Legality of AR pistol with a folding cheek rest?

[mhswlee]

Perhaps this seems a rather strange concept, but I want to go ahead and see what others think.

I am planning to acquire a 12.5" ARAK-21. It is going onto a pistol build. One of the nice things about such a build is that it does not need a receiver extension. However, I would like one so that I have something to rest my cheek on. (And, looking at YouTube videos, it seems to be helpful if you're trying to steady yourself to hit steel at 100+ yards.)

So would the idea of a folding cheek rest be out of the question?

As far as I know, the buffer extension is not a stock, even if it is redundant. Making it fold does not really change this. Another plus is that a folding tube would not interfere very much with the operation of the AR pistol itself, so I would have the option of firing with and without a cheek rest.

[ElvenSoul]

Pics of this rest?

[Quiet]

CA laws, allows a handgun to also be classified as a SBR/SBS, if it meets CA's definition of a SBR/SBS. [PC 16530(b) & 16640(b)]
(CA = can be two classifications at the same time)

Therefore, it is not recommend to add/install a non-essential tube to the rear of a handgun (AK pistol, SIG P556, Kel-Tec PLR-16, etc).

Because of the non-essential tube, a DA's Office can argue that it is there to redesign the firearm to be fired from the shoulder. Which would make the firearm a SBR (rifle with a less than 16" barrel length).

This is one of the reasons why it is recommend that a tube/extension is not added to a handgun that does not need it to function.

If you have the $$$$$ to fight a SBR charge in Court, then by all means ignore the recommendation to avoid it.



Penal Code 16530
(a) As used in this part, the terms "firearm capable of being concealed upon the person," "pistol," and "revolver" apply to and include any device designed to be used as a weapon, from which is expelled a projectile by the force of any explosion, or other form of combustion, and that has a barrel less than 16 inches in length. These terms also include any device that has a barrel 16 inches or more in length which is designed to be interchanged with a barrel less than 16 inches in length.
(b) Nothing shall prevent a device defined as a "firearm capable of being concealed upon the person," "pistol," or "revolver" from also being found to be a short-barreled rifle or a short-barreled shotgun.

Penal Code 16640
(a) As used in this part, "handgun" means any pistol, revolver, or firearm capable of being concealed upon the person.
(b) Nothing shall prevent a device defined as a "handgun" from also being found to be a short-barreled rifle or a short-barreled shotgun.

Penal Code 17010
Use of the term "pistol" is governed by Section 16530.

Penal Code 17090
As used in Sections 16530, 16640, 16650, 16660, 16870, and 17170, Sections 17720 to 17730, inclusive, Section 17740, subdivision (f) of Section 27555, Article 2 (commencing with Section 30300) of Chapter 1 of Division 10 of Title 4, and Article 1 (commencing with Section 33210) of Chapter 8 of Division 10 of Title 4, "rifle" means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed cartridge to fire only a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of the trigger.

Penal Code 17170
As used in Sections 16530 and 16640, Sections 17720 to 17730, inclusive, Section 17740, Article 1 (commencing with Section 27500) of Chapter 4 of Division 6 of Title 4, and Article 1 (commencing with Section 33210) of Chapter 8 of Division 10 of Title 4, "short-barreled rifle" means any of the following:
(a) A rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length.
(b) A rifle with an overall length of less than 26 inches.
(c) Any weapon made from a rifle (whether by alteration, modification, or otherwise) if that weapon, as modified, has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length.
(d) Any device that may be readily restored to fire a fixed cartridge which, when so restored, is a device defined in subdivisions (a) to (c), inclusive.
(e) Any part, or combination of parts, designed and intended to convert a device into a device defined in subdivisions (a) to (c), inclusive, or any combination of parts from which a device defined in subdivisions (a) to (c), inclusive, may be readily assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person.

[TheExiled]

Ive been eyeballing the LAW side folder for one of my pistols, but I'm not sure about adding one when its not required for the operation of the gun. I suppose if you had another upper in 5.56 for the lower, youd need the tube, eh? Seems sketchy to me

[Fate]

Quiet I think you are reaching. If a typical AR pistol isn't viewed as being capable of being fired from the shoulder then the OP's build wouldn't be either.

It's irrelevant whether or not said receiver extension is needed for functionality.

[CK_32]

As long as it can't be shoulder fired...


I don't think it being collapsed is where it would skim the law but coming out would replicate a stock again as long as it being not shoulder comparable you could be fine, cause I've seen pistols with no buffer before.

[MrPlink]

It's irrelevant whether or not said receiver extension is needed for functionality.

Why?

[mhswlee]

Interesting.

So. To those who think this can constitute an SBR: What exactly is stopping a DA from arguing that all receiver extensions, regardless of whether or not they are necessary, constitute intent to shoulder, and thus, render all AR pistols illegal?

I mean, the last time I checked, making an illegal feature necessary never made it legal.

[MrPlink]

Plausible. No case law to that effect that I am aware.
In liklihood I think it is far to say that a CA DA would have a harder time (but not impossible) arguing that a bare receiver extension on a pistol that needs one is a SBR as opposed to a SIG or AK pistol with one of those silly arm brace dealios.

on a side note, why not just skip all the trouble and weld and pin a 3.6" device to the barrel?

[stix213]

Quiet I think you are reaching. If a typical AR pistol isn't viewed as being capable of being fired from the shoulder then the OP's build wouldn't be either.

It's irrelevant whether or not said receiver extension is needed for functionality.

And you'd be willing to bet thousands of $$$ and potential lifelong loss of gun rights when you make that argument in front of an anti-gun CA judge and jury?

I think Quiet is correct. If it doesn't need to be there, the judge will wonder why it is there. Followed by a DOJ "expert" stating on the stand how adding this unnecessary extension to the back of the handgun makes it easily shoulderable. I think you're putting too much faith in CA judges to make unbiased decisions if you think they will surely agree that since it is fine on a pistol when the pistol design needs it, that also makes it fine on any pistol that doesn't need it to function.

[mhswlee]

And you'd be willing to bet thousands of $$$ and potential lifelong loss of gun rights when you make that argument in front of an anti-gun CA judge and jury?

Honestly... if you're going to say stuff like this, I would prefer you not post. You're not actually contributing anything. This is just fear mongering; you are trying to convince someone of your viewpoint by causing fear or doubt.

Indeed, if judges and juries are as irrational as you say, I wonder why AR pistols are legal at all.

on a side note, why not just skip all the trouble and weld and pin a 3.6" device to the barrel?

Because one can only do so many ridiculous things to appease our overlords. =P

[Junkie]

How about if it's set up to not work well from shouldering - meaning a reasonably sharp end after a well defined cheek rest? Think that would help at all?

[MrPlink]

That sounds like a terrible accident waiting to happen

[mhswlee]

Well, as far as I understand it, the law talks of intent, not of capability. When you attach a pistol tube that cannot accept a shoulder stock, you intend for it not to accept an attachment designed for shouldering. This does not mean that you cannot shoulder the tube though.

[rockstar]

This seems to be doing all right using a sling and RDS. Slings are cheap and legal (I'm not an attorney so don't take my word for it):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwUMLQ2X5hU