Night vision scopes, revisited

[grammaton76]

So, I was thinking about night vision setups, and thought I'd look at the penal code again on them. Below is an abbreviated version of CPC 468, in which the definition of a 'sniperscope' appears. The bits I trimmed out were just the bit about it being a crime, and exemptions for military/LE/education. What's most important here, to me, is the definition.

As used in this section, sniperscope means any attachment, device
or similar contrivance designed for or adaptable to use on a firearm
which, through the use of a projected infrared light source and
electronic telescope, enables the operator thereof to visually
determine and locate the presence of objects during the nighttime.

It's already well known that thermal infrared scopes are, although expensive, completely passive and thus legal.

Starlight scopes are passive and thus legal.

But - in order for the scope to be a telescope, wouldn't it have to magnify? Or would a 1x scope actually comprise a telescope?

Now, if the above is indeed valid (non-magnifying = non-telescope), could you then use an Aimpoint-style 3x magnifier behind it? After all, the scope isn't doing the magnification...

Just a thought.

Edit: Just so folks understand where I'm going here... what I'm suggesting, is that if the definition of 'telescope' requires that the scope magnify things, then a non-magnifying (i.e. 1x) night vision scope with an active infrared projector would be legal. Possibly even in conjunction with a seperate (i.e. Aimpoint 3x like) magnifier.

[maschronic]

to me, the key word is electronic telescope. wouldn't that be like a digital zoom on a camera. your idea of aimpoint style 3x magnifier would be a optical zoom and not electronic. thus, having optical zoom would be legal.

[Stanze]

Maybe the company that was fined $100 million for selling classified Night-Vision technology outside the U.S. will have a sale?

http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,130378,00.html

[xenophobe]

Now, if the above is indeed valid (non-magnifying = non-telescope), could you then use an Aimpoint-style 3x magnifier behind it?

Of course you can. You can also purchase integrated units like the Raptor as well. Perfectly legal in California.

The California law was put in place to ban active devices like the IR scope used on the M3 Carbine:


Passive starlight and thermal devices that are weapons mounted are perfectly legal.

[grammaton76]

Of course you can. You can also purchase integrated units like the Raptor as well. Perfectly legal in California.

The California law was put in place to ban active devices like the IR scope used on the M3 Carbine:
*pic trimmed*

Passive starlight and thermal devices that are weapons mounted are perfectly legal

Ah, right. Actually, what I failed to bring up in the post adequately, was: what about non-magnifying but active devices? That's why I was focusing on the word 'telescope'... does it have to magnify in order to be a telescope? If so, then non-magnifying active scopes oughtta be legal. Possibly even in conjunction with an Aimpoint-style independent magnifier...

[xenophobe]

Active weapons mounted systems would be illegal. I don't think magnification would be a factor. If it is electronic and uses an active IR source, do not have it weapons mounted.

This law was passed during the early CAMP days, and they were worried about people shining their active IR sources into FLIRs, if I remember correctly...

When the law was passed, starlight-type NVDs were not common and still an emerging technology, very rare and expensive. This was to counter all the older M3 Carbine era active IR devices that were on the market in the 70's and 80's.

[Technical Ted]

When the law was passed, starlight-type NVDs were not common and still an emerging technology, very rare and expensive. This was to counter all the older M3 Carbine era active IR devices that were on the market in the 70's and 80's.

The law was on the books in the 1950's. It was enacted to prevent the use of the primitive NVDs for poaching.

[grammaton76]

Active weapons mounted systems would be illegal. I don't think magnification would be a factor. If it is electronic and uses an active IR source, do not have it weapons mounted.

So, you're pretty sure that telescope isn't tied to magnification capabilities? Bummer.

[Technical Ted]

So, you're pretty sure that telescope isn't tied to magnification capabilities? Bummer.

Uh. Look up the definition of a telescope: a device for viewing distant objects.

[pnkssbtz]

Uh. Look up the definition of a telescope: a device for viewing distant objects.

The definition contained in respectable dictionaries and what the law considers can be two different things entirely...

[Technical Ted]

The definition contained in respectable dictionaries and what the law considers can be two different things entirely...

Then there's science and about 500 years of accepted use and definition. Not to mention what schools have taught for nearly as long. Find me the "legal" definition of telescope in a legal dictionary.

Besides an NVD is an image intensifier or amplifier, not a magnifier.

[triggerhappy]

Of course you can. You can also purchase integrated units like the Raptor as well. Perfectly legal in California.

The California law was put in place to ban active devices like the IR scope used on the M3 Carbine:


Passive starlight and thermal devices that are weapons mounted are perfectly legal.

Looks kinda, I dunno, bare. Needs a picatinny rail and lots of stuff on it.

[grammaton76]

Uh. Look up the definition of a telescope: a device for viewing distant objects.

Ok, so keeping tally here - are you on the "no magnification = not telescope" side, given that a non-magnifying scope wouldn't be any better for viewing distant objects than the naked eye?

[Technical Ted]

Ok, so keeping tally here - are you on the "no magnification = not telescope" side...

No lens assembly for magnification, not a telescope.

[AJAX22]

break it down in greek

tele = far away
scope = to see

so no magnification, no telescope

if it just said scope then we'd be screwged

there's no getting around the definition of the word, it hasn't changed in a few thousand years