Would this be legal on AR pistol?

oldrifle · #1 09-08-2011, 8:50 PM

Would the Mako Magazine Well Grip/Mag Funnel be legal on an AR-15 pistol?

On one hand it could be considered a forward grip on an AR pistol (definitely illegal), however it could also be considered a mag funnel (device used to aid in loading a magazine) that happens to be ergonomic... thoughts?

bob7122 · #2 09-08-2011, 8:51 PM

i say yay, but might be a grey area.

DannyInSoCal · #3 09-08-2011, 8:55 PM

I've never seen anyone run one on a featureless rifle either.....

oldrifle · #4 09-08-2011, 8:56 PM

It seems like it would be easy to argue that it's just a wrapper for the mag well that happens to have finger grooves... perhaps designed to assist in loading the pistol to prevent droppage.

Of course the intended useage doesn't matter. It comes down to whether it's a forward grip or not. If it had a single purpose as a grip, I'd say yeah, illegal. If it's a mag well funnel with grooves... I dunno...

MakoDefense · #5 09-08-2011, 9:28 PM

ATFE Letter regarding the use of the MWG Magazine Well Grip on AR Pistols:

Keep in mind that this refers only to the MWG, and specifically mentions that the MWG fits in two halves around the magazine well of the pistol, an existing structure, and has a window to prevent the obscuring of the serial number, both features that were specifically mentioned also in my discussions with the ATFE.

I would not use this as license to use one of the vertical grips designed to attach to a rail and rest close to the front of the magwell, or even one of the copies of the MWG. Also keep in mind that the MWG is manufactured under a patent that covers the attachment of a magwell funnel to the magazine well of a receiver, and a patent that covers the manufacture of any grip designed to be attached to the front of a receiver. This building similar grips are doing so in violation of an existing patent, and we ask that you do not support them in doing so.

oldrifle · #6 09-08-2011, 9:45 PM

Cool, thanks Mako. I really appreciate the info and letter.

oldrifle · #7 09-08-2011, 10:55 PM

Any opinions at the state level? This letter only covers federal law.

MakoDefense · #8 09-08-2011, 11:04 PM

I can't make any statements about CA law, only federal as far as this letter covers. I can't spend the time to work out CA laws - you will need someone who is an expert.

huntercf · #9 09-08-2011, 11:17 PM

I would be careful, CA DOJ is known for keeping silent on these matters and then nailing people to a cross. All it takes is for one LEO and one DA to arrest and charge you, since CA has a bad habit of passing half a** laws with a lot of grey area so they can make the rules up as they go.

oldrifle · #10 09-08-2011, 11:24 PM

Yeah... seems like a potentially bad idea just because CA is so vague. I wouldn't even attempt to try and interpret these laws without a lawyer.

epcii · #11 09-09-2011, 6:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MakoDefense

This building similar grips are doing so in violation of an existing patent, and we ask that you do not support them in doing so.

Does this include the Never Quit Grip?

tenpercentfirearms · #12 09-09-2011, 6:50 AM

What is the concern about CA law? How would that violate any CA laws? I can't think of any since it is simply a magazine well accessory.

**ke6guj** · #13 09-09-2011, 7:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tenpercentfirearms

What is the concern about CA law? How would that violate any CA laws? I can't think of any since it is simply a magazine well accessory.

exactly. Since ATF says that using that on an AR-pistol doesn't create an AOW, it doesn't matter if CA thinks it might be a second handgrip since our AR-pistols can have second handgrips. Same reason why we can use AFGs on AR-pistols, ATF says it is ok, and CA's opinion on what an AFG is doesn't matter.

oldrifle · #14 09-09-2011, 8:40 AM

Yeah, on second thought there may be no restrictions in CA about forward grips. Thanks guys.

CHS · #15 09-09-2011, 9:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldrifle

Yeah, on second thought there may be no restrictions in CA about forward grips. Thanks guys.

