PDA

View Full Version : Is The New MagPul AFG an Evil Feature?


Phireglass
12-02-2009, 1:21 PM
Ok, so after 2 seconds i decided im buying this AFG, when its out, my question is, does this count as a evil feature? im gettin 2, that is as long its alright to throw on a featureless, I mean its not a pistol grip but maybe the DOJ had different thoughts? What do you guys think?

aplinker
12-02-2009, 1:32 PM
No, it is not a "forward pistol grip."

CCR is pretty clear in defining what a pistol grip is. This doesn't meet that definition.

Phireglass
12-02-2009, 2:03 PM
yea, thought so, better to be safe then sorry..

Fate
12-02-2009, 2:09 PM
No, it is not a "forward pistol grip."

CCR is pretty clear in defining what a pistol grip is. This doesn't meet that definition.

Not so fast. Since it is hollow, one could conceivably put their thumb thru it and attain a pistol-style grasp. Women/children especially. It's not "intended" to be used that way, but it could be used that way.

No way I'd run it on a featureless build as is. Maybe plug the hole, but stock configuration on a featureless build is asking for it.

http://i50.tinypic.com/2m5dsut.jpg

Jicko
12-02-2009, 2:24 PM
Very possible for a "pistol style graps"... i personally would NOT use it on a featureless... unless you get a "formal" letter from DOJ or BATF...

technique
12-02-2009, 2:25 PM
I doubt I could fit my thumb in there, let alone enough to get a pistol style grasp.

glock_this
12-02-2009, 2:27 PM
http://i50.tinypic.com/2m5dsut.jpg

there is a dude picking his nose in the background of this photo :D

glock_this
12-02-2009, 2:33 PM
since all the hoopla yesterday, this is the cleanest photo I have seen of it..

but, something stands out about it. notice the metal, maybe 2, joints in it? one at the lowest point and one up near the rail? what do you suppose those are about. I suppose the one up near the rail "could" be the nut side of the picatinny bolt system. but the lower one almost seems like an adjustable pivot point, but the rear most down support is fixed. I wonder what that 1 gleaming metal rivet/nut/joint is down at the lowest apex? why would it need to be there? the whole unit could be molded solid, but when you see that, it almost seems there is some adjustability to it like maybe forward and aft 2 to 3 rail slots to adjust angle?

slappomatt
12-02-2009, 2:34 PM
Very possible for a "pistol style graps"... i personally would NOT use it on a featureless... unless you get a "formal" letter from DOJ or BATF...

you are insane. lol. how do you get "conspicuously protrudes" from a sliver of angle like that.:TFH:

rkt88edmo
12-02-2009, 2:40 PM
At some point a sling attachment on a rail could be a FPG according to that definition. I'm not saying CADOJ/zealous DAs wouldn't go there though.

tiger222
12-02-2009, 2:40 PM
It's like a foward monster man ......

technique
12-02-2009, 2:43 PM
since all the hoopla yesterday, this is the cleanest photo I have seen of it..

but, something stands out about it. notice the metal, maybe 2, joints in it? one at the lowest point and one up near the rail? what do you suppose those are about.

It comes apart in 2 pieces. There is one screw there at the triangle and another upfront.

You loosen the screws and it becomes wide enough to slip on to the rail.
The screw up front is the one you slip between the slots in the rail to place it.

So...you could. (if you have small thumbs) slip something between it in that area and you tighten it down....no more hole.

glock_this
12-02-2009, 2:44 PM
gotcha. have you seen a photo of it in pieces?

Jicko
12-02-2009, 2:45 PM
I doubt I could fit my thumb in there, let alone enough to get a pistol style grasp.

Not the thumb thru the hole, but straight index finger and the thumb wrapping around the back....

sonico
12-02-2009, 2:48 PM
So...you could. (if you have small thumbs) slip something between it in that area and you tighten it down....no more hole.

Is the legality based on the person that owns it? If you're thumb is too big to fit but someone elses thumb would fit that makes it not an AW for you but an AW for them?

