PDA

View Full Version : Upper to Make U-15 Legal(ier)


stator
12-05-2006, 5:09 PM
Most of you know the debate regarding the U-15 stock being a thumbhole stock due to the buffer tube still be intact (and even covered with a foam sleive for a cheek rest).

So, I found the upper which should bring the U-15 stock back into the legal fold so it cannot be considered a thumbhole stock. The ZM system is piston driven and does not use a buffer tube. Just remove the ZM stock and replace with the U-15 stock. The only problem is that the ZM System upper is $1300. So, one would need to invest $1500 and change to keep out of the "swimming pool".


http://www.zmweapons.com/LR%20300-SR-A%202.JPG

blkA4alb
12-05-2006, 5:15 PM
The buffer tube is not part of a stock. Go look at the majority of the free-state pistol AR builds. They all use a regular or smaller receiver extension. If it was considered a buttstock they would all be SBRs on the federal level.

Not to mention, what would you plan to use to get a cheekweld? :rolleyes:

wooger
12-05-2006, 5:18 PM
The U-15 is definately not A thumbhole stock.

JPglee1
12-05-2006, 5:25 PM
Not to mention, what would you plan to use to get a cheekweld? :rolleyes:

Well with a ZM upper you could make a more conventional shaped stock to get a cheek weld.

I used to be really REALLY convinced that gripless was the way to go.

But now that Ive shot ARs and AKs both ways, I say fixed mag is the better of the 2.


With an AK or an AR, you take out a set screw and the mag release works again. So if Zombies invade, it takes a maximum of 30 seconds to put your rifle back to "NORMAL" in the mean time you can have all the evil features you want, and its not such a PITA to reload 1 round at a time thru the top (actually makes me save ammo, cuz I dont bump fire with 10rd mags hahaha)

With a prince50 style lock kit, you could put your allen wrench in the A2 grip storage area, or on your key chain, etc... Then its just a matter of pulling a set screw out and you're good to go.

On a gripless build, you can't have a telestock or a folding stock, you can't have a muzzle device, its just much more of a PITA.

With a fixed mag build you could have an AK with an actual folder (make sure its 30" long) and all the evil crap you want... If there is civil insurrection or pink aliens invade from the planet zorax, you can pull out the screw in your lock plate and the AK is back to normal.


Response time to "normalize" the gun is MUCH shorter with a fixed mag kit. Think of the time it takes to find the pistol grip, put the safety in, put the plunger in and get the selector back in place... on an AK it wouldn't be as slow if you had a riveted pistol grip nut (or welded)

But either way, its generally faster to take something apart as opposed to putting it together. Especially under stress.


JP

pacificcoast
12-05-2006, 5:31 PM
With a fixed mag build you could have an AK with an actual folder (make sure its 26" long) and all the evil crap you want

:eek: :eek: :eek:

30" otherwise its an AW:

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) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon.
(B) A thumbhole stock.
(C) A folding or telescoping stock.
(D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(E) A flash suppressor.
(F) A forward pistol grip.

(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

(3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches.

bwiese
12-05-2006, 5:32 PM
Stator,

Your concerns about the receiver extension ("buffer tube") are misplaced.

And many folks don't wanna run an unproven gas piston design that may worsen accuracy.

The pistol buffer tube, if it were considered a stock, would turn every AR pistol into an NFA weapon.

The U15 is in no way a thumbhole stock because you grasp the complete stock on its outside. Even if below the buffer tube, you're still on the outside of the stock. There is, topologically speaking, no "hole", no 'simple closed curve'.

blkA4alb
12-05-2006, 5:35 PM
JP, pacificcoast is correct. Even with a fixed magazine it must be 30" OAL ;) .

JPglee1
12-05-2006, 5:38 PM
JP, pacificcoast is correct. Even with a fixed magazine it must be 30" OAL ;) .

Yah, me slip...

Good thing its hard to get most OLLs under 30" when they are assembled.

Excepting of course a folding stock AK...


JP

blkA4alb
12-05-2006, 5:39 PM
Yah, me slip...

Good thing its hard to get most OLLs under 30" when they are assembled.

Excepting of course a folding stock AK...


JP
Or a folding stock AR with piston upper.

JPglee1
12-05-2006, 5:42 PM
Or a folding stock AR with piston upper.

