PDA

View Full Version : Making my evil gun SB23 compliant


WhiteGT
05-10-2006, 11:05 PM
Since I have an itch to shoot my gun at a range and not worry about the legal crap right now, I'm considering running gripless and with detachable mags. I Can chop up my extra A2 grip so I can retain that one spring so thats not a problem. Getting a fixed stock is a no brainer. But I have a flash hider. I can take it off and have threads exposed. Will that make it ok?

Oh, and does anyone know where I can pick up one of those 'phantom' flash hiders that is actually a 'muzzle break'?

NeoWeird
05-10-2006, 11:09 PM
It just can't be a flash suppressor. So having a muzzle brake, exposed threads, thread protecting nut, etc is fine. Also, I am not too sure about the cut pistol grip thing, but I thought that was a no-no as the top portion allows your web to rest on it, and even though it is not a grip, it was still considered a pistol grip. I could be wrong, but I thought that was why the SRB was so popular (and a God sent to some).

Either way, no pistol grip, fixed stock, and no evil features (the most important being flash suppressor) and you are good to go. As for the Izzy muzzle brake, Bushmaster has them. I am sure someone else has them, but I know for a fact Bushmaster has them without even looking.

grammaton76
05-11-2006, 12:01 AM
I Can chop up my extra A2 grip so I can retain that one spring so thats not a problem.

The DOJ has stated in the past that even if you saw off a pistol grip, they will still call it a pistol grip. Unless perhaps you were to saw it down to the same overall dimensions as the SRB (as in, basically leave nothing for your hand to contact). I would still be paranoid about using any manner of sawed-off PG due to them having said that it still counts as one.

blacklisted
05-11-2006, 12:10 AM
Using that logic, if you file down the vertical foregrip on the Romanian AK furniture, it's still a vertical foregrip if one layer of atoms protrudes above the surface of the handguard.

creampuff
05-11-2006, 3:54 AM
It just can't be a flash suppressor. So having a muzzle brake, exposed threads, thread protecting nut, etc is fine.

I haven't been able to find a thread protecting nut. Do you have a link to where these can be purchased?

thanks

pc_city
05-11-2006, 6:19 AM
I haven't been able to find a thread protecting nut. Do you have a link to where these can be purchased?

thanks
http://www.midwayusa.com/eproductpage.exe/showproduct?saleitemid=469030

10TH AMENDMENT
05-11-2006, 7:07 AM
The DOJ has stated in the past that even if you saw off a pistol grip, they will still call it a pistol grip. Unless perhaps you were to saw it down to the same overall dimensions as the SRB (as in, basically leave nothing for your hand to contact). I would still be paranoid about using any manner of sawed-off PG due to them having said that it still counts as one.

Gram:

PLEASE produce the reg section and letter to support your assertion. No offense, but the proposition that a pistol grip with the entire grip portion removed is still a "conspicuously protruding grip that allows for a pistol style grasp" is 100% false.

The ONLY reason that pistol grips could not be removed or "sawed off" from AR/AK weapons back in 2000 so that they would comply with SB23 and remain in the state as SB23 compliant rifles is because of the Kasler decision that created the DOJ's supposed "Catagory 2 Assault Weapon".

Please scroll 2 posts down and read. I does not matter if you don't believe this because whether you believe it or not, these are the facts.
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=255685#post255685

This is not even arguable.

And PLEASE stop with the "web of the hand" stuff, it is completely irrelevant unless the device in question allows for a "PISTOL STYLE GRASP"! a pistol grip that has had the entire grip portion removed will not allow for a "pistol style grasp" so the placement of the web of the hand is not even an issue.

The attorneys from the DOJ are not stupid. They fully understand this. After all, they are the ones that have adopted this correct position!

p.s. Still love ya Gram, but you are just plain wrong on this one.;)

grammaton76
05-11-2006, 2:17 PM
Gram:

PLEASE produce the reg section and letter to support your assertion. No offense, but the proposition that a pistol grip with the entire grip portion removed is still a "conspicuously protruding grip that allows for a pistol style grasp" is 100% false.

