Is a Kriss Vector featureless?

[Quiet]

The manufacturer (KRISS USA) ships them to CA with a maglock + 10 round magazine + non-folding stock, because they were advised by their lawyers that they are required in order to be CA legal.

So, if you want to fight it in Court, the firearm manufacturer will not be on your side of the argument.

[Shovel]

Here's a picture of the Kriss Vector action. the yellow and blue parts being the action itself. Based on my limited understanding, the grip doesn't seem to be protruding below it.

The OP is not questioning the vertical grip or the folding stock. We all know that those are "evil" features that can be removed or disabled. The question at hand is whether or not the rifle has a pistol grip under the current definition of the law. I think (I'm not a lawyer) that a case can be made that the grip is in line with or even above the action of the firearm. What I don't know is how to have that confirmed with someone in the CA government so that I could feel comfortable running it without a mag lock.

Adding a grip wrap for featureless operation would be a good start to using the rifle though.

Does anyone know how we could get get its status as a pistol grip confirmed with the state?

[Wes C Addle]

I feel like California is the Special Ed of gun laws.

sadly, New York laws take their place. Our laws suck too though

[strongpoint]

Here's a picture of the Kriss Vector action. the yellow and blue parts being the action itself. Based on my limited understanding, the grip doesn't seem to be protruding below it.

You're confusing the label with the definition. "Pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon" is just a label, a legal term, a name for the thing being defined. There's no requirement that the term accurately describe what it's applied to (much like "assault weapon," another legal term with a legal definition).

This is the definition in question, from 11 CCR 5469(d):

... a grip that allows for a pistol style grasp in which the web of the trigger hand (between the thumb and index finger) can be placed below the top of the exposed portion of the trigger while firing.

Does a Vector have that? Yes it does, so therefore it has a "pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon," full stop.

Does anyone know how we could get get its status as a pistol grip confirmed with the state?

We can't. The California DOJ doesn't make such determinations.

[Mutenri]

You're confusing the label with the definition. "Pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon" is just a label, a legal term, a name for the thing being defined. There's no requirement that the term accurately describe what it's applied to (much like "assault weapon," another legal term with a legal definition).

I don't see how that definition would spare the M1919A6 (stocked version) while still condemning the Kriss Vector.

[strongpoint]

I don't see how that definition would spare the M1919A6 (stocked version) while still condemning the Kriss Vector.

I wouldn't argue that it does, at least in terms of AW features.

[drclark]

Well if you use the strict definition without the "conspicuously below the action" label the spade grips would also still qualify as a pistol grip would it not?

[strongpoint]

Well if you use the strict definition without the "conspicuously below the action" label the spade grips would also still qualify as a pistol grip would it not?

Maybe, but spade grips generally means no stock, which means you can't shoulder it. And if you can't shoulder it, it's technically not a rifle (see 18 USC 921(a)(7) or 26 USC 5845(c); the Calguns wiki also addresses the intersection with California law here). And if it's not a rifle, it can't be a "semiautomatic, centerfire rifle," which means it can't be a California assault weapon in the rifle categories, so the list of features doesn't apply. See here for another example.

Bear in mind that California law doesn't really give us an option aside from "us[ing] the strict definition without the 'conspicuously below the action' label."

[Mutenri]

Maybe, but spade grips generally means no stock, which means you can't shoulder it. And if you can't shoulder it, it's technically not a rifle (see 18 USC 921(a)(7) or 26 USC 5845(c); the Calguns wiki also addresses the intersection with California law here).

And if it's not a rifle, it can't be a "semiautomatic, centerfire rifle," which means it can't be a California assault weapon in the rifle categories, so the list of features isn't relevant.

There is a version of the M1919A6 which has a stock. It is the one the thread I linked earlier asserted does not have a pistol grip.

Here it is, and I don't see how that's not a pistol gripped rifle under the strict definition

[strongpoint]

There is a version of the M1919A6 which has a stock. It is the one the thread I linked earlier asserted does not have a pistol grip.

Here it is, and I don't see how that's not a pistol gripped rifle under the strict definition

I knew exactly what you were describing -- the A6 is the version of the M1919 that includes a stock.

That's not a spade grip, and I stated earlier that I think the A6 DOES appear to include a pistol grip per the definition. If someone else is arguing that it's not, or that the A6 is somehow exempt, I don't know what their reasoning is.

THIS is a spade grip (below). Hard to attach a stock behind that.

[Cokebottle]

That's not a spade grip, and I stated earlier that I think the A6 DOES appear to include a pistol grip per the definition. If someone else is arguing that it's not, or that the A6 is somehow exempt, I don't know what their reasoning is.

Ditto.

Spade grip, tripod mount is neither a rifle nor a pistol. It is a Title-1 "Other"

Same goes if the spade grip is replaced with a pistol grip AND the OAL remains over 26"... It is neither a rifle nor a pistol, remains Title-1 "Other"

The Kriss is manufactured as a rifle and fits all definitions:
Barrel length => 16"
OAL => 26" with the buttstock in its extended position

Likewise, the 1919A6: Barrel length => 16" - OAL => 26" = Rifle

Now, being belt fed throws a monkey wrench into this debate of semantics.
The 1919A6 does not have a detachable magazine, nor does it have a fixed magazine.

The 1919A6 *MAY* be exempt from California AW laws because it is belt-fed, NOT because it is not a rifle or some literal reading of PART of the California law seems to indicate that the PG does not qualify as a PG.

[bombadillo]

Either way, I want to know why that holographic sight is on the Kriss backwards on that first photo.....

[strongpoint]

Ditto.

Spade grip, tripod mount is neither a rifle nor a pistol. It is a Title-1 "Other"

Same goes if the spade grip is replaced with a pistol grip AND the OAL remains over 26"... It is neither a rifle nor a pistol, remains Title-1 "Other"

The Kriss is manufactured as a rifle and fits all definitions:
Barrel length => 16"
OAL => 26" with the buttstock in its extended position

Likewise, the 1919A6: Barrel length => 16" - OAL => 26" = Rifle

Now, being belt fed throws a monkey wrench into this debate of semantics.
The 1919A6 does not have a detachable magazine, nor does it have a fixed magazine.

The 1919A6 *MAY* be exempt from California AW laws because it is belt-fed, NOT because it is not a rifle or some literal reading of PART of the California law seems to indicate that the PG does not qualify as a PG.

Nicely done. I was wondering whether belt-fed vs. "detachable magazine" was part of the reasoning.

Something else that likely informs this opinion, at least in part -- a determination letter that DOJ issued in 2000:



Now, pay attention:

1) The climate in Sacramento was much different in Y2K, with a sane AG in office.

2) The DOJ Firearms Division no longer issues ANY such determinations.

3) Perhaps most importantly, the regulatory definition of "pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon" DID NOT EXIST AT THAT TIME. The rulemaking process didn't begin until just a few weeks prior to that letter's date, and didn't conclude until some time after. There is a good chance the opinion in the first paragraph of this letter is no longer applicable.

4) This letter addresses the 1919A4 and 1919A6, not Kriss Vector rifles.

[strongpoint]

Either way, I want to know why that holographic sight is on the Kriss backwards on that first photo.....

Ha! I don't think it is. That's not a real holographic (i.e., an EoTech); it's a plain-old laser RDS in a jumped-up housing. In fact, I think it's exactly this.

[E Michael]