LOL, yah and those are runnin around everywhere like unicorns ;) hahaha


J

blkA4alb
12-05-2006, 5:45 PM
LOL, yah and those are runnin around everywhere like unicorns ;) hahaha


J
Shhhh!! ;)

NeoWeird
12-05-2006, 5:49 PM
Well from the rear of the lower receiver to the front of the upper receiver is probably an additional 8-10". So if you put a ~20" barrel on it with a permanent muzzle device it wouldn't be too bad.

You know what would look sweet. A dispator upper with a pistol non-tube buffer system (or a pistol system if they make it for dispators) and a good flash suppressor. It would be like one of those window mounted M-16s for combat vehicles. That would be pretty slick.

stator
12-05-2006, 5:53 PM
Or a folding stock AR with piston upper.

You guys do not get out much?

http://www.zmweapons.com/LR%20300-ML-N%202.JPG

blkA4alb
12-05-2006, 5:56 PM
You guys do not get out much?
Excuse me? :mad:

NeoWeird
12-05-2006, 6:01 PM
Excuse me? :mad:

I think he thought you were saying IF they existed they would be hard to meet the minimum length, when really you were referencing them the entire time.

The ZM system has always intrigued me, but I don't have the money for one. Maybe in the future...

JPglee1
12-05-2006, 6:02 PM
. It would be like one of those window mounted M-16s for combat vehicles. That would be pretty slick.


http://tri.army.mil/LC/CS/csi/sam231.jpg
M231 port firing weapon



I don't see the resemblance... lol.


Lemme go hit another beer... then we'll see :D


J

anotherone
12-05-2006, 6:03 PM
The problem with ZM is that it's proprietary so parts won't always be easy or cheap to come by like standard AR-15 parts. However, it certainly would be nice to be able to essentially build a conventional stock with a traditional cheek weld.

However, this basically defeats the whole point of the UA-15. The point of the UA-15 was to use any upper with all standard parts and detachable magazine. There is already another design out there that does what you're proposing: the Blackstar rifle.

stator
12-05-2006, 6:05 PM
The buffer tube is not part of a stock. Go look at the majority of the free-state pistol AR builds. They all use a regular or smaller receiver extension. If it was considered a buttstock they would all be SBRs on the federal level.

Not to mention, what would you plan to use to get a cheekweld? :rolleyes:

Good thing you brought that up. I will respond with two points and one question for you. First the points:

1- Federal law has nothing to do with SB-23 which is the law that can be used (and has by Lockyer) to intrepret the U-15 as a thumbhole stock.

2- AR pistols must have a stubby buffer tube so as it cannot be used as a cheek rest. If one puts a standard buffer tube on an AR pistol, one then must have a SBR tax stamp to avoid Club Fed. Olympic Arms and others use a piston and not gas impingment to eliminate the buffer tube altogether due to this issue.


Here is my question..... So if you believe that federal law regarding AR pistols and SBR plays into the issue of the U-15 stock, did you see a short, stubby buffer tube or a standard buffer tube on on the U-15 equipped AR posted here?

JPglee1
12-05-2006, 6:17 PM
2- AR pistols must have a stubby buffer tube so as it cannot be used as a cheek rest. If one puts a standard buffer tube on an AR pistol, one then must have a SBR tax stamp to avoid Club Fed. Olympic Arms and others use a piston and not gas impingment to eliminate the buffer tube altogether due to this issue.

Not really true, lots of companies sell pistols with full length tubes on them, legally.



http://images.gunsamerica.com/upload/976738271-1.jpg
K-23-P 9mm Olympic Arms Pistol (as shown on page 87 of Vol 60 issue 34 SGN)

http://images.gunsamerica.com/upload/976804391-2.jpg
CMMG 7" pistol w/long buffer tube

http://images.gunsamerica.com/upload/976686605-1.jpg
Another K-23-P

http://images.gunsamerica.com/upload/976707333-1.jpg
Bushmaster Carbon 15 pistol

JPglee1
12-05-2006, 6:21 PM
http://www.jcweaponry.com/images/ar15/buffer3.jpg
JC Weapons 7" pistol w/full length buffer.



http://www.jcweaponry.com/images/ar15/Pistol_5.jpg
THIS is how they all should be to really be a "pistol" It would be pretty hard to shoulder this short of a tube...

The samples above would all be very easy to shoulder. Prove it to yourself, take your M4 stock off your buffer tube and go shoot the rifle. It won't hurt, its 100% do-able :D

blkA4alb
12-05-2006, 6:22 PM
Good thing you brought that up. I will respond with two points and one question for you. First the points:

1- Federal law has nothing to do with SB-23 which is the law that can be used (and has by Lockyer) to intrepret the U-15 as a thumbhole stock.
Where has Lockyer interpreted the U-15 as a thumbhole stock? Cite your sources.