Actually, I'm going off of Tech. Ted's post here:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=255334&postcount=4

And the DOJ page here:
http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/regs/pistolgrip.htm

The ONLY reason that pistol grips could not be removed or "sawed off" from AR/AK weapons back in 2000 so that they would comply with SB23 and remain in the state as SB23 compliant rifles is because of the Kasler decision that created the DOJ's supposed "Catagory 2 Assault Weapon".

So, what you're saying is that that was only valid due to the "series" ban being considered to hold water at that time. I could buy that.

Please scroll 2 posts down and read. I does not matter if you don't believe this because whether you believe it or not, these are the facts.
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=255685#post255685

This is not even arguable.

And PLEASE stop with the "web of the hand" stuff, it is completely irrelevant unless the device in question allows for a "PISTOL STYLE GRASP"! a pistol grip that has had the entire grip portion removed will not allow for a "pistol style grasp" so the placement of the web of the hand is not even an issue.

Actually, the definition of a pistol style grasp below (found on the DOJ's website) conflicts with the one you're citing. In the definition below, 'pistol style grasp' is specifically all about the web of the hand stuff. I don't deny that the DOJ probably has a few different, conflicting definitions out there about the web of the hand or additional fingers, but when they conflict, I tend to take the most conservative interpretation.

Although these firearms are centerfire, semi-automatic rifles capable of accepting detachable magazines, they do not have conspicuously protruding pistol grips because none of the grips allow 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 of the exposed portion of the trigger while firing.

...note to reader: the above was from the DOJ page referenced above - it looked funny when reviewing the post

The attorneys from the DOJ are not stupid. They fully understand this. After all, they are the ones that have adopted this correct position!

I don't deny that this SHOULD be the correct position. However, I have yet to see it officially reversed for AR grips. Note that the fab-10 hook wasn't approved - granted, that's a poor example, and does allow a pistol style grasp in a different configuration. But I'd still be paranoid about anything that could be considered a grip down there. So far, I don't think anyone has posted a picture of the Barrett grip for the M82, which is what the DOJ approval letter here specifically cites.

p.s. Still love ya Gram, but you are just plain wrong on this one.;)

*grin* I don't take it personally. There's a certain duty to hash out the correct version of the facts... problem is, that I'm not completely convinced that the DOJ agrees with your version just yet. And, as I've stated before, I prefer to err on the side of caution rather than on the other side - folks don't go to jail for being more cautious.

10TH AMENDMENT
05-11-2006, 3:17 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by 10TH AMENDMENT
Gram:

PLEASE produce the reg section and letter to support your assertion. No offense, but the proposition that a pistol grip with the entire grip portion removed is still a "conspicuously protruding grip that allows for a pistol style grasp" is 100% false.


Actually, I'm going off of Tech. Ted's post here:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...34&postcount=4

And the DOJ page here:
http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/regs/pistolgrip.htm

Gram:

These illustrations are intended to provide a guideline for following the actual regulation. All that DOJ is trying to do here is put the public on notice as to what a "conspicuous protruding pistol grip" actually looks like and what the users hand would be grasping while firing the weapon with one attached to it.

And most importantly, this is not even remotely close to a regulation, letter opinion or official position by the DOJ that a sawed off AR-15 pistol grip, wherin the entire portion of the "graspable" part of it is gone, constitutes an illegally assembled assault weapon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 10TH AMENDMENT
Please scroll 2 posts down and read. I does not matter if you don't believe this because whether you believe it or not, these are the facts.
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...685#post255685

This is not even arguable.

And PLEASE stop with the "web of the hand" stuff, it is completely irrelevant unless the device in question allows for a "PISTOL STYLE GRASP"! a pistol grip that has had the entire grip portion removed will not allow for a "pistol style grasp" so the placement of the web of the hand is not even an issue.