Vertical forward grips in CA are regulated as SB23 "AW" features. As such, they are only illegal in certain configurations. A magazine lock on semi-automatic AR type rifles or pistols allows VFGs and other forward grips to be used.

oldrifle · #16 09-09-2011, 9:09 AM

Right, got it. Thanks

bwiese · #17 09-11-2011, 11:13 AM

Yes, as long as Fed issues are cleared there are no CA issues for this device i.e., when used on a semiauto AR pistol with forward magwell as long as it has a non-detachable magazine (i.e, BulletButton-style maglock).

I am disturbed a bit, however, how the vendor trots out their BATF letter without any mention of California compliance issues.

We've seen similar drama involving the highly illegal SlideFire SSAR15 stock where they hide behind their ATF stuff and don't mention CA matters at all.

Just because a vendor has an ATF letter does not mean the device is legal (or illegal) in CA.

Cali-V · #18 09-11-2011, 11:29 AM

Bill did you see post 8#...

**ke6guj** · #19 09-11-2011, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bwiese

I am disturbed a bit, however, how the vendor trots out their BATF letter without any mention of California compliance issues.

I don't see a responsibility for a vendor to list the legalities in all 50-states. As long as it is federally legal, and that is all they talk about, they have done their due diligence. Now, if they direct advertizing towards CA-shooters, then they should mention CA legality of the product.

Quote:

We've seen similar drama involving the highly illegal SlideFire SSAR15 stock where they hide behind their ATF stuff and don't mention CA matters at all.

I don't see SlideFire "hiding behind ATF stuff". They even tell you that it is your responsibility to make sure it is legal in your area.

Quote:

ATTENTION -

It is the responsibility of the purchaser to ensure that the installation or use of any product sold by Slide Fire Solutions, Inc. is not prohibited in your area.

Quote:

Just because a vendor has an ATF letter does not mean the device is legal (or illegal) in CA

correct.

bwiese · #20 09-11-2011, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ke6guj

I don't see a responsibility for a vendor to list the legalities in all 50-states. As long as it is federally legal, and that is all they talk about, they have done their due diligence. Now, if they direct advertizing towards CA-shooters, then they should mention CA legality of the product.

Agreed, but they came up on a CA forum and trotted out their ATF letter.

Only afterward did they post something about CA laws in a separate post.

Quite a few folks will see "it's Federally legal" and assume the ATF letter has CA validity.

Quote:

I don't see SlideFire "hiding behind ATF stuff". They even tell you that it is your responsibility to make sure it is legal in your area.

I think that may be new.

A few months ago they were touting complete legality, "it was just a stock" etc. A well-worded noninflammatory post of mine on their FB site appears to have been pulled, as well.

slappomatt · #21 09-11-2011, 1:42 PM

I am all for pushing laws to a point but things like this are just such a grey area I really don't think I would bother. What does it add to the pistol? Its a grip that helps with mag changes.

There are so many AR accessories out there that never where intended for use in Ca that you are really at the mercy of the LEO that you run into. Is it worth a trip to court and lawyers fee's to you?

CHS · #22 09-11-2011, 7:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slappomatt

I am all for pushing laws to a point but things like this are just such a grey area I really don't think I would bother.

There's nothing at all gray about this. It's very clear.

The feds think it's ok, and the only thing that CA could possibly consider it would be a forward vertical grip, which are perfectly fine on fixed-magazine semi-auto pistols and non semi-auto pistols.

**Kestryll** · #23 09-11-2011, 7:39 PM

I have one of these exact mag wells on one of my featureless build rifles, it is a very functional flared mag well adapter.

If this counts as a 'forward grip' how does this affect lowers with built in checkering on the front of the mag well?
Can they then only be used on BB builds?

bwiese · #24 09-11-2011, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kestryll

If this counts as a 'forward grip' how does this affect lowers with built in checkering on the front of the mag well?
Can they then only be used on BB builds?

11 CCR 5499(c) states, "'forward pistol grip means a grip that allows
for a pistol style grasp forward of the trigger."

I can't see a real pistol style grasp here such that it also allows firing, but it may be possible to get thumb behind magwell (and ahead of trigger) and fingers

It may be sensible to not put this device on a featureless gun - even though you could grasp the magwell per above it's still a magwell.