs.org/articles/sheriffs%E2%80%99-response-ny-safe-act

  14. mandingo says:

    Did the accessory manufacturers give the Governor’s office permission to use their IP (photos) in its publication?

  15. BS says:

    I grew up in So Cal….Never Again, I lived in LI, NY for 7 yrs, Never Again….These people don’t live in the real world, they expect the government to provide everything in thier lives, safety, security, and financial help. You will Never change the way they think. Those two states are already model “Police States”, time for America to Wake Up……..