As Bill said, it is not a thumbhole stock. Where you grasp the rifle to fire it is below the receiver extension. Your hand does not go into the stock in any way.

2- AR pistols must have a stubby buffer tube so as it cannot be used as a cheek rest. If one puts a standard buffer tube on an AR pistol, one then must have a SBR tax stamp to avoid Club Fed. Olympic Arms and others use a piston and not gas impingment to eliminate the buffer tube altogether due to this issue.Again, cite your sources. Where in the law does it say that a cheekrest counts as a stock? A regular length receiver extension does not make the rifle an SBR.

Take a look through here and tell me how many of the pistol builds have foam cheek rests :rolleyes: .

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=122&t=245757
Here is my question..... So if you believe that federal law regarding AR pistols and SBR plays into the issue of the U-15 stock, did you see a short, stubby buffer tube or a standard buffer tube on on the U-15 equipped AR posted here?Again, show me the federal law where it says that you cannot use a standard length receiver extension.

JPglee1
12-05-2006, 6:24 PM
http://www.jcweaponry.com/images/ar15/Pistol_3.jpg
This picture gives you a visual reference for how short a tube can be and still be shouldered and get a cheek weld. Thats an "A2 Entry" length stock, so using scale, you can see that ALL the padded tubes shown above are AT LEAST as long as the A2 entry stock.


J

JPglee1
12-05-2006, 6:27 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v503/AKsrule/ARpistollast.jpg
Here's a pistol with an M4 stock tube, filled in with epoxy (or maybe TIG welded to prevent the stock from slipping on)

stator
12-05-2006, 6:36 PM
The problem with ZM is that it's proprietary so parts won't always be easy or cheap to come by like standard AR-15 parts. However, it certainly would be nice to be able to essentially build a conventional stock with a traditional cheek weld.

However, this basically defeats the whole point of the UA-15. The point of the UA-15 was to use any upper with all standard parts and detachable magazine. There is already another design out there that does what you're proposing: the Blackstar rifle.


Yes, but the "swimming pool" is the grey area that separates clear legal from clear illegal ARs. Do you want to spend $180 for a U-15 stock to go swimming in that pool? You could be arrested then post bail. If you are not swimming in cash, you would have to pay 10% of the bail amount as the bondsman fee. If bail is $25K, that fee would be $2.5K. Even if you won or the charges were dropped, that stock costed you $2.68K at the very least. Would you have purchased it in the first place then?

It is not about what I believe, but what the DOJ and DA's believe. Lockyer is on record saying that the buffer tube of the AR design is considered part of the stock back in 2000.

My only purpose is to point out what happened in 2000 as it relates to now. There are many on this board who like to see many having fun in the "swimming pool" as a way of eliminating bad gun laws in CA. I do too but I believe each should decide for himself/herself in an informed fashion. Being informed includes considering counter opinions of others like Lockyer, AM, Iggy, and other law enforcement and district attorney personnel.

I personally would not purchase the U-15 stock with a standard AR upper with the buffer tube. Doing so, in my opinion would be swimming in the deep end of the that pool. I guess neither would Mike at SJGE either since his demo U-15 had the 10-round Bushmaster mag with the Prince50 mag lock. I would consider it with the ZM System upper though if I had the case.

blkA4alb
12-05-2006, 7:51 PM
...It is not about what I believe, but what the DOJ and DA's believe. Lockyer is on record saying that the buffer tube of the AR design is considered part of the stock back in 2000.
Again, please cite your sources or stop spreading misinformation.

Do you care to address the point I made in my other post?

stator
12-05-2006, 7:57 PM
Again, cite your sources. Where in the law does it say that a cheekrest counts as a stock? A regular length receiver extension does not make the rifle an SBR.

Take a look through here and tell me how many of the pistol builds have foam cheek rests :rolleyes: .

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=122&t=245757
Again, show me the federal law where it says that you cannot use a standard length receiver extension.

Okay, I will assume that when you refer to "receiver extension" you mean the buffer tube. Here's the latest ruling from ATF and note the pistol definition.


U.S. Department of Justice

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives


Washington, DC 20226


Adding a Vertical Fore Grip to a Handgun

“Handgun” is defined under Federal law to mean, in part, a firearm which has a short stock and is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand…. Gun Control Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(29).

