New bullet button tool option for AR

[solislbc]

under 10 bucks for 4 mags. work great.

http://www.riflegear.com/p-879-ultimate-bullet-button-tool.aspx

[advocatusdiaboli]

My 6.8 SPC is being built featureless with a Thordsen Customer FRS-15 stock to see how I like it. Won't be built of in action for a long while: Wilson Combat is backordered 4-12 weeks for their 6.8 SPC BCG

Haven't decided yet for my other build: a 5.56 1:7. probably with a Wison Combat Recon Tac Lightweight 16" barrel and use Magpul furniture with locking a BB and try the UBBT on a couple of my pinned and blocked 30->10 mags.

[glock_this]

under 10 bucks for 4 mags. work great.
http://www.riflegear.com/p-879-ultim...tton-tool.aspx

You can also go right to the source and support one of our vendors, the guy who designed the original concept.

[LBDamned]

You can also go right to the source and support one of our vendors, the guy who designed the original concept.

Buying from Riflegear doesn't undercut Thordo (they buy from him)... That way you are supporting "two" of our vendors

[glock_this]

Buying from Riflegear doesn't undercut Thordo (they buy from him)... That way you are supporting "two" of our vendors

Yeah... I just wanted to give props to the guy who started it and just for readers who don't know it was one of our very own who came up with the UBBT and the whole concept. Plus it is another buy source if 1 or the other is out.

[boopiejones]

i still think this is legal grey area. i realize the tool can't be used when attached to the mag inserted in the gun, but you can slip the tool off the mag without removing the mag, thereby making it a usable tool again. how is this any different than clipping a tool to the side of the gun?

seems like a cheaper (and more legal) option would be to go to home depot, buy some small machine screws and nuts and insert into a small hole drilled in the body or floorplate of the mag. can't be removed from the magazine without a tool, therefore it becomes useless once in the magwell. and it's only 15 cents instead of $15.

[glock_this]

i still think this is legal grey area. i realize the tool can't be used when attached to the mag inserted in the gun, but you can slip the tool off the mag without removing the mag, thereby making it a usable tool again.

seems like a cheaper (and more legal) option would be to go to home depot, buy some small machine screws and nuts and insert into a small hole drilled in the body or floorplate of the mag. can't be removed from the magazine without a tool, therefore it becomes useless once in the magwell. and it's only 15 cents instead of $15.

Are you not looking at the UBBT option mentioned (and linked to) throughout this entire post

[LBDamned]

i still think this is legal grey area. i realize the tool can't be used when attached to the mag inserted in the gun, but you can slip the tool off the mag without removing the mag, thereby making it a usable tool again.

seems like a cheaper (and more legal) option would be to go to home depot, buy some small machine screws and nuts and insert into a small hole drilled in the body or floorplate of the mag. can't be removed from the magazine without a tool, therefore it becomes useless once in the magwell. and it's only 15 cents instead of $15.

But it's not a grey area.... At no point is it a "tool" while "attached" to rifle.

If you can remove mag while attached to rifle it's a no-go... If it is a tool not attached to the rifle, no law is broken.

Otherwise a round chambered would be illegal - simple eject unspent round and remove mag with it... Of course that's not illegal however... Same as UBBT

[boopiejones]

Are you not looking at the UBBT option mentioned (and linked to) throughout this entire post

yes i am looking at that one, which can be slipped off the magazine with your fingers. the difference with using a screw is that it cannot be removed from the magazine without the use of another tool. therefore if you need a tool to access the tool to remove the magazine, then it is clearly in compliance with the law.

edit: i just scrolled down the other thread and see that it has an option for installing directly on the magazine. as long as it is mounted from the inside out and requires a tool to uninstall, then i'd personally be comfortable using one of those. but the method where it is attached to the rubber magpul grip seems like legal grey area to me.

[boopiejones]

But it's not a grey area.... At no point is it a "tool" while "attached" to rifle.

