I have a couple 20% ar lowers. I wanted to build one bare minimum. No bolt catch if it isnt.necessary to the function of an ar and no safety. Is the safety required?
Unconfigured Ad Widget
Collapse
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
is a safety required by law?
Collapse
X
-
"But far more numerous was the herd of such, Who think too little and who talk too much." -John DrydenComment
-
-
Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. Jefferson's "Commonplace Book," 1774_1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764Comment
-
Originally posted by bruceflinchTis Better, to be Overworked & Underpaid,
Than Oversexed & Underlaid...
Comment
-
-
While I do not think it is required by law You will be doing yourself a great disservice by not Including it in your build.I'm forever blowing bubbles,
Pretty bubbles in the air,
They fly so high,
Nearly reach the skyComment
-
Bolt catch is needed to clear jams. You must have a mechanical way to lock the BCG to the rear.
The safety provides a mechanical stop for the trigger in the fire position. No its not 100% needed to function, but to function as designed its 100% needed.
the only real way to save weight is to omit the extra stuff on the lower like the magazine release fencing and beveled edges on the magazine well.Comment
Calguns.net Statistics
Collapse
Topics: 1,863,662
Posts: 25,109,036
Members: 355,945
Active Members: 4,923
Welcome to our newest member, glocksource.
What's Going On
Collapse
There are currently 8844 users online. 132 members and 8712 guests.
Most users ever online was 239,041 at 10:39 PM on 02-14-2026.

Comment