Originally Posted by hoffmang
1. This is not a pistol grip. When attached to the firearm, please show me where the stock is.
2. A pistol style grasp has a meaning and this is a rifle style grasp. There are quite a few M1A stocks that are almost exactly the same.
3. If there is confusion, then it's a comment on the law and not the stock. It's the sense of CGF that we can defend anyone accused of having a "by features AW" when simply using this stock.
i'm not buying this. if a promag archangel stock integrates an SB23 pistol grip (which i think it clearly does), then so does this. is it the sense of CGF that you can defend anyone accused of possessing a by-features AW when using an archangel?
i think a prosecutor could fairly easily convince a jury that the grip can be integral to a larger component -- the stock -- and that such a grip isn't thus relieved of the burden of remaining compliant with the SB23 definition of a "pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon."
sorry, thordo -- i love your stuff, and this thing is tremendously creative, but i think it's problematic.
“Keep it up, America, keep telling your youth that mud and danger are fit only for intellectual pigs. Keep on saying that only the stupid are fit to sacrifice, that America must be defended by the low-brow and enjoyed by the high-brow. Keep vaunting head over heart, and soon the head will arrive at the complete folly of any kind of fight and meekly surrender the treasure to the first bandit with enough heart to demand it.” (Robert Leckie)
Last edited by strongpoint; 12-01-2012 at 12:35 PM..