PDA

View Full Version : Is this a legal pistol?


Chatterbox
01-14-2011, 2:53 PM
http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/3575/ideac.jpg


It would be built from a non-rifle receiver (i.e. bent from a flat), it would have no stock nor provision for one (pistol trunnion) and the barrel length would be below 16". Looks like a pistol to me - am I right?

killmime1234
01-14-2011, 3:15 PM
It's not on the roster and a magazine outside the grip makes it an assault pistol in California so it's not legal for at least two immediate reasons I can see. Someone more versed in the law may chime in though.

CSACANNONEER
01-14-2011, 3:19 PM
Legal with a mag lock. But, please don't do it. I'm helping another member with a bullpup right now and it's the biggest PITA! The linkage to the forward trigger SUCKS! You will be sorry if you attempt this!

MasterYong
01-14-2011, 4:16 PM
Doesn't look like it'd really be shootable. Would have to be REALLY well balanced to hit anything, what with almost no room ahead of the PG to grab with your other hand.

Also, since it looks so much like a bullpup rifle, is there a possibility it could be argued that the rear of the receiver is intended to act as a stock, and as such it's not a pistol but an SBR? Just spitballin' here, I am not a lawyer.

Chatterbox
01-14-2011, 4:31 PM
Looks like BATFE had a chance to rule on something like that:
http://www.cbrps.com/
http://www.cbrps.com/publishImages/index~~element368.jpg

"Your new design eliminates the forward handgrip and thus does not facilitate two handed firing as your initial design did. Therefore FTB finds that an AK pistol mounted in your redesigned srock is intended to be fired with one hand and thus constitutes a "pistol" as defined in the Gun Control Act. Accordingly an AK pistol mounted in your newly designed stock would not meet the definition of an "AOW" as noted above and thus would not be regulated under the provisions of the NFA in any way."

CSACANNONEER
01-14-2011, 6:51 PM
Doesn't look like it'd really be shootable. Would have to be REALLY well balanced to hit anything, what with almost no room ahead of the PG to grab with your other hand.

Also, since it looks so much like a bullpup rifle, is there a possibility it could be argued that the rear of the receiver is intended to act as a stock, and as such it's not a pistol but an SBR? Just spitballin' here, I am not a lawyer.

Looks better balanced than a traditional AK pistol is. I can't shoot mine one handed and it's extremely front heavy.

Since not desinging it to be fired from the should keeps it from being a rifle, I don't understand how it's any different than a traditional AR pistol with a buffer tube.

jpigeon
01-14-2011, 8:08 PM
Give CA some time and more progressiveness and that and many more shall become illegal to law abiding Americans...

z-bob
01-14-2011, 8:18 PM
AFAIK, the barrel length on a pistol is whatever you want. No need to keep in under 16", if a long barrel would balance better.