Under an implementing regulation of the National Firearms Act (NFA), 27 C.F.R. § 479.11, “pistol” is defined as a weapon originally designed, made, and intended to fire a projectile (bullet) from one or more barrels when held in one hand, and having (a) a chamber(s) as an integral part(s) of, or permanently aligned with, the bore(s); and (b) a short stock designed to be gripped by one hand and at an angle to and extending below the line of the bore(s).

The NFA further defines the term “any other weapon” (AOW) as any weapon or device capable of being concealed on the person from which a shot can be discharged through the energy of an explosive, a pistol or revolver having a barrel with a smooth bore designed or redesigned to fire a fixed shotgun shell, weapons with combination shotgun and rifle barrels 12 inches or more, less than 18 inches in length, from which only a single discharge can be made from either barrel without manual reloading, and shall include any such weapon which may be readily restored to fire. Such term shall not include a pistol or revolver having a rifled bore, or rifled bores, or weapons designed, made, or intended to be fired from the shoulder and not capable of firing fixed ammunition. 26 U.S.C. § 5845(e).

ATF has long held that by installing a vertical fore grip on a handgun, the handgun is no longer designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand. Therefore, if individuals install a vertical fore grip on a handgun, they are “making” a firearm requiring registration with ATF’s NFA Branch. Making an unregistered “AOW” is punishable by a fine and 10 years’ imprisonment. Additionally, possession of an unregistered “AOW” is also punishable by fine and 10 years’ imprisonment.

To lawfully add a vertical fore grip to a handgun, a person must make an appropriate application on ATF Form 1, “Application to Make and Register a Firearm.” The applicant must submit the completed form, along with a fingerprint card bearing the applicant’s fingerprints; a photograph; and $200.00. The application will be reviewed by the NFA Branch. If the applicant is not prohibited from possessing a firearm under Federal, State, or local law, and possession of an “AOW” is not prohibited in the applicant’s State of residence, the form will be approved. Only then may the person add a vertical fore grip to the designated handgun.

A person may also send the handgun to a person licensed to manufacture NFA weapons. The manufacturer will install the fore grip on the firearm and register the firearm on an ATF Form 2. The manufacturer can then transfer the firearm back to the individual on an ATF Form 4, which results in a $5.00 transfer tax. If the manufacturer is out of State, the NFA Branch will need a clarification letter submitted with the ATF Form 4 so that the NFA Branch Examiner will know the circumstances of the transfer. Questions can be directed to the NFA Branch or the Firearms Technology Branch.


That is the reason why you see AR pistol manufacturers shortening the buffer tube to a stub, or eliminating it all together (Olyarms). ATF has been changing their definitions on a whim (they always do) and are backing away from their previous standpoint regarding the buffer tube. THis was that it could not be readily convertable to receive a stock (hence the reason why you see pictures of AR pistols with epoxied additions to the buffer tube in the past).

Looks like there are some potential club fed members in those photos, no?

If you do not believe me, go to the Washington Arms Collectors gunshow and ask the guy from Olyarms. He has a booth there. He will tell you all about their interchanges with ATF regarding their AR pistols. I did and even joined for a year since I was travelling up to Everett on business all the time.

blkA4alb
12-05-2006, 8:08 PM
Okay, I will assume that when you refer to "receiver extension" you mean the buffer tube.
Buffer tube is the laymans term for the receiver extension.

Here's the latest ruling from ATF and note the pistol definition.



That is the reason why you see AR pistol manufacturers shortening the buffer tube to a stub, or eliminating it all together (Olyarms). ATF has been changing their definitions on a whim (they always do) and are backing away from their previous standpoint regarding the buffer tube. THis was that it could not be readily convertable to receive a stock (hence the reason why you see pictures of AR pistols with epoxied additions to the buffer tube in the past).
First of all why did you quote the article regarding second handgrips on handguns. That has nothing to do with the receiver extension. It says a firearm with a short stock, what's a short stock?

Maybe I should quote you,
2- AR pistols must have a stubby buffer tube so as it cannot be used as a cheek rest.
So if it has a cheekrest its an SBR? Show me the law where it says this.

Looks like there are some potential club fed members in those photos, no?
Not that I see.

If you do not believe me, go to the Washington Arms Collectors gunshow and ask the guy from Olyarms. He has a booth there. He will tell you all about their interchanges with ATF regarding their AR pistols. I did and even joined for a year since I was travelling up to Everett on business all the time.
So I should go to a gunshow to ask one manufactorer the law? No, I don't think so. Bushmaster has a policy to not ship certain things to california that are perfectly legal here. Does that make them right? No way. Is cheaper than dirt right because they won't ship anything "that could build an AW", no.

