PDA

View Full Version : Muzzle Brake or Flash Suppressor???


4DSJW
03-15-2012, 3:19 PM
Hi All,

After looking at the Flowchart I started to wonder how this would be classified. I looked for a name, or any kind of markings, but couldn't find a thing. It has four rows of three holes and a scalloped front surface. It looks like it may have a locking ring on the rear so that it can be indexed. The "thingy" adorns the end of a FAL, supposedly an Imbel barrel. Does anyone know what this is, where it came from, or how it would be classified?

Thanks for your help!

http://tameshigiri.com/images/MuzzleDeviceSd.jpg

http://tameshigiri.com/images/MuzzleDeviceFr.jpg

S470FM
03-15-2012, 3:23 PM
muzzle device.

bombadillo
03-15-2012, 3:25 PM
Looks like a flash hider to me. No closure toward the muzzle end.

Chaos47
03-15-2012, 3:45 PM
Looks like a flash hider to me. No closure toward the muzzle end.

I'm going to vote flash hider as well for the same reason.

OP are you going to run a magazine lock or are you going featureless?

If you are going with a magazine lock it doesn't matter either way you are good to go.

EDIT: quick google turns up this:
http://www.northridgeinc.com/store/index.cfm/c223/i992
Looks pretty similar...
They call it a "BELGIAN FN FAL FLASH HIDER"

S470FM
03-15-2012, 3:53 PM
it's not a FH, the ports on the device are slanted upward (similar to an M1A), it's a brake.

Chaos47
03-15-2012, 4:06 PM
it's not a FH, the ports on the device are slanted upward (similar to an M1A), it's a brake.

You know there are Flash Suppressors for the M1A too right?

2 Common features of a Flash Suppressor are:
1 a larger internal cavity for gas expansion and an open front end
2 Tines

This device falls under number 1.
But this is not what the CA DOJ uses to classify devices

CA DOJ's first step in determining a Flash Suppressor is what it is called. In this case I found a similar device that is clearly marked as a flash hider. That is enough for the CA DOJ to declare it as such.

https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=14Sc8MNP9AO6JgHxcnqm5oR45LDLIhpqeBHsCN8-K4XU&pli=1
Flash Suppressor
VS
Compensator / Brake
978.20 Definitions
(b) “flash suppressor” means any device designed, intended, or that functions to
perceptibly reduce or redirect muzzle flash from the shooter’s field of vision.
From SB23 http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/sb23.pdf


During Hunt v Lockyer it was determined that:
1. That the DOJ’s definition of “flash suppressor” exceeded the authority granted to them by the legislature.
2. That the definition of “flash suppressor” was unconstitutionally vague and ambiguous.

Durring the trial the DOJ filed a declaration by DOJ Special Agent Ignatius (Iggy) Chinn

Hunt v. Lockyer Declaration of DOJ Special Agent Ignatius Chinn
http://calgunlaws.com/Docs/ASSAULT%20WEAPONS/Cal%20Regulations/NRA-HuntPDecOfIgnatiusChinn061205.PDF

Quote from Ignatuis Chinn’s Declaration:
7. Accordingly, DOJ determines whether a particular feature or device is a flash suppressor as defined in section 978.20(b) by inspecting the device, reviewing material regarding the device provided by the manufacturer or otherwise, and/or consulting with ATF. In particular, DOJ determines whether a particular device is a flash suppressor under the regulatory definition by following a step-by-step analysis. In nearly all instances to date, DOJ has been able to determine that the device in question is a flash suppressor in the initial stage of the analysis, without needing to proceed further in the determination process.

8. The first step is determination of whether the device in question is designed or intended to perceptibly reduce or redirect muzzle flash from the shooter's field of vision. The assigned Firearms Division personnel examine the device and review material produced by the manufacturer of the device to see what the manufacturer has said publicly about its designed or intended uses for the device. Manufacturer materials reviewed can include brochures and packaging provided with the device, advertising materials, websites, and point-of-sale or other marketing materials. If it is determined that the device in question was designed or intended to perceptibly reduce or redirect muzzle flash from the shooter's field of vision, then the device is determined to be a flash suppressor, and the inquiry is at an end.

9. If however, it is determined that the device in question was not designed or intended to perceptibly reduce or redirect muzzle flash from the shooter's field of vision, then the analysis proceeds to a determination of whether the device nonetheless functions to perceptibly reduce or redirect muzzle flash from the shooter's field of vision. If it is determined that the device in question does not function to perceptibly reduce or redirect muzzle flash from the shooter's field of vision, then the device is determined not to be a flash suppressor, and the inquiry is at an end.

10. If, however, at this stage, Firearms Division personnel were unable to determine whether a particular device functions to perceptibly reduce or redirect muzzle flash from the shooter's field of vision based on inspection of the device, they would consult with ATF.


So in short the CA DOJ’s system for determining a Flash Suppressor is:
1. Examine the device and the claims made by the manufacturer.
If at step 1 the device is found to be a Flash Suppressor there is no need to progress to later steps and the device is determined to be a flash suppressor.
2. Test if the device does nonetheless function as a Flash Hider
If at step 2 the device is determined “not function to perceptibly reduce or redirect muzzle flash from the shooter's field of vision” then the device is determined not to be a flash suppressor”
3. If unable to determine, consult with ATF

4DSJW
03-15-2012, 4:44 PM
I'm going to vote flash hider as well for the same reason.

OP are you going to run a magazine lock or are you going featureless?

If you are going with a magazine lock it doesn't matter either way you are good to go.

EDIT: quick google turns up this:
http://www.northridgeinc.com/store/index.cfm/c223/i992
Looks pretty similar...
They call it a "BELGIAN FN FAL FLASH HIDER"

The rifle is currently configured as featureless with a kydex grip-wrap and no mag lock. Thanks for the link, I have to agree that this seems to fall more on the side of a flash suppressor than a brake. All comments and thoughts are welcome.

dfletcher
03-15-2012, 4:55 PM
CA DOJ's approach sounds similar to the methods my forbears used to determine if someone was a witch. Weigh the offender down with stones and dunk them in the water for a good long time. If the person drowns, she's not a witch. If the person survives, she's witch - at which point she's stoned, hanged or pressed. :31:

I don't recall anyone making it past the dipping pool ..... :angel: