PDA

View Full Version : AR w/ detach mag, pistol, and NO gas tube?


elsolo
05-13-2006, 8:01 PM
What is your guys opinion if somebody built an offlist AR with any/all the evil features, but a blocked off gas tube so it's really just a straight pull bolt action with removable mags. Physically no gas tube, and drill, tap and plug it's hole in the gas block.
This was discussed among a few friends recently as a way to use an AR-10 in a "manually operated rifle" class instead of a true bolt gun. Having the charging handle on the side would be a definate plus obviously.

saki302
05-13-2006, 8:22 PM
Should be good to go IMO as long as it is not restorable to semi without adding parts or modifying it in other ways.

The AR isn't exactly the ideal straight-pull action because of the charging handle location, but it's better than nothing. A FAL or AK would probably work better this way.

-Dave

elsolo
05-13-2006, 9:03 PM
That's why a side charging handle would be in order.
I have seen AR's with side charging handles at 3-gun matches, but I do believe they were owner modified to be like that.

adamsreeftank
05-13-2006, 9:50 PM
I'll repeat what I wrote in a similar thread:

AR uppers with side charging handles are available, but I don't think using one would make an open-magwell pistol gripped lower legal. Regardless of the upper, the lower is considered semi-automatic. Even a lower with no upper is illegal if it has the naughty features.

elsolo
05-13-2006, 9:55 PM
I'll repeat what I wrote in a similar thread:

AR uppers with side charging handles are available, but I don't think using one would make an open-magwell pistol gripped lower legal. Regardless of the upper, the lower is considered semi-automatic. Even a lower with no upper is illegal if it has the naughty features.

Yeah, I thought about that.

I figure this would be in the same boat as a dedicated .22lr AR, not centerfire but how can you maintain that the lower is JUST FOR THAT UPPER?

I don't think you really could meet that burden.
Just tossing out ideas so they can get shot down or inspire better ideas.

Ford8N
05-14-2006, 5:44 AM
I'll repeat what I wrote in a similar thread:

AR uppers with side charging handles are available, but I don't think using one would make an open-magwell pistol gripped lower legal. Regardless of the upper, the lower is considered semi-automatic. Even a lower with no upper is illegal if it has the naughty features.

I started a similar thread about a single shot FAL. There is no definition of what is a semi-auto in the Law. There is a pump action AK that uses the same receiver as the semi-auto version. Just different parts. And the DOJ let it be sold in this state. Maybe someone should send a letter to the legal branch or tech branch of the DOJ.

kick Z tail out
05-14-2006, 11:57 AM
I'm lost here... What would be the purpose of this?




:p


I'd shoot a fixed 10 round long before I'd go with a bolt action just so I could use detachable mags. :confused:

adamsreeftank
05-14-2006, 2:04 PM
Huh? How's that? Does the lower cycle itself? What is it that makes the lower a semi-automatic? That's like saying it's a full automatic simply because it can accept an autosear.

Well, as I said, a stripped lower with a pistol grip and an open magwell would constitute an assault weapon. In my opinion and interpretation of the written law (not DOJ memos), it doesn't really matter what kind of upper, if any, is on the receiver.

Ford8N
05-14-2006, 2:55 PM
Well, as I said, a stripped lower with a pistol grip and an open magwell would constitute an assault weapon. In my opinion and interpretation of the written law (not DOJ memos), it doesn't really matter what kind of upper, if any, is on the receiver.


Uh...then the pump action AK is an AW. Open mag well + pistol grip attached to the receiver + pump action attached.

We could go round and round with this poorly written piece of law. I wonder why the NRA isn't tearing it apart.:rolleyes:

12voltguy
05-14-2006, 3:09 PM
Uh...then the pump action AK is an AW. Open mag well + pistol grip attached to the receiver + pump action attached.

We could go round and round with this poorly written piece of law. I wonder why the NRA isn't tearing it apart.:rolleyes:


what good is the NRA?:rolleyes:

bobfried
05-14-2006, 3:11 PM
Uh...then the pump action AK is an AW. Open mag well + pistol grip attached to the receiver + pump action attached.

We could go round and round with this poorly written piece of law. I wonder why the NRA isn't tearing it apart.:rolleyes:

But everyone is forgetting that on the AK and FAL the receiver itself dictates the function of the rifle. As in an FAL upper contains the barrel and gas system which can be converted into bolt action only. Same for the AK as the pump action is attached to the controlled part (the receiver) of the rifle. In both of these cases the controlled part (the receiver) is only able to operate in pump/bolt action mode only and cannot be easily converted without tools and time.

On an AR, the burden of the controlled part lays in the lower receiver since it also contains the mag-well. There is no operational difference between an AR lower that fires semi-auto and one that fires bolt/pump action. Because the cycling mechanism is contained in the upper receiver, which can be changed out with two push pins.

Now if you were to build an AR and have the upper and lower made as one piece or permanently joined together into one part; than you can argue that the controlled part (the entire assembly of upper and lower receivers) are not semi-auto.

So all those that keeps on bringin up the bolt action AR types need to remember the clear distinction of which is the controlled part. No matter what you do to anything else, a controlled part with a specific operational requirement is still the same.

You cannot simply change the upper, leave the lower alone and call is somethign else. By that same line of argument you could have a full auto lower with a BCG modified not to trip the auto-sear. I don't think the ATF is going to agree with you and say that the rifle is strictly semi-auto.

saki302
05-14-2006, 4:21 PM
Again, I ask, where is the documentation to support this? There is no definitive ruling yet that a pump-AR or .22LR AR is an AW by nature of the receiver. I believe before the Kasler list update, DOJ did say if converted to .22LR, most AW's would be legal under SB23(this is back in 2000). If we take that into account, making it a pump action is no different.
An AK is EASY to modify from pump to semi, just FYI. If it were done as a screw build, you're talking 5 minutes tops to go from one config to another. What makes the AR receiver so special that it's automatically an AW if someone so much as sneezes on it? Kasler? Not anymore.

I think this is more paranoia at work, until proven by written rule of law. Not just what some random DOJ agent said, or what my brother's mother's 3rd son heard on the internet.
DOJ SAID there is no constructive AW possession either, so simply owning enough parts to make an AW won' hold water in court. And IMO, a simple AR lower with a pistol grip on it isn't an AW *YET* as it is not semi-auto until an upper is added to it. what if you built and regged it as a .50BMG, for example?

-Dave

artherd
05-15-2006, 8:04 AM
Well, as I said, a stripped lower with a pistol grip and an open magwell would constitute an assault weapon. In my opinion and interpretation of the written law (not DOJ memos), it doesn't really matter what kind of upper, if any, is on the receiver.
It's a goood thing you're not a lawyer, because your opinion is flawed.

DOJ and ATF have in the past considered the serialized stamped component of a firearm to be the firearm. However, the california AW laws specifically stipulate "SEMI-AUTOMATIC, CENTERFIRE RIFLE" and other 'features' that only fully functional built-up rifles can have.

Furthur, DOJ has opined in the past that the principle of constructive posession does not apply to Category 3 (features) based AWs.

In other words, if you have one lower, and it has a .22LR (or plugged gas tupe straight-pull bolt action) upper on it, and you happen to have a BUSHMASTER .223 upper right next to you, you're still OK as long as you never actually mount that .223 semiautomaticcenterfire upper.

artherd
05-15-2006, 8:05 AM
I figure this would be in the same boat as a dedicated .22lr AR, not centerfire but how can you maintain that the lower is JUST FOR THAT UPPER?
Simply by virtue of keeping only that upper attached to your lower at all times. Burden of proof is on the state that you did anything else, and constructive posession principles do not apply.

artherd
05-15-2006, 8:07 AM
So all those that keeps on bringin up the bolt action AR types need to remember the clear distinction of which is the controlled part. No matter what you do to anything else, a controlled part with a specific operational requirement is still the same.
Under what theroey of law do you attest is there a rectriction on a "controled part" for features-based assault weapon purposes in California?

Wulf
05-15-2006, 11:52 AM
Here's what I like to see that would be a lot more usable than a bolt operated manual ar......

How about your replace the gas tube with a small high pressure gas cylinder that would fit under the handguard. The cylinder would have a one way valve on its "up" side that would be plumbed into the gas port on the barrel. The down side of the cylinder would have a push button activate valve that would protrude through the hand guard and be plumed into the bolt. The idea would be that when you fired a shot the gas cylinder would get presurized, when you depressed the button on the hand guard the gas charge in the cylinder would be released to cycle the bolt. My understanding of the law says this would be a manually operated rifle since it wouldent be self loading in that another user action (pressing the release valve) would be necessary to cycle the action.

12voltguy
05-15-2006, 12:15 PM
Here's what I like to see that would be a lot more usable than a bolt operated manual ar......

How about your replace the gas tube with a small high pressure gas cylinder that would fit under the handguard. The cylinder would have a one way valve on its "up" side that would be plumbed into the gas port on the barrel. The down side of the cylinder would have a push button activate valve that would protrude through the hand guard and be plumed into the bolt. The idea would be that when you fired a shot the gas cylinder would get presurized, when you depressed the button on the hand guard the gas charge in the cylinder would be released to cycle the bolt. My understanding of the law says this would be a manually operated rifle since it wouldent be self loading in that another user action (pressing the release valve) would be necessary to cycle the action.

O-my-GOD !

GO BUY A MINI 14...............Gezzzzzzzzz :rolleyes: this stuff gets lamer by the minute, LOL

Yes that is very insighfull thinking, ( really you sound like a very smart guy) if it were for creating something, but just to get around a law? I'll just run a fixed 10 until I get to register, in the meantime thx for the laugh:D

glen avon
05-15-2006, 12:21 PM
Huh? How's that? Does the lower cycle itself? What is it that makes the lower a semi-automatic? That's like saying it's a full automatic simply because it can accept an autosear.

so an M16 lower, which can be built either way, is what?

saki302
05-15-2006, 6:08 PM
Another red herring. You are citing an example of federal law, not California law. Federally, there IS constructive possession of a machinegun or an SBR. Not state-wide as far as AWs are concerned. And federally, once a machinegun, always a machinegun.

-Dave

so an M16 lower, which can be built either way, is what?

artherd
05-15-2006, 10:18 PM
so an M16 lower, which can be built either way, is what?
A regulated NFA machinegun component, and a firearm.

Now I've got a questionl; Is an M16 lower a rimfire or centerfire rifle?

shopkeep
05-16-2006, 1:37 AM
This whole episode is complete bulls***. Basically at this point it's DOJ vs. Calguns.net . The DOJ cannot and will not admit that they were owned by a group of people online who have never met each other in person. Not only did we show them what the law was, but in the process we made them admit we were right.