magpul prs featureless?

[Click Boom]

I searched the forum and the threads I saw were from 2010. Slightly mixed opinion at the time but most said it's ok.

Do you think the stock is g2g for a featureless build? Thx

[ke6guj]

No, I don't.

I am unaware of any legal definition for "telescoping stock" that would specificaly exclude the adjustability of the PRS stock from being an evil feature.

[Chaos47]

Not worth the risk to me.


ke6guj is right "telescoping" is not defined in SB23 or the PC.
A DA could very well argue that it's telescoping.

This is what happens when people write laws about something they have no clue about...

If you have to have it then personally I would adjust it to the place you want when the upper if off and pin the adjustments..

[Merc1138]

Right. There's no definition of how far it telescopes, how the mechanism has to work, etc. So even if it only collapse a couple inches and requires turning the knob 20 times to do it, it could easily be considered an AW feature. Adjust it for your desired LOP and fix it in place.

[Click Boom]

No, I don't.

I am unaware of any legal definition for "telescoping stock" that would specificaly exclude the adjustability of the PRS stock from being an evil feature.

Haha you were the lone voice on that ancient thread saying it was too risky - so I started another to see if any interpretations had changed in the last 4 yrs. I agree the metal pieces that the end ride on are telescopic for that 3/4inch, even though it's not a telescopic stock. .. I mean a large part of it attaches right up against the receiver. It does have a shoulder thing that goes up, though.

[Chaos47]

BTW if someone is going to come out and argue that its a fixed stock because it uses a fixed rifle tube. Or that it can only be extended and not shortened then I would point you to this from the magpul description page:

http://store.magpul.com/product/MAG307/181

Compared to the A2 stock, the PRS can shorten LOP by .25" or extend it by .75"

Now we understand that the reason that its LOP can be shorter then an A2 is because its not using the A2 Buffer extension on the rifle tube. But can you really expect a jury to understand that when the DA produces manufactures information that states the product can shorten and extend?

[Arson]

You could take any fixed stock and add or remove spacers to the end so whats the difference?

[Merc1138]

You could take any fixed stock and add or remove spacers to the end so whats the difference?

You can, but that wouldn't be "telescoping". The only thing we know based on the wording, and other obvious aspects, is that a stock which can change it's length without tools, is telescoping.



Without using any extra tools, that stock can have it's length adjusted by sliding back and forth. Obviously, such a stock would be an assault weapon feature.

A magpul PRS stock can have it's length adjusted by part of it sliding back and forth, controlled by a dial. Since there is no minimum amount of movement required by the wording in the PC, there is no way to distinguish a stock that can move 1 inch, or 4 inches, it's irrelevant.

We can also determine that slip on recoil pads that increase the length of pull, thicker recoil pads, or spacers that fit somewhere do not necessarily meet this requirement, as even the DOJ would have a hell of a lot of explaining to do regarding why no one has ever been charged for unscrewing a buttplate and adding a spacer, or slipping a rubber pad in the end. But... none of those are really "telescoping" either.

The difference is whether or not the stock meets the state's idea of "telescoping", and a fixed stock with spacers does not appear to. While a stock like the PRS with an adjustable length of pull via thumbwheel, could easily be considered to meet the "telescoping" definition. That difference, means you end up in jail, or get to stay out of jail.

[Click Boom]

I think I will use it on a long range precision rig or sell it, I'm not quite ready to build the long range gun. I have seen some featureless builds with the prs, though.

[MrPlink]

Well just because somebody is using one does not mean it is impossible to get picked up and charged.

Practical question, if it is for a precision rig then is it really that much of a detriment to have to use a tool to drop a mag? Philosophical and moral stances aside of course.

[Click Boom]

Yeah no doubt there are conflicting interests, maybe one of those raddlocks would be the way to gox because I shoot in the high nevada desert sometimes.

[kelvin232]

adjustable pull for a stock that doesn't 'telescope" (which is a word that already has a definition) and that never reduces the rifle length to under minimum OAL?

yeah, i'm not worried about it.