Are compensators on Glocks illegal in CA?

[keith1911]

Yeah I was referring to one with a threaded barrel, I hate California.

You could get the comp welded to the barrel. But then you couldn't fully disassemble it for cleaning.

[AKSOG]

Are threads defined in the PC? Im just curious if non threaded locking mechanisms on the end of a barrel would be permitted similar to a MP5 tri-lug for example.

[ar15barrels]

Yeah I was referring to one with a threaded barrel, I hate California.

A threaded barrel with a muzzle device pinned & welded is no longer considered a threaded barrel.
It's no problem to build a new top end with a comp perm attached on the barrel.

[ar15barrels]

Would loctite count?

Loctite does not meet the established legal guidelines for permanent attachment.

Is Pina nd weld an option with this like on rifles?

Yes.

Randall can probably pin and weld it for you.

Yes.

Here are a couple of aluminum comps that I pinned/welded on glock barrels:

[wilderness medic]

Loctite does not meet the established legal guidelines for permanent attachment.



Yes.



Yes.

Here are a couple of aluminum comps that I pinned/welded on glock barrels:

[tenemae]

Are threads defined in the PC? Im just curious if non threaded locking mechanisms on the end of a barrel would be permitted similar to a MP5 tri-lug for example.

It's not defined in the PC, but it is defined in CCR5471 which the DoJ has applied to PC 30515 (drafted to clarify terms for SB880 registration)
CCR 5471 (rr)

[tenemae]

Where does DOJ state the requirement for “permanently attached”?

Their only definition of "permanently attached" refers to magazines, but one could infer the same definition (in CCR5471) to apply to muzzle devices since it is defined as:

(w) “Permanently attached to” means the magazine is welded, epoxied, or riveted into the magazine well. A firearm with a magazine housed in a sealed magazine well and then welded, epoxied, or riveted into the sealed magazine well meets the definition of “permanently attached to”.

So I would reasonably conclude the DoJ to define a "permanently attached" muzzle device to be one which is "welded, epoxied, or riveted" on to the barrel.

Take the example of the Walther P22CA- which is a california legal version of the threaded-barreled P22. The only difference between the two models being that:
1) the retaining barrel nut for P22CA is smooth with no wrench notches (making it difficult to remove without altering/destroying)
2) the retaining barrel nut is epoxied in place

One could presume this combination satisfies the DoJ's definition of "permanently attached", though I would caution that the only opinion that matters is your lawyer's. I would assume one without the other is not sufficient (i.e, cutting wrench notches into the still-epoxied smooth barrel nut, or simply epoxying a standard "featured" barrel nut would likely constitute prosecutable actions).

[wilderness medic]

Their only definition of "permanently attached" refers to magazines, but one could infer the same definition (in CCR5471) to apply to muzzle devices since it is defined as:



So I would reasonably conclude the DoJ to define a "permanently attached" muzzle device to be one which is "welded, epoxied, or riveted" on to the barrel.

Take the example of the Walther P22CA- which is a california legal version of the threaded-barreled P22. The only difference between the two models being that:
1) the retaining barrel nut for P22CA is smooth with no wrench notches (making it difficult to remove without altering/destroying)
2) the retaining barrel nut is epoxied in place

One could presume this combination satisfies the DoJ's definition of "permanently attached", though I would caution that the only opinion that matters is your lawyer's. I would assume one without the other is not sufficient (i.e, cutting wrench notches into the still-epoxied smooth barrel nut, or simply epoxying a standard "featured" barrel nut would likely constitute prosecutable actions).

[ar15barrels]

Where does DOJ state the requirement for “permanently attached”?

They defer to the feds.

https://www.atf.gov/file/58251/download

During the 94 AW ban, permanent attaching a muzzle device was a legal way to eliminate the threads on a barrel.
Many manufacturers did this as a standard practice until the sunset of the AWB in 2004.

[wilderness medic]

They defer to the feds.

https://www.atf.gov/file/58251/download

During the 94 AW ban, permanent attaching a muzzle device was a legal way to eliminate the threads on a barrel.
Many manufacturers did this as a standard practice until the sunset of the AWB in 2004.

[ar15barrels]

Where did they say they defer to that?


Look at that ca compliant pistol with the epoxied barrel nut. Seems like it would be hard to get stuck with that charge with that as a comparison. If you ever even found yourself charged with it. Can’t imagine what you’d have to do for DOJ to get ahold of your compensated Glock and start removing loctite and wrenching on it.

When you talk to them, they will tell you that the federal guidelines are acceptable.
Get your own determination letter if you think that Loctite is good enough.
Nobody else has been allowed to use Loctite other than when the DOJ screwed up and made manufacturers put Loctite on the muzzle caps to fix the DOJ screwup.

The test for permanence is to wrench off a muzzle device with brute force and see if the barrel gets destroyed.
If the barrel is destroyed, then the job was considered acceptably permanent.
If the barrel is not destroyed, then the job was not considered permanent.
Loctite and epoxy fail the permanence test.

[wilderness medic]

When you talk to them, they will tell you that the federal guidelines are acceptable.
Get your own determination letter if you think that Loctite is good enough.
Nobody else has been allowed to use Loctite other than when the DOJ screwed up and made manufacturers put Loctite on the muzzle caps to fix the DOJ screwup.

The test for permanence is to wrench off a muzzle device with brute force and see if the barrel gets destroyed.
If the barrel is destroyed, then the job was considered acceptably permanent.
If the barrel is not destroyed, then the job was not considered permanent.
Loctite and epoxy fail the permanence test.

[ar15barrels]

As long as it takes more than 1100 degrees to remove without damage, you are fine.
Just use 1200 degree Loctite.

[teh rick]

If you had a glock with a comp welded onto a threaded barrel, how would it come out of the slide? Wouldn't the comp have to be removed to take the barrel out?

I might be an idiot on this but it seems like it wouldn't have anywhere near enough space to clear.

[tenemae]

As long as it takes more than 1100 degrees to remove without damage, you are fine.
Just use 1200 degree Loctite.

In case anyone wonders where he got those numbers, I'll be kind and cite the relevant section of the link he provided (https://www.atf.gov/file/58251/download)