Back up your statements with LAW.

gose
12-05-2006, 8:09 PM
The inventors/makers of the U15 stock stated themselves in a thread here that an early prototype was submitted to the DOJ and returned with a written response stating that they considered the stock to be a thumbhole stock.
It was also said in the thread that the current manufacture differs from the prototype, but I haven't seen any pics or details about what was actually changed.
We all "know" that the monsterman grip and no evil features or a pinned mag are legal.
We also "know" that the U15 is legal when used without evil features.
However, when it comes to the U15 there is actually something from the DOJ and I would not want a DA waving that letter in my face in court.

PLINK
12-05-2006, 8:30 PM
FYI....The U-15 stock uses/comes with a AR pistol receiver extention.

The receiver extention on the top (not on rifle) is a A2 receiver ext.

http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o133/PLINK223/U-15/receiverext.jpg

hoffmang
12-05-2006, 8:31 PM
Though I understand some folks wishing to take a conservative view, it needs to be known as a conservative view.

The U15 is a stock and not a thumbhole stock and let me walk you through an illustrative exchange at a hypothetical trial.


Your lawyer points at the U15 and asks Iggy:
"Is this a stock?"

"Yes."

Your lawyer points at the metal below the buffer tube and above the U15 and asks:
"What's this"

"Hmm.... Haw... the receiver."

Then your lawyer points at the buffer tube and asks:
"What's this?"

"A Stock"

Your Lawyer asks:
"How can a stock have a receiver in between it and another stock? Have you ever heard of a rifle with two stocks? Are you going to tell this court that the forward hand grip, which is seperated from the stock by the receiver is a third stock? If you think there are two stocks here, the CCR is pretty clear that a thumbhole stock is a single entity by using the singular "a stock" not "stocks" in the definition. Are you sure that's not a buffer tube as its called right here in the Army Manual?"

"Uhmm... maybe?"


I feel confident enough in the U15 to have a lower with a normal magazine catch attached to it.

-Gene

gose
12-05-2006, 8:57 PM
Though I understand some folks wishing to take a conservative view, it needs to be known as a conservative view.
The U15 is a stock and not a thumbhole stock and let me walk you through an illustrative exchange at a hypothetical trial.
I feel confident enough in the U15 to have a lower with a normal magazine catch attached to it.
-Gene

Or:
They take a normal thumb hole stock.
"Here we have a thumb hole stock"
By applying a sharp saw-toothed object to it, they slice the stock in two parts, separated by a 1/16" opening.
"Is this not still a thumb hole stock?"
"This U15 stock is exactly the same, the opening is just somewhat wider"
"This letter, that the defendant was aware of, clearly states that the U15 stock was deemed by DOJ to be a thumb hole stock, yet he still installed that on his child-killing assault weapon"

Too paranoid and conservative? Maybe.... YMMV.

hoffmang
12-05-2006, 9:02 PM
Gose,

If you cut a thumbhole stock in two, you have two stocks. I don't see how you would put your thumb through a hole that isn't a hole anymore.

And DOJ also is trying to claim that there are some Colt AR-15s that are off list... Good luck to them on that one too.

-Gene

Toolbox X
12-05-2006, 10:28 PM
Hey guys,

I really appreciate all the support. Because I have a vested interest in the success of the U15 stock I have motive to be impartial. Though I do consider myself very objective, it is for this reason I will rarely comment in discussions like these. Additionally, there is very little reason for me to comment. Everything I would say has been repeated over and over again by you fine gentlemen.

Alas, there is a small bit of information I would like to share that I believe demonstrates the U15's legality.

I announced the U15 stock when I did because I wanted people to know they could come to the Costa Mesa gun show to try out and/or buy a U15 stock kit.

The DOJ knew exactly where I was going to be and that I would have rifles with the U-15 stock installed.

I sat at my table all day Saturday with 3 rifles, 2 of them had open magwells, and all 3 had U15 stocks installed. Sunday before the show I scrambled and bought a muzzle brake to replace the flash hider on my A1 upper. So Sunday I had all 3 rifles, open magwells, U15 stock kits installed, sitting at my table.

If the DOJ was confident that I was breaking the law, that would have been the place to put a stop to my law breaking. They knew I was going to be there. I had my rifles out in the open. But nothing happened.

