[UPDATE]: Reddit: “cop...called [this] fin grip not good enough [Mendocino]

[RickD427]

And again, the flash hider was NOT on the weapon.

Geez.......

It's not only the the Flash Hider Suppressor that is the problem. Unless that folding stock is pinned, it also makes the weapon an "Assault Weapon."

[CheapBloke]

I don't think it is a folding stock. You can get triangle stocks attached to your ak without folding part.

Plus even as the ak newbie, the back of that trunnion doesn't have the rivets thingy of a folding stock trunnion. (I could be wrong, as I am still fairly new with aks)

guesstimator, opinionator, and commentator.

[RickD427]

That's true, but when you read the court's analyses in both cases, it's irrelevant to the court's decision. The viewing of the magazine, and absent any viewing of a firearm, would permit the search under the reasoning of Hale. Under DeLong, if you accept the position that the viewing of the magazine meets the "Probable Cause" test to believe the corresponding weapon is present (as the Hale court concluded) then DeLong also permits the search.

But to directly answer your question, I don't know of a case that addresses only a magazine being viewed.

[RickD427]

I don't think it is a folding stock. You can get triangle stocks attached to your ak without folding part.

Plus even as the ak newbie, the back of that trunnion doesn't have the rivets thingy of a folding stock trunnion. (I could be wrong, as I am still fairly new with aks)

guesstimator, opinionator, and commentator.

I don't recognize the stock by its manufacturer, but I do see what appears to be a vertical pivot pin where the stock meets the receiver.

Can anyone identify the particular stock involved here?

I will agree that if the Flash Hider Suppressor was removed, the stock was fixed, and the magazine detachable, or fixed with ten round or less capacity, then I'm hard-pressed to see where the weapon meets the definition of an "Assault Weapon."

[CheapBloke]

Wonder if the grip was loose which caused the fin to slide back and forth a lil.

The pic shows there is a very small gap between the fin and grip, if there is a small looseness, Those fins easily slide back off it.

guesstimator, opinionator, and commentator.

[Devilmonkey89]

Where did you get the fin grip?

AK BATTLE FIN

[Quickdraw559]

That's true, but when you read the court's analyses in both cases, it's irrelevant to the court's decision. The viewing of the magazine, and absent any viewing of a firearm, would permit the search under the reasoning of Hale. Under DeLong, if you accept the position that the viewing of the magazine meets the "Probable Cause" test to believe the corresponding weapon is present (as the Hale court concluded) then DeLong also permits the search.

But to directly answer your question, I don't know of a case that addresses only a magazine being viewed.

any

[RickD427]

I’m (obviously) not a lawyer so I’m unsure of how the law works in great detail, but if the law recognizes the presence of a magazine as “probable” that a weapon accompanies it, thus allowing a search without viewing a firearm, wouldn’t the law also recognize the presence of any removable gun part as “probable” that a weapon accompanies it? What is to stop them for searching your vehicle for simply having a stock, or optics, or even a sling?

That's why it's important to follow the case law, not only so that you're familiar with what the law says, but also in order to get some insight as to how case law is formed.

I'm not a lawyer either. I'm a retired LEO that spent close to 40 years employing the law to a practical conclusion. That's a little different background than a lawyer who may have spent the same time arguing the law to a legal conclusion. Both perspectives are important.

The first key point is that the law is rarely absolute. That's why we often see split decisions in the Appellate Courts. Some legal questions would lead to a 9-0 Supreme Court opinion and some to a 5-4 opinion. You really gotta pay attention to the 5-4 stuff because it can change with just a single heart attack, cancer case, or trip into the tidal basin with a stripper (the tidal basin one was actually a Senator, but you get the idea).

Court decisions very rarely point out exactly where the "line in the sand" is drawn. They only rule on cases and then tell us what side of the line the case landed on. The 5-4 stuff is close to the line and the 9-0 stuff is far away from it. I taught several classes at the Sheriff's Academy and case law often was in the syllabus. I'd always try to find three or four cases that led up to the "line" and one case where the line was crossed. The idea is that the students would get a good idea of where "the line" was because the courts would not clearly identify it.

In this discussion, we know that the Firearm, Magazine, and Ammunition are a package deal. The existence of one supports the belief that rest of the package is present. Now suppose I find a removable buttstock of a firearm. Does that support the conclusion that the rest of the firearm is present? I would personally think so, and would argue that Hale supports my view, but the facts are a little different, so I can't use Hale to compel someone else to accept my view. If that someone else were the defense attorney, then we go to trial and get a decision.

