Ledesma Arms Featureless California Compliance Conversion Kit

[SloChicken]

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...6&postcount=42

If you look at the thordsen. You can see that the shortest point between the grip portion and the trigger is above the top line of the trigger.

This is not the case with the Ledesma grip.

Running out of angles to help you here buddy.

If this one was compliant I would be all over it as it is like a MMG without the fin - would be great!

Problem being ...

[varanidguy]

Either way, I'm going to see someone who can give me a real answer who is very intimate with the laws pertaining to this, on Tuesday. My posts were more for informational/educational purposes, take it whichever way you like.

[calif 15-22]

Here is Thordson High and Low Grip all be it the Thordson is a stock not a Grip

Thordson High (normal) Grip

[/URL][/IMG]

Thordson Low (DA ) Grip

[IMG][/IMG]

[Cokebottle]

Agreed, but unfortunately I think we often nit-pik things to death and perhaps out of being overly cautious come up with arguments against products that perhaps even the gun grabbers wouldn't have thought of. The bottom line is that the California laws suck, truly making law breakers out of law abiding citizens.

Nobody wants to be the guy that gives a piece of advice that sends a friend to jail

I'll give an opinion on something, but often indicate "I am not comfortable with it" rather than flatly stating that it is illegal.
The wheel lock style mag release was not one of those times

[SloChicken]

Either way, I'm going to see someone who can give me a real answer who is very intimate with the laws pertaining to this, on Tuesday. My posts were more for informational/educational purposes, take it whichever way you like.

Are you trying to give information?

Because it sure seems like you don't want to receive it ...

[varanidguy]

Are you trying to give information?

Because it sure seems like you don't want to receive it ...

You're not saying anything new. I know what the law says. I'm going to see someone who deals with compliance on a daily basis for the gov't as his career. I'll get a second opinion then.

[calif 15-22]

Either way, I'm going to see someone who can give me a real answer who is very intimate with the laws pertaining to this, on Tuesday. My posts were more for informational/educational purposes, take it whichever way you like.

Keep us posted. My only concern with the pic you posted is if you slide your had down the "Grip" your webbing would be well below the compliant line.

While the Thordson may have the exact same angle, the difference is Thordson is a "stock" and the Ledesma is a "Grip".

Now granted nether have been tested in court and I for one look terrible in Orange and am too good looking to go to jail so I'm errorring on the safer side and will most likely go Monsterman or Exile Grip Fin, which I believe leave less up for the "webbing" issue.

[IMG][/IMG]

[varanidguy]

Here is Thordson High and Low Grip all be it the Thordson is a stock not a Grip

Thordson High (normal) Grip

[/URL][/IMG]

Thordson Low (DA ) Grip

[IMG][/IMG]

The top grip is pretty much exactly where the grip falls on the Ledesma as well.

[SloChicken]

The top grip is pretty much exactly where the grip falls on the Ledesma as well.

But no, it isn't

[varanidguy]

Keep us posted. My only concern with the pic you posted is if you slide your had down the "Grip" your webbing would be well below the compliant line.

While the Thordson my have the exact same angle, the difference is Thordson is a "stock" and the Ledesma is a "Grip".

Now granted nether have been tested in court and I for one look terrible in Orange and am too good looking to go to jail so I'm errorring on the safer side and will most likely go Monsterman or Exile Grip Fin, which I believe leave less up for the "webbing" issue.

[IMG][/IMG]

I don't blame you. If I'm told then that it's a no-go as well, I'm going to see about returning the grips and going elsewhere. While I'm arguing in favor for it, I'm not delusional in thinking my word is stone. I very well could be wrong, SloChicken very well could be right, but I'm going to get a second opinion.

[SloChicken]

Sounds good!

Again, If you apply the law line by line per the defining criteria of a pistol grip and grasp it will be quite clear.

[calif 15-22]

I don't blame you. If I'm told then that it's a no-go as well, I'm going to see about returning the grips and going elsewhere. While I'm arguing in favor for it, I'm not delusional in thinking my word is stone. I very well could be wrong, SloChicken very well could be right, but I'm going to get a second opinion.

That sounds like a sound plan. This entire "featureless" stock/grip thing has yet to be tested in court. And while I'm sure it will be tested, i'm also sure it's not gonna be tested by me.

[varanidguy]

I also requested more info from Ledesma pertaining to their claim that the DOJ has viewed their grip and stated that it is compliant. We'll see what they come up with.

[AEtrane]

Curious to hear your examples for comparison.

Mentioned already, but

https://www.cheaperthandirt.com/product/promag-archangel-m1a-precision-stock-springfield-m1a-and-m14-glass-reinforced-polymer-black-aam1a-708279010262.do

This is clearly a pistol grip, despite being part of a stock.

By your logic, the thordsen must also have a pistol grip. Yet somehow, you deem it not a pistol grip. Why? Because it's part of a stock, just like the archangel above, except it's not, because......reasons.

If the thordsen is legal, then this grip ought to be as well. If this grip is illegal, so is the thordsen. If the thordsen is legal because its part or a stock, then the archangel is legal on the same premise.

each scenario cannot be true on their own based on the same reasoning.

[SloChicken]

Mentioned already, but

https://www.cheaperthandirt.com/product/promag-archangel-m1a-precision-stock-springfield-m1a-and-m14-glass-reinforced-polymer-black-aam1a-708279010262.do

This is clearly a pistol grip, despite being part of a stock.

By your logic, the thordsen must also have a pistol grip. Yet somehow, you deem it not a pistol grip. Why? Because it's part of a stock, just like the archangel above, except it's not, because......reasons.

If the thordsen is legal, then this grip ought to be as well. If this grip is illegal, so is the thordsen. If the thordsen is legal because its part or a stock, then the archangel is legal on the same premise.

each scenario cannot be true on their own based on the same reasoning.

I never said either is legal.

I did say to read the law as written and apply the defining terms to the Ledesma and if you can do the (very simple) math, one can see the ledesma grip is not compliant.
Particularly the "web of the hand" part.

Argue with that.