The DOJ knows where I live. They know that in my gun safe I have 3 rifles with open magwells and U15 stocks installed. That is more than enough for a warrant. They can come get me any time. All they have to do is first figure out which laws I am breaking. And that is the problem. I'm not breaking any laws.

It is very important to remember that the DOJ does not make laws by simply writing an opinion letter or saying something to someone 6 years ago. Laws are written down.

Penal Code section 12276.1 defines "thumbhole stock".
(e) “thumbhole stock” means a stock with a hole that allows the thumb of the trigger hand to penetrate into or through the stock while firing.

That is the definition that is on the books.
In a court of law, that is exactly what a person would be charged with violating.

Where or what you rest your cheek on has no legal bearing in California on what constitutes a thumbhole stock.

The U15 stock has no hole in it. The thumb of the trigger hand does not penetrate into or through the stock.

If the DOJ does not like that my stock is legal by the letter of the law, they will have to change the definition of "thumbhole stock" just like they are trying to change the definition of "capacity to accept" because they don't like the Prince50 kits, which are also legal by the letter of the law.

-Grant

PIRATE14
12-05-2006, 10:32 PM
It's not like they have far to drive.................:D

PIRATE14
12-05-2006, 10:37 PM
Or:
They take a normal thumb hole stock.
"Here we have a thumb hole stock"
By applying a sharp saw-toothed object to it, they slice the stock in two parts, separated by a 1/16" opening.
"Is this not still a thumb hole stock?"
"This U15 stock is exactly the same, the opening is just somewhat wider"
"This letter, that the defendant was aware of, clearly states that the U15 stock was deemed by DOJ to be a thumb hole stock, yet he still installed that on his child-killing assault weapon"

Too paranoid and conservative? Maybe.... YMMV.

Well first off you started w/ a known entity ie a thumb hole stock and than you tried to modify it.......

U-15 is designed from the ground up to meet the letter of the law.

But this is a big game w/ high stakes and people have to make the decision for themselves...........:cool:

Fjold
12-06-2006, 8:02 AM
Your Lawyer asks:
"How can a stock have a receiver in between it and another stock? Have you ever heard of a rifle with two stocks? Are you going to tell this court that the forward hand grip, which is seperated from the stock by the receiver is a third stock? If you think there are two stocks here, the CCR is pretty clear that a thumbhole stock is a single entity by using the singular "a stock" not "stocks" in the definition. Are you sure that's not a buffer tube as its called right here in the Army Manual?"
-Gene

Personally I think the the U15 stock is legal but your "testimony" wouldn't fly. Just about every lever gun made has a 2 piece stock (singular, not plural)with a receiver in the middle. Google "2 piece stock"

xrMike
12-06-2006, 8:33 AM
I used to be really REALLY convinced that gripless was the way to go.

But now that Ive shot ARs and AKs both ways, I say fixed mag is the better of the 2.After trying both ways, I totally agree. Shooting without a grip (a grip that I can get my opposable thumb around the backside of) just feels very wrong and unatural, like I'm not in control of the rifle.

Plus I like how the grip gives me unlimited rounds without having to reload! Heheh.

ARRRR-15
12-06-2006, 8:35 AM
Or:
They take a normal thumb hole stock.
"Here we have a thumb hole stock"
By applying a sharp saw-toothed object to it, they slice the stock in two parts, separated by a 1/16" opening.
"Is this not still a thumb hole stock?"
"This U15 stock is exactly the same, the opening is just somewhat wider"
"This letter, that the defendant was aware of, clearly states that the U15 stock was deemed by DOJ to be a thumb hole stock, yet he still installed that on his child-killing assault weapon"

Too paranoid and conservative? Maybe.... YMMV.

But your thumb would still need to be put through the stock(hence a thumb hole stock). If you made the cut maybe 1 inch wide you could bring your thumb into position without putting it through a hole. It would be more like a thumb slot stock.

hoffmang
12-06-2006, 6:54 PM
When I google "2 piece stock" I got stocks and forearms.

In fact though - you point out a way that my testimony is even more defensible. Does there exist a two piece thumbhole stock?

Also though - if there is something I'm not seeing on Google, please post a URL.

Either way, the only way DOJ can claim that the U15 is a thumbhole stock is to attempt to define a foam covered buffer tube as a stock also. In a criminal case, two interpretations are interpreted to the benefit of the accused.

I think there is a whole lot of evidence (SAMI, AR armorers manuals from the Army, ATF AR Pistol designations, etc) that shows that the thing coming out the back of the receiver on a U15 equipped OLL is a buffer tube.

-Gene