CFV
12-02-2009, 2:49 PM
So what say you on an AR pistol....yay or nay. Whos gonna be the first to walk that line

Jicko
12-02-2009, 2:51 PM
Is the legality based on the person that owns it? If you're thumb is too big to fit but someone elses thumb would fit that makes it not an AW for you but an AW for them?

Negative....

This argument came up when people are designing different bullet button.... as long as "someone" is able to get their finger to "detach without a tool", then it is no go....

technique
12-02-2009, 2:51 PM
Is the legality based on the person that owns it? If you're thumb is too big to fit but someone elses thumb would fit that makes it not an AW for you but an AW for them?

I would say, I am the owner of the rifle...

If MY thumb don't fit, YOU must acquit!

Its like the Solar tactical thing...If the DA stands up in front of a court room, bends your Solar tactical and releases the mag...does that make you guilty of MGFing an AW. NO! But the DA is now guilty of MFGing an AW.

sonico
12-02-2009, 2:55 PM
Interesting points. Hmm. If I cut off my thumb I wonder if I can take off my bullet button LOL.

till44
12-02-2009, 3:11 PM
since all the hoopla yesterday, this is the cleanest photo I have seen of it..

but, something stands out about it. notice the metal, maybe 2, joints in it? one at the lowest point and one up near the rail? what do you suppose those are about. I suppose the one up near the rail "could" be the nut side of the picatinny bolt system. but the lower one almost seems like an adjustable pivot point, but the rear most down support is fixed. I wonder what that 1 gleaming metal rivet/nut/joint is down at the lowest apex? why would it need to be there? the whole unit could be molded solid, but when you see that, it almost seems there is some adjustability to it like maybe forward and aft 2 to 3 rail slots to adjust angle?

Drake mentioned on ARF that the finished design also had interchangeable straps like the MIAD. One with the finger notch and another thats flat. Adding to what Technique said it may allow the straps to be changed out and locked in place.

technique
12-02-2009, 3:16 PM
gotcha. have you seen a photo of it in pieces?

Saw a detailed design photo.

shark92651
12-02-2009, 3:18 PM
Not so fast. Since it is hollow, one could conceivably put their thumb thru it and attain a pistol-style grasp. Women/children especially. It's not "intended" to be used that way, but it could be used that way.

No way I'd run it on a featureless build as is. Maybe plug the hole, but stock configuration on a featureless build is asking for it.

Does the California definition of "pistol grip" apply to a vertical pistol grip?

California Definition Of Assault Weapon

12276.1
(a) Notwithstanding Section 12276, "assault weapon" shall also mean any of the following:
(1) a semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:

(a) pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon.
(b) thumbhole stock.
(c) folding or telescoping stock
(d) grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(e) flash suppressor.
(f) forward pistol grip.

The following definitions apply to terms used in the identification of assault weapons pursuant to Penal Code section 12276.1:

(d) "pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon" means a grip that allows for a pistol style grasp in which the web of the trigger hand (between the thumb and index finger) can be placed below the top exposed portion of the trigger while firing.


I guess the California legislators didn't really think of applying this definition to a "forward pistol grip" because language regarding "beneath the action" and describing where the web of the hand is while firing doesn't make sense when talking about a grip under the barrel. Is there a separate definition of "vertical pistol grip" published by the DOJ anywhere?

Even if you could slip your thumb in that hole the web of your support hand is still above the top portion of the trigger. Also, clearly the device was not designed to be gripped like that - just look at where the texture is on the grip and how the manufacturer presents the product in use. There may still be some slight risk on a featureless build though. But I'd so no more risk than using a MMG or a U15. Remember, they tried to argue the U15 was a thumb-hole stock at one point!

