Foregrip legal with Maglock?

[Gryff]

The old BB rifle wasnt allowed a forward grip under the old CA rules.

Er...it was. And still is. Just like flash hiders.

Only "featureless" rifles can't have it, since it constitutes one of the dreaded evil features that make the gun do crazy things.

[RickD427]

The DOJ is an executive agency. Their authority to regulate assault weapons only extends as far as what is delegated to them by the legislature. The legislature amended the AW statutes (which speak for themselves) and delegated to the DOJ the authority to promulgate regulations for a registration scheme to mete out the legislative goals of the amended statutes. DOJ doesn't get to make new laws/regs without explicit authority from the legislature. They created a registration process to register assault weapons oer the mandate from the legislature. Their regs pertaining to manufacturing a new assault weapon if you change the magazine locking device was whipped up out of wholecloth with no legislative support in the actual statutes. I have yet to come across someone who reg'ed (as an AW) a BB equipped rifle and was arrested or prosecuted for altering their BBRAW to be more "assaulty" aka a newly manufactured AW. I'm not saying it can't happen, but ilI would welcome such a case.

I am NOT advising you remove the BB from your BBRAW. That is a decision each person should make for themselves based on their risk tolerance and research. Make the decision for yourself after doing your due diligence. I've made mine.

Yes, You're absolutely correct in what you've posted.

I'm just gonna observe that DOJ has done it, and the regs in which they did it still stand.

And, just for the record, I am also not aware of any attempted prosecutions under the DOJ regs.

[ohsmily]

Yes, You're absolutely correct in what you've posted.

I'm just gonna observe that DOJ has done it, and the regs in which they did it still stand.

And, just for the record, I am also not aware of any attempted prosecutions under the DOJ regs.

True but the regs are for the purpose of registration. They attempted to promulgate a separate set of regulations purporting to control and regulate future possession (separate from registration). Those regulations were withdrawn with threat of (or actual, I can't recall) litigation. I had this discussion (this and my previous post) with the BOF director (or whatever his title was) Blake Graham when we were both in court testifying as dueling experts on a case. I laid out the foregoing in the hallway off the record with him and he sheepishly shrugged....they know they don't have ****. I await a prosecution for a BBRAW where the owner removed the BB....I hope I get the case and not some random non-gun lawyer. (The case we were testifying on was DURING the registration period where the owner had removed his BB and had not yet registered the AR. He got a jury instruction as a result of my testimony that, in essence, the BB did not need to be on the rifle even though he would need to install it to register it as an AW. He walked on the AW charge but went down on some pretty bad animal cruelty stuff.

[RickD427]

True but the regs are for the purpose of registration. They attempted to promulgate a separate set of regulations purporting to control and regulate future possession (separate from registration). Those regulations were withdrawn with threat of (or actual, I can't recall) litigation. I had this discussion (this and my previous post) with the BOF director (or whatever his title was) Blake Graham when we were both in court testifying as dueling experts on a case. I laid out the foregoing in the hallway off the record with him and he sheepishly shrugged....they know they don't have ****. I await a prosecution for a BBRAW where the owner removed the BB....I hope I get the case and not some random non-gun lawyer. (The case we were testifying on was DURING the registration period where the owner had removed his BB and had not yet registered the AR. He got a jury instruction as a result of my testimony that, in essence, the BB did not need to be on the rifle even though he would need to install it to register it as an AW. He walked on the AW charge but went down on some pretty bad animal cruelty stuff.

An once again, you're correct in your posting.

But you are also describing from your first-hand experience the extent to which the extra-legal agenda of DOJ exists.

This is the reason that I'm heavily biased toward a very conservative read of the statutes and regs.

[TheGood]

Is a foregrip considered equivalent to a 'forward pistol grip'?



Without starting a new thread, I'm asking in reference to featureless builds.

[Quiet]

Is a foregrip considered equivalent to a 'forward pistol grip'?



Without starting a new thread, I'm asking in reference to featureless builds.

Only if the foregrip meets the CA definition of a "forward pistol grip", which is any type of grip forward of the trigger that can be held in a pistol style grasp.

[SanDiego619]

False.

I assumed he meant vertical forward pistol grip, I thought those were not allowed. That's what I was referring to.

They are allowed on mag locked rifles, I thought they were not allowed on BBAW or previously bullet button rifles. And of course not allowed on featureless.

Edit: I was googling. Have I been wrong this whole time? Before the BB registration, I thought forward pistol grips were not allowed period. Is that wrong? How did that fud get so deeply embedded? I am sure I have seen it here, that vertical forward grips were illegal. I am talking before the BB AW registration.

Bullet button gun, VFG is/was legal??

[Quiet]

Edit: I was googling. Have I been wrong this whole time? Before the BB registration, I thought forward pistol grips were not allowed period. Is that wrong? How did that fud get so deeply embedded? I am sure I have seen it here, that vertical forward grips were illegal. I am talking before the BB AW registration.

Bullet button gun, VFG is/was legal??

Under CA assault weapons laws, starting 01-01-2000...

A "forward pistol grip" on a semi-auto centerfire rifle that did not have a fixed magazine made the firearm into an assault weapon.

From 01-01-2000 to 12-31-2016, a "fixed magazine" was an ammunition feeding device that could not be removed without the use of a tool or that was permanently attached in the firearm's magazine well.
Starting 01-01-2017, a "fixed magazine" is an ammunition feeding device contained in a firearm that could not be removed without disassembling the firearm's action or that was permanently attached in the firearm's magazine well.


A "forward pistol grip" is CA legal on the following types of rifles:
A. Semi-auto centerfire rifle that has a fixed 10 or less round magazine.
B. Manually operated (bolt-action, lever-action, pump-action) repeating centerfire rifle.
C. Manually operated (break-open, bolt-action, lever-action, pump-action) single-shot centerfire rifle.
D. Any type of rimfire rifle.
E. Registered Assault Weapon.
F. Registered SBR.

[Gryff]

Is a foregrip considered equivalent to a 'forward pistol grip'?



Without starting a new thread, I'm asking in reference to featureless builds.

Generally, if you can wrap your and around it, then yes, it is a foregrip. Handstops or Magpul's AFG are not considered foregrips in terms of the law.

[TheGood]

^^^ Thanks for the clarification, Gryff & Quiet