AR Pistol's

[SSDriver]

Ok I have a few q's about AR15 pistols in california. I remember reading a long time ago that you could aquire a AR Pistol if an LEO purchased it first and then PPT transfered it. What is the specific law about this and what literature do you have?

Also I was wondering what regulations there are on the pistol it self. I know you can't have a rifle stock or a forward grip at all. What other regulations are there. Thanks

[TannerBoyl]

As long as you comply with the following.
Borrowed from CA DOJ:

(4) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer.
(B) A second handgrip.
(C) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel that allows the bearer to fire the weapon without burning his or her hand, except a slide that encloses the barrel.
(D) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.

(5) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

and the model doesn't appear on this list, then I don't see a problem (other than trying to find someone to do the transfer for you.)

As for the Safe List Requirement:

Private party transfers, curio/relic handguns, certain single-action revolvers, and pawn/consignment returns are exempt from this requirement.

Then it could be done.

[AYEAREFIFTEEN]

I think the "(D) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip" would make any AR style pistol illegal in this state reguardless of who or where it was coming from.

[69Mach1]

How about a fixed 10 round magazine on the AR pistol.
Bushmaster carbon 15 CALI-legal pistol anyone?

[bwiese]

It's difficult to do an AR pistol in CA due to 'safe gun' laws - the gun would have to be PPT'd as there's no way an receiver can be sold/transferred as a pistol.

I also believe - thinking very quickly - that such a gun may well have to be previously configured/enter the state as not only a pistol, but it'd need a fixed mag attached prior to sale/transfer (unlike a rifle which can be sold as a bare receiver). Of course the receiver would need to be 'off-list', and it could never have been transferred as a rifle in its history - it'd have to have been initially 4473'd as a non-rifle as well.

AR pistols are pretty useless anyway.

[bu-bye]

I'm willing to bet even if you weld the mag and follow the law to the letter you will get taken away in cuffs while at the range. While you may be 100% legal, if there is one thing that looks VERY bad in CA it is a AR pitol. You might get off but you will pay for lawyer fees and your time just fighting it. Personally I don't think its worth it. The 223 round out of such a short barrel does not have the same energy as a lot of large bore pistols so you are just buying a fun toy with a big risk. If you want a fast moving 223 bullet why not just look at the FN 5.7?

I too think an AR pistol would be the cats meow but if you really think about it its kinda pointless and not worth the risk just to say you own one.

[Jack_Bauer]

What about the DPMS single shot ar-receivers. Useless, probably. Novelty factor, high. I think CA has thatsafe-list excemption for single-shot pistols with a barrel at least x inches long.

[bwiese]

What about the DPMS single shot ar-receivers. Useless, probably. Novelty factor, high. I think CA has thatsafe-list excemption for single-shot pistols with a barrel at least x inches long.

That'll fly.

[Stanze]

What about the DPMS single shot ar-receivers. Useless, probably. Novelty factor, high. I think CA has thatsafe-list excemption for single-shot pistols with a barrel at least x inches long.

Hmmm.....pair of consecutive serial numbered DMPS single shot AR pistols could be THIS!





The modern day equivalent of a cased pair of dueling pistols.
(I know those aren't DPMS single shot receivers, best I could do for a quick MS Paint hack job.)

[WeThePeople]

AR pistols are pretty useless anyway.

Personally I don't think its worth it. The 223 round out of such a short barrel does not have the same energy as a lot of large bore pistols so you are just buying a fun toy with a big risk. If you want a fast moving 223 bullet why not just look at the FN 5.7?

Have you looked at the 6.8 SPC ballistics? The 6.8 is much better than a .223 and it uses the same lower. Of course, this does not address the legal issues...just the lust factor.

[anotherone]

The problem with the DPMS single shot exemption build is that all the DPMS single shot lowers are being built as rifles. Once it's a rifle it's always a rifle there's no way for it to become a pistol. Wouldn't someone have to convince DPMS to manufacture the lowers as pistol recievers for this idea to become viable?

[JPglee1]

Hmmm.....pair of consecutive serial numbered DMPS single shot AR pistols could be THIS!





The modern day equivalent of a cased pair of dueling pistols.
(I know those aren't DPMS single shot receivers, best I could do for a quick MS Paint hack job.)

Well, since we know that a pre-1899 antique collectible is not legally a firearm, nor can it legally BE an assault weapon, and the DOJ has told me in writing I can modify an existing weapon to any extent I want as long as the serial # is intact, how about taking frame/serial
# from some old pistol (maybe some old british bull dogs or S&Ws) and welding it to an 80% finished AR-15 steel receiver, LOL..

Then you'd have a modified pre-1899 pistol "receiver" LMAO...

Im not being serious but in the exact letter of the law, and going off the DOJ leter I have, it wouldn't be illegal, LMAO...

I don't think it would fly however.


J