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2696/4154260670_ded32fbba2_o.png

Full Clip
12-02-2009, 3:23 PM
It is absolutely evil, in that it is trying to separate me from my money.

k3nnex
12-02-2009, 3:25 PM
what is a forward pistol grip? I googled it and I didn't find an answer. How is it different from a vertical foregrip?

glock_this
12-02-2009, 3:32 PM
what is a forward pistol grip? I googled it and I didn't find an answer. How is it different from a vertical foregrip?

same thing

aplinker
12-02-2009, 3:44 PM
what is a forward pistol grip? I googled it and I didn't find an answer. How is it different from a vertical foregrip?

"forward pistol grip" is the penal code statement of the assault weapon "feature."

The vertical foregrip is the more common name.

It's clearly not a F-P-G. If it were, sling mounts, bayonet lugs, slings, etc... would all be F-P-G's, as well.

SuperSet
12-02-2009, 3:45 PM
Much thanks to DOJ for straightening this all out for us. Oh wait...

professorhard
12-02-2009, 3:48 PM
I wonder if my OLL would become an assault weapon if I put my finger in a pencil sharpener and got it to the point that I could drop mags with the pointed bone.

Fate
12-02-2009, 3:50 PM
Does the California definition of "pistol grip" apply to a vertical pistol grip?

California Definition Of Assault Weapon

12276.1
(a) Notwithstanding Section 12276, "assault weapon" shall also mean any of the following:
(1) a semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:

(a) pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon.
(b) thumbhole stock.
(c) folding or telescoping stock
(d) grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(e) flash suppressor.
(f) forward pistol grip.

The following definitions apply to terms used in the identification of assault weapons pursuant to Penal Code section 12276.1:

(d) "pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon" means a grip that allows for a pistol style grasp in which the web of the trigger hand (between the thumb and index finger) can be placed below the top exposed portion of the trigger while firing.


I guess the California legislators didn't really think of applying this definition to a "forward pistol grip" because language regarding "beneath the action" and describing where the web of the hand is while firing doesn't make sense when talking about a grip under the barrel. Is there a separate definition of "vertical pistol grip" published by the DOJ anywhere?
No, there's no definition of what a vertical pistol grip is (It's forward pistol grip in the Penal code). The definition: “forward pistol grip means a grip that allows for a pistol style grasp forward of the trigger” (http://www.ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/fsor.pdf)

Even if you could slip your thumb in that hole the web of your support hand is still above the top portion of the trigger. I've argued for a similar stance on other rail mounted devices but the consensus was that it'd be up to a jury to decide if a forward grip was under the same "below the action" requirement.

Also, clearly the device was not designed to be gripped like that - just look at where the texture is on the grip and how the manufacturer presents the product in use. There may still be some slight risk on a featureless build though. But I'd so no more risk than using a MMG or a U15. Remember, they tried to argue the U15 was a thumb-hole stock at one point!So are you saying if I start a new grip business that sells stock pistol grips but all of my advertising photos and usage materials show it being held in a "non-pistol" style grasp, that it would be CA legal on a featureless rifle? I didn't think so. ;) I don't think this is the same kind of grey area that muzzle brake/flash suppressors fall into where how it's marketed determines it's classification.

The line art drawing I posted earlier is now gone, this photo is the best I could find. The hole is indeed something to look at closely. I would also want to know if you could hold the weapon while using a pistol style grasp on the V part (fingers in front, wrapping around it as it was designed to do, but thumb/web wrapping around the back. If you can hold the rifle up that way as well, it's an issue on a featureless build.

Until someone actually gets them in hand and "tries these theories (both for and against)", the issue won't really be resolved, regarding suitability for a featureless rifle.

Fate
12-02-2009, 4:00 PM
It's clearly not a F-P-G. If it were, sling mounts, bayonet lugs, slings, etc... would all be F-P-G's, as well.

You can't get a pistol style grasp on sling mounts, bayonet lugs, etc. You "might" be able to get a pistol style grasp on this.

Furthermore, in the clarification documents attached to the legislation, things like bipods, light mounts, etc. were specifically excluded from being deemed grips. However, this is not an accessory mount. It's a grip, plain and simple.

shark92651
12-02-2009, 4:03 PM
So are you saying if I start a new grip business that sells stock pistol grips but all of my advertising photos and usage materials show it being held in a "non-pistol" style grasp, that it would be CA legal on a featureless rifle?