The case law business is a little bit like the field artillery business. It is not a question of "Ready, Aim, Fire". The process is "Ready, Fire, Aim" You use the impact data of your last shot to aim your next shot. Dinosaurs in that business, like myself, can explain the "Bracket and Halfing" process of aiming Naval gunfire and Field Artillery. The law works the same, only the impact explosions are figurative more than literal.

[naz]

. The rifle in the photos isn't a "AKM". It's a Russian SAIGA semiautomatic rifle. It's a AK 100 Series. It's been converted to look like a AK-74 and the Saiga trigger group has been replaced with standard AK type trigger group.

Svt40, is there an easy way to distinguish a Russian parts kit Saiga from a Kalishnikov USA Saiga that’s on the banned list? Sorry this is a bit unrelated to the thread.

It’s pretty cool you were able to identify all that just from the pics

[norcal77]

I wonder if that space between the grip and fin is the issue? Looks like they could have trimmed away the extra plastic to make the fin fit more snug against grip. I use those same fins and had to trim the plastic for each of my rifles.

[socom2shooter]

The amount of folks saying the rifle was stolen is ridiculous, I just got done reading all the comments. It was BOOKED INTO EVIDENCE, as are all firearms that are lawfully seized as evidence. Theres a lot more to this story than is being told.

I think Mendo223's comment about MCSO being corrupt is absurd. All of those guys I have met are very pro 2a. His comment about taking peoples drugs is laughable. The amount of crime marijuana brings into this count is insane. The more marijuana thats seized and destroyed the better. Marijuana is destroying this county.

[socom2shooter]

Also to awnser a question I saw mentioned earlier. They will print out reports at the records department if someone desires a copy.

Funny thing most people seem to forget is that most everything law enforcement does these days is recorded... from initial contact to conclusion. Kinda hard for someone to accuse LE of wrongdoing if its all recorded. Not saying they're all right, but its sad to see so many jump to conclusions and judge all of LE as if they're the same person.

[socom2shooter]

Not to keep dragging on but I want to make it clear im not taking sides. I'm just trying to say its not fair for either side to jump to conclusions without the report or recording of the contact.

[Quickdraw559]

That's why it's important to follow the case law, not only so that you're familiar with what the law says, but also in order to get some insight as to how case law is formed.

I'm not a lawyer either. I'm a retired LEO that spent close to 40 years employing the law to a practical conclusion. That's a little different background than a lawyer who may have spent the same time arguing the law to a legal conclusion. Both perspectives are important.

The first key point is that the law is rarely absolute. That's why we often see split decisions in the Appellate Courts. Some legal questions would lead to a 9-0 Supreme Court opinion and some to a 5-4 opinion. You really gotta pay attention to the 5-4 stuff because it can change with just a single heart attack, cancer case, or trip into the tidal basin with a stripper (the tidal basin one was actually a Senator, but you get the idea).

Court decisions very rarely point out exactly where the "line in the sand" is drawn. They only rule on cases and then tell us what side of the line the case landed on. The 5-4 stuff is close to the line and the 9-0 stuff is far away from it. I taught several classes at the Sheriff's Academy and case law often was in the syllabus. I'd always try to find three or four cases that led up to the "line" and one case where the line was crossed. The idea is that the students would get a good idea of where "the line" was because the courts would not clearly identify it.

In this discussion, we know that the Firearm, Magazine, and Ammunition are a package deal. The existence of one supports the belief that rest of the package is present. Now suppose I find a removable buttstock of a firearm. Does that support the conclusion that the rest of the firearm is present? I would personally think so, and would argue that Hale supports my view, but the facts are a little different, so I can't use Hale to compel someone else to accept my view. If that someone else were the defense attorney, then we go to trial and get a decision.

The case law business is a little bit like the field artillery business. It is not a question of "Ready, Aim, Fire". The process is "Ready, Fire, Aim" You use the impact data of your last shot to aim your next shot. Dinosaurs in that business, like myself, can explain the "Bracket and Halfing" process of aiming Naval gunfire and Field Artillery. The law works the same, only the impact explosions are figurative more than literal.

[AKSOG]

I don't recognize the stock by its manufacturer, but I do see what appears to be a vertical pivot pin where the stock meets the receiver.

Can anyone identify the particular stock involved here?

I will agree that if the Flash Hider Suppressor was removed, the stock was fixed, and the magazine detachable, or fixed with ten round or less capacity, then I'm hard-pressed to see where the weapon meets the definition of an "Assault Weapon."

It has a solid stock rear trunnion. I highly doubt its a folder.

Looks like a Manticore except for that rivet looking thing near the front.

Oh this looks like it

http://supplyingpatriots.com/akm-fixed-triangle-stock/