If you can remove mag while attached to rifle it's a no-go... If it is a tool not attached to the rifle, no law is broken.

Otherwise a round chambered would be illegal - simple eject unspent round and remove mag with it... Of course that's not illegal however... Same as UBBT

so by that logic, i can clip a little pocket screwdriver onto my trigger guard and then just unclip it when i want to remove a magazine?

i totally get it... clipping it on the gun is no different than putting it in my pocket. but i wouldn't want to test that theory.

[LBDamned]

so by that logic, i can clip a little pocket screwdriver onto my trigger guard and then just unclip it when i want to remove a magazine?

i totally get it... clipping it on the gun is no different than putting it in my pocket. but i wouldn't want to test that theory.

As long as it's not "attached" while it's a tool... The reason mag magnet was controversial (and basically deemed illegal) is because (in theory) it is magnetically "attached" to the rifle while being used (your examples don't fall under this theory - the tools you mention are not attached while in use).

[advocatusdiaboli]

If that was the case, and bullet (chambered or loaded in mag that is inserted in rifle) would be in violation...

As stated previously - it becomes illegal when the object can actually be used as a tool to remove mag... A chambered round, ammo in mag and UBBT mag inserted in rifle can not be used as a tool, until they are no longer attached to the rifle.

ETA: I didn't realize this way basically stated already

Enough people seem to be accepting it (including training firms run by LEOs) that I am going to assume that it is a very low risk even though an unsettled area of the law. I don't buy all the logic, but LEOs seem to interpret this as legal and they are the tip of the spear on that so...you get the rest.

However, just to clear up the cartridge/tool analogy, the law is not specific enough and can be interpreted several ways. Prosecutors love gray areas. The law mentions tools but a cartridge is not a tool any more than your finger nail is a tool (screwdriver in a pinch) even if used as one. A dedicated tool with no other purpose than to remove a magazine is entirely different than a cartridge.

Here is what the prosecutor might say and a judge and jury might buy: "This tool was made and attached to the rifle for only one reason: to violate the law and make an assault weapon. A cartridge, while convenient to use, is not a tool and was not designed as a tool, it is a cartridge deigned to be fired in the rifle. No one made them to create an assault weapon and break the law."

I repeat: the risk appears to be very low, LEOs and range masters are accepting it, and the use is growing and no one has been arrested or prosecuted. So it all boils down to your appetite for risk. Just remember there still is some risk there as small and diminishing as it may be.

[LBDamned]

I understand your prospective - but s far as I can tell; As written - a tool is a tool... And providing it is not attached to (or otherwise part of) the rifle, it's not in violaton...

Let's face it - the law was initially written with the concept that some great amount of effort would be needed and would require a tool to get the mag out... What "tool" do you think they felt suitable?... Are you suggesting that no special tool could ever be created for the sole purpose of removing a mag?...

[advocatusdiaboli]

I understand your prospective - but s far as I can tell; As written - a tool is a tool... And providing it is not attached to (or otherwise part of) the rifle, it's not in violaton...

Let's face it - the law was initially written with the concept that some great amount of effort would be needed and would require a tool to get the mag out... What "tool" do you think they felt suitable?... Are you suggesting that no special tool could ever be created for the sole purpose of removing a mag?...

They simply wanted to make it cumbersome to change magazine s"for the children". That is why they specifically didn't want the tool attached which would make make it faster and easier. But they never defined "attached" just as the same legislators never really defined "locked" for unloaded locked concealed carry nor did they define "rebuild kits" for the manufacture felony for standard capacity magazines.

The legislators that create and vote for these laws are either inept and incompetent in communicating in written English or deviously vague to frustrate us in the exercise of our constitutional right. Either way, they spin up FUD in the laws. No other Western state has to deal with this cr*p. It's ridiculous but that is life under the tyranny of the People's Soviet Socialist Republik of Kalifornia with a higher per capita murder rate than free Texas.

[LBDamned]

^^^ Amen to that!