Actually, the definition of a pistol style grasp below (found on the DOJ's website) conflicts with the one you're citing. In the definition below, 'pistol style grasp' is specifically all about the web of the hand stuff. I don't deny that the DOJ probably has a few different, conflicting definitions out there about the web of the hand or additional fingers, but when they conflict, I tend to take the most conservative interpretation.

You are absolutely right. "The Pistol Style Grasp" IS specifically what the "Web Of The Hand Stuff" is all about!!!

Are you seriously suggesting that they would even consider posting any of these pistol gripped rifles with the grip cut off below the trigger guard to illustrate what is necessary to allow for a "pistol style grasp"? I know you are waaay too logical and rational than to suggest that. And because I'm convinced from all of your prior postings that this your mental state, I refuse to accept that you cannot follow the basic english rules of construction in this sentence:

Although these firearms are centerfire, semi-automatic rifles capable of accepting detachable magazines, they do not have conspicuously protruding pistol grips because none of the grips allow 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 of the exposed portion of the trigger while firing.

Again, for the umpteenth time...

the positioning of the web of the hand is irrelevant to the definition of what "a grip" is and only comes into play if, and only if the fingers of the hand other than that the trigger finger can be wrapped around a conspicuously protruding device in a "pistol style grasp".

Hence, a device is "a grip" if, and only if the fingers of the hand can be wrapped around the device so as to provide the operator with a "pistol style grasp" in which the web of the trigger hand (between the thumb and index finger) can be placed below the top of the exposed portion of the trigger while firing.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 10TH AMENDMENT
p.s. Still love ya Gram, but you are just plain wrong on this one.


*grin* I don't take it personally. There's a certain duty to hash out the correct version of the facts... problem is, that I'm not completely convinced that the DOJ agrees with your version just yet. And, as I've stated before, I prefer to err on the side of caution rather than on the other side - folks don't go to jail for being more cautious.

This IS their position!

10TH AMENDMENT
05-11-2006, 3:36 PM
Gram:

BTW, I hope you do recognize that the other rifles that the DOJ has yellow lined and determined not to be assault weapons do have pistol grips that conspicuously protrude below the action and allow for a "pistol style grasp"!

There is a clue in there as relates to the very proposition that I am establisihing here Gram old boy...that the "web of the hand" is only relevant if there is a grip that provides for a "pistol style grasp"!;)

blacklisted
05-11-2006, 3:40 PM
Gram:

BTW, I hope you do recognize that the other rifles that the DOJ has yellow lined and determined not to be assault weapons do have pistol grips that allow for a "pistol style grasp"!

There is a clue in there as relates to the very proposition that I am establisihing here Gram old boy!;)

Just in case people are confused: :confused:

Yes. They allow for a pistol style grasp, but the web of the hand is not below the yellow line. This is why they are known as "pistol grip stocks"

A pistol grip (such as the ones on the ar-15 and ak47) allow for a pistol style grasp AND the web of the hand is below the line, making it "evil".

What do I win? :D

Ryoushi
05-11-2006, 4:14 PM
Oh, and does anyone know where I can pick up one of those 'phantom' flash hiders that is actually a 'muzzle break'?

Here's (http://egw-guns.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=53&products_id=93) a nice one.

grammaton76
05-11-2006, 4:27 PM
Again, for the umpteenth time...

the positioning of the web of the hand is irrelevant to the definition of what "a grip" is and only comes into play if, and only if the fingers of the hand other than that the trigger finger can be wrapped around a conspicuously protruding device in a "pistol style grasp".

I guess the crux of the issue is, where do you find that they've made that statement? Where do they say that the placement of the other fingers matters?

blacklisted
05-11-2006, 4:36 PM
Another thing to consider: you can put the web of your hand below the line on ANY gun, whether it has a grip or not. But it wont be a pistol style grasp.

10TH AMENDMENT
05-11-2006, 9:55 PM
I guess the crux of the issue is, where do you find that they've made that statement? Where do they say that the placement of the other fingers matters?

Well then, this should solve the crux:

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c142/solascriptura1984/CCF05122006_00003.jpg

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c142/solascriptura1984/CCF05122006_00004.jpg