Of course not, because the common and natural way to grasp it would be with the thumb on one side and the fingers on the other, and the web in the back. Clearly marketing with pictures like that would be viewed as deceptive. Images of this product used as designed does NOT result in a pistol style grasp.


I don't think this is the same kind of grey area that muzzle brake/flash suppressors fall into where how it's marketed determines it's classification.


Why not? A flash-suppressor has a distinctly different purpose than that of a muzzle brake, even though they look very similar. Just what is this device? It's clearly not a pistol grip by any definition that I am familiar with, and it looks NOTHING like any pistol grip from any reasonable description I am aware of. It's more of an ergonomic support for your fingers than anything. A pistol grip is for keeping the muzzle down while you fire full auto from the hip and kill lots of people! Right? ;)

Bug Splat
12-02-2009, 4:09 PM
Nothing a little JB weld couldn't fix. For those of you running featurless just plug up the hole with some JB Weld and maybe a little plexiglass if you are worried about it. For those not handy with JB just use a large screw or bolt through the back and into the hole essentially putting a bar right through the middle which would not allow you to put a finger through it. Should not take more than 5-10 minutes.

shark92651
12-02-2009, 4:11 PM
It's a grip, plain and simple.

So is a "MonsterMan Grip", but it's legal right? The law says a "forward pistol grip" is a banned feature, not a generic "grip". By your logic I could conclude that a rail panel mounted on the bottom rail that I rest my fingers on is a "grip" and therefore is a banned feature.

shark92651
12-02-2009, 4:14 PM
Nothing a little JB weld couldn't fix. For those of you running featurless just plug up the hole with some JB Weld and maybe a little plexiglass if you are worried about it. For those not handy with JB just use a large screw or bolt through the back and into the hole essentially putting a bar right through the middle which would not allow you to put a finger through it. Should not take more than 5-10 minutes.

I don't think anyone is arguing that it is a thumbhole stock, so why would plugging the hole make a difference - you could still wrap your thumb around the back side of it. My contention is that even if you do that it is not a "pistol grip", no more than if I attached a flashlight mount on the bottom and gripped it like a pistol grip. This device is not designed to be gripped with a pistol style grasp no more than a flashlight mount is.

andrewj
12-02-2009, 4:19 PM
Isn't it disgusting that we even have to have this discussion?

dieselpower
12-02-2009, 4:19 PM
I am sorry, but please explain how in the bloody hell the "web of the trigger hand (between the thumb and the index finger)" is going to come into play on this device? No way in hell.

It is not a pistol grip period. If that was the case every folding bi-pod is a pistol grip too.

You can not use the definition of one thing to call another illegal. Using the definition of a Pistol grip for a forward grip is impossible...THE TRIGGER HAND IS NO WHERE NEAR THERE.

FPG is an evil feature. This is NOT a FPG. I dont care if you "can" grip it like that.....thats not how it was designed to be used.

Pistol grip = "pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon" means a grip that allows for a pistol style grasp in which the web of the trigger hand (between the thumb and index finger) can be placed below the top exposed portion of the trigger while firing.

"forward pistol grip" means a grip that allows for a pistol style grasp forward of the trigger.

IMHO this is saying " a "grip" designed to be held as would a pistol grip.
This is a "grip" that is designed to use the palm of the hand to craddle the foreward portion of the firearm. If I try to "grip" it like a pistol, I can not, since...
1) If I place my index finger through the hole, the rest of my hand is not around any part of the grip, not a pistol grip.
2) If I place my thumb through the hole, this is a Thumb-Hole stock configuration, not a Pistol grip.
3) If I wrap my whole hand around it, I can not "grasp" it as I would a pistol, not a pistol grip.

