I'm sure this has been discussed in the past but I was hoping someone could help me out. I'm trying to post this in the Northeast Shooters forum but dont have permission to post yet ha. I live in CT and I know the laws for an "evil weapon". But the thing that confuses me is that its stated in the laws that it's a select fire weapon with a removal magazine and at least one of the options (threaded barrel, pistol grip, etc.) but the 15-22 is not a select fire weapon correct? I'm just confused on that. Sorry for the dumb question.
Is the 15-22 Considered an Assualt Weapon?
- Thread starter Gachrid
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
whoppo
Member
3. Any semiautomatic firearm not listed in subdivision (1) that meets the following criteria:
(A) A semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least two of the following:
i. a folding or telescopic stock;
ii. a pistol grip;
iii. a bayonet mount;
iv. a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and
v. a grenade launcher.
Well it doesn't need to be select fire... they specify semiauto in section 3. However, if your 15-22 is compliant (pinned stock and no threaded barrel/flash suppressor), then it's not technically an "assault rifle" in CT as it would only meet one of the conditions (pistol grip). Some states completely exclude rimfire rifles from the whole "AR" thing, but I'm not seeing that exclusion in the CT laws.
Reference: http://www.jud.ct.gov/JI/criminal/glossary/assaultweapon.htm
(A) A semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least two of the following:
i. a folding or telescopic stock;
ii. a pistol grip;
iii. a bayonet mount;
iv. a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and
v. a grenade launcher.
Well it doesn't need to be select fire... they specify semiauto in section 3. However, if your 15-22 is compliant (pinned stock and no threaded barrel/flash suppressor), then it's not technically an "assault rifle" in CT as it would only meet one of the conditions (pistol grip). Some states completely exclude rimfire rifles from the whole "AR" thing, but I'm not seeing that exclusion in the CT laws.
Reference: http://www.jud.ct.gov/JI/criminal/glossary/assaultweapon.htm
Thanks for the help. I know that section 3 but I thought it said it was select fire weapons. Anyways, I do have the CT compliant version. But as everyone does I have a pistol grip which makes it so I cant thread my barrel for a suppressor like I want. Where I shoot for free I think the 15-22 may be too loud and I really want a suppressor for it (as long as my rifle and pistol). I'm always confused with section though. If I have pistol grip and threaded barrel it is considered illegal? I get confused if two items means illegal or is the limit to stay legal ha.
DownRange&Upwind
Member
The 15 22 is TOO loud? I can see a .223 or a 308 etc etc but a 15 22 too loud?!? Wow.. that is avery strict range there. What do they allow.. Slingshots and crossbows?
Haha maybe its just me for loud. I shoot for free at my girlfriends fathers land. It's near people homes so loud shots are sometimes an issue. My rifle is not loud so its never been a problem. Pistols are louder. Point is that I still want a suppressor I can use on all my guns ha.
DownRange&Upwind
Member
Oh my bad. I thought it was a free public range. As far as the 15 22 its not nearly as loud as other calibers. Sorry for this misunderstanding. And I may be wrong here,( and likely I am) but are'nt the suppressor linked to that particular weapons serial Number when you pay the tax stamp? As I say im probably wrong, but some how this seems like I have saw this posted somewhere else.
What do you mean? Its registered to my pistol so I can't use it on my rifle of 15-22?
DownRange&Upwind
Member
Im not 100% sure. So forgive me if I am wrong. But it seems I read somewhere that you can get in trouble with the authorities for using a suppressor on a weapon that hasnt had the tax stamp paid for it specificaly. As I said im not fully sure, and I am probably wrong. So take this as a " could be true". But Id look into it to be safe. I remember reading something on this subject a long time back, and I just cant fully remember what the actual psoting of the law on this matter was.
Tram
Member
This is incorrect.. A suppressor can be moved between weapons with no worries.. You have to have a stamp for each suppressor though.. So you can't go get 1 tax stamp and a Tac 65 and a Spectre and a X, Y and Z..
The tax stamp does not link the suppressor to any serial number of a weapon..
I have a SWR Spectre on order (waiting on my Form 4) that will ride on all my .22 equiped weapons - MP15-22, P-22, Ruger 10-22, etc.. etc..etc..
DownRange&Upwind
Member
Ok, that may be it. I even said I was probably wrong. I knew there was a 200 dollar stamp, just wasnt aware if it was per weapon or not. As I said it was a long time ago, when I saw a thread that had the same question in it, on another site.
Tram
Member
Yeh, no worries.. I wasn't trying to give you a hard time about it..
I wasn't trying to give you a hard time about it..
DownRange&Upwind
Member
No offence taken. Just glad a fellow member got the correct info, and I as well, now have the correct info on the subject.
dsf
Member
Does CT define "detachable magazine"? Not "what is the common sense definition?" but the state's legal definition. I'm in CA and we have a similar AW ban, however the CA definition of a detachable magazine specifically states a magazine may be removable with a tool and that a bullet is a tool. We have literally hundreds of thousands of ARs, AKs, FALs, Sigs, etc that use a device called a "Bullet Button" to meet CA's definition of a non-detachable, but legally removable, magazine. Takes nearly the same amount of time to remove a "non-detachable" magazine as a detachable one.
YouTube - how to install a bullet button on your AR15 / M16
Again, I've no idea what CT requires for non-detachable status but maybe this is worth exploring on AR rifles. Once you kill the non-detachable feature none of the other restrictions would apply, correct?
Similar threads