Bug Splat
12-02-2009, 4:26 PM
I don't think anyone is arguing that it is a thumbhole stock, so why would plugging the hole make a difference - you could still wrap your thumb around the back side of it. My contention is that even if you do that it is not a "pistol grip", no more than if I attached a flashlight mount on the bottom and gripped it like a pistol grip. This device is not designed to be gripped with a pistol style grasp no more than a flashlight mount is.

I'm with you 100% on this. This is not a pistol grip. you could easly use an empty scope ring as well. Ask me how I know :D.

If you guys don't like it then don't run it.

djbooya
12-02-2009, 4:30 PM
You can't get a pistol style grasp on sling mounts, bayonet lugs, etc. You "might" be able to get a pistol style grasp on this.

Furthermore, in the clarification documents attached to the legislation, things like bipods, light mounts, etc. were specifically excluded from being deemed grips. However, this is not an accessory mount. It's a grip, plain and simple.

I've always wondered if the bipod on my featureless Sig556 is asking for trouble.. since you can hold the bipod when the legs are completely vertical as you would a vertical fore grip.

dieselpower
12-02-2009, 4:48 PM
Just noticed something else with the pic....
Why does a lefty need a B.A.D. ?????

tacticalcity
12-02-2009, 4:55 PM
It is absolutely evil, in that it is trying to separate me from my money.

+1

My next build is going to probably be a Recon type rifle, which has grown in popularity with schools like Magpul as of late, and this looks perfect for it.

technique
12-02-2009, 4:59 PM
Just noticed something else with the pic....
Why does a lefty need a B.A.D. ?????

he's not a lefty, and lefties can use BADs...:sleeping:

pacrimguru
12-02-2009, 5:09 PM
why does everyone think making something ambi only means "more useful to a right hander only"? ambi means that both right and left hands can be utilized. in the case of the BAD, a left hander can release the bolt when shooting with his reaction hand (right hand).

Fate
12-02-2009, 5:20 PM
I've always wondered if the bipod on my featureless Sig556 is asking for trouble.. since you can hold the bipod when the legs are completely vertical as you would a vertical fore grip.

No, this was specifically spelled out during the comments period prior to the bill's passing. I don't have my hands on it, but it's in there.

Personally, I would LOVE to bless this as A-OK on a featureless build. I just think it's too early to do so from a couple of pre-production line drawings and photo of the pre-production sample.

I'm not saying it is a pistol grip. I'm saying it might be possible to attain a pistol style grasp of it. If you can, you open yourself up for a fun time in court defending your hypothesis that even though you can hold it with a pistol style grasp (that is part of the definition of a pistol grip elsewhere in the code), that doesn't mean it's a pistol grip. Good luck.

FWIW, I run a KAC handstop on my featureless because it's
1) Not possible to attain a pistol style grasp and even remotely hold a rifle by it.
2) It's marketed as a hand stop, not a grip (of any sort)
3) It also has a sling swivel mount and thus falls into the "accessories exception" granted in the "comment period" documents (bipods, light mounts, sling mounts cannot be called forward pistol grips).

Fate
12-02-2009, 5:36 PM
Isn't it disgusting that we even have to have this discussion?
Quoted for truth!

So is a "MonsterMan Grip", but it's legal right? The law says a "forward pistol grip" is a banned feature, not a generic "grip". By your logic I could conclude that a rail panel mounted on the bottom rail that I rest my fingers on is a "grip" and therefore is a banned feature.
You're taking my comment out of context. I was referring to the exemption granted to accessories in the comment period papers. Gonna have to dig those up, aren't I? A rail panel, bipod, sling mount, light mount were listed as things that weren't "grips" and thus exempt. The original language of the bill tried to list any protrusion on the forestock as a grip. It was struck as too overbroad.

shark92651
12-02-2009, 6:06 PM
Yes please pull those up if you can find them - I'd like to check them out.

dchang0
12-02-2009, 7:05 PM
I doubt I could fit my thumb in there, let alone enough to get a pistol style grasp.

I could stick my middle finger through there, for the benefit of the CADOJ or DAs if they try to say this is a forward pistol grip.

technique
12-02-2009, 7:15 PM
I could stick my middle finger through there, for the benefit of the CADOJ or DAs if they try to say this is a forward pistol grip.

You would be gripping a whole lotta air!:)

The only plausible way I can see fro this to come anywhere close to a forward grip, would for the thumb to go through, or if you have Shaq hands and gripped around the whole thing. ~Just my opinion though.

We'll see what happens when they start shipping.

MikeR
12-02-2009, 7:31 PM
Just noticed something else with the pic....
Why does a lefty need a B.A.D. ?????

I shoot rifles left handed and a BAD is one of the best things ive put on my ARs. Its just as good for lefties as it is for righties. I can work all my controls without taking my hands off fire control, it works really good with the right side mounted redi-mag im working on too.

As far as the AFG, i sure hope its GTG. I don't see why it wouldn't be but im a little bias. The Magpul cool-aid is strong, i feel like such a whore.

Fate
12-02-2009, 8:03 PM
Yes please pull those up if you can find them - I'd like to check them out.

Here's the document: http://www.ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/fsor.pdf

978.20 (c) - Forward Pistol Grip
The proposed definition originally noticed to the public defined a forward pistol grip as “any protrusion in front of the trigger that is designed or intended to grasp and control the firearm.” As a result of public comment during the initial comment period (December 31, 1999 through February 28, 2000), the Department determined the term “any protrusion” appeared to lack clarity in that it could include many shooting accessories or parts of the firearm that may be used to grasp and control the firearm, but could not be considered forward pistol grips, such as sling swivels, bipods and monopods, palm rests, etc. The definition was therefore revised by replacing “any
protrusion” with “a grip that allows for a pistol style grasp.” The Department believes that the concept of a “pistol style grasp” is generally understood by persons affected by the regulations. The revised definition: “forward pistol grip means a grip that allows for a pistol style grasp forward of the trigger” was then noticed to the public during the first 15-day comment period (May 10 through May 30, 2000). Although additional comments were received, no comments were received during the first 15-day comment period that warranted additional revisions to the definition.

SJgunguy24
12-02-2009, 8:18 PM
I would say, I am the owner of the rifle...

If MY thumb don't fit, YOU must acquit!

Its like the Solar tactical thing...If the DA stands up in front of a court room, bends your Solar tactical and releases the mag...does that make you guilty of MGFing an AW. NO! But the DA is now guilty of MFGing an AW.

I have my doubts about that whole thing. The Solartac bending maglock thing

MikeR
12-02-2009, 8:22 PM
Here's the document: http://www.ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/fsor.pdf

To me that reads it has to be a “pistol style grasp”. See Definition of a pistol grip = GTG

Fate
12-02-2009, 9:56 PM
Dunno if I agree with that reading (but I'd like to). Here's a better close up. Info is that A2 style strap is swappable with A1 style.

http://i49.tinypic.com/2dqlgqx.jpg

pratchett
12-02-2009, 10:27 PM
So: YES or NO on an AR pistol?

StraightArch
12-02-2009, 10:40 PM
Isn't it disgusting that we even have to have this discussion?

YES. Just think about it, 100+ grown men arguing over the interpretation of a law that would prevent them from putting a piece of plastic on their gun. Now that is ridiculous, don't we have better uses of our time.

... Nope

thefinger
12-02-2009, 11:00 PM
So: YES or NO on an AR pistol?

lol. dude, I wish it was legal, because I'd want one too. However, I'm pretty sure its a no-no. I'm pretty sure the federal law would classify an AR pistol with one of these as an AOW since its designed to use as a grasp for your second hand. I may be wrong though...

shark92651
12-03-2009, 9:54 AM
YES. Just think about it, 100+ grown men arguing over the interpretation of a law that would prevent them from putting a piece of plastic on their gun. Now that is ridiculous, don't we have better uses of our time.

... Nope

Just imagine how many millions of dollars (YOUR tax dollars included) and countless hours of time have been spent debating, legislating, prosecuting, etc... all over a piece of shaped plastic attached to a gun. That is the real crime!