Rifle vs pistol definition

[lorenolson888]

CA AW laws Question.

What constitutes a pistol vs a rifle... the cartridge or the ability to fire from the shoulder?

Lets assume that we are talking non detachable 10 round mags. Outside the pistol grip.

LO

[hoffmang]

Shoulder firing, a stock, rifling, and the length - both overall and the barrel.

-Gene

[oaklander]

Was there a build you had in mind?

CA AW laws Question.

What constitutes a pistol vs a rifle... the cartridge or the ability to fire from the shoulder?

Lets assume that we are talking non detachable 10 round mags. Outside the pistol grip.

LO

[mymonkeyman]

It's pretty unclear actually. There is a definition for "pistol," "handgun," and "other firearms capable of being concealed upon the person" as any firearm with a barrel less than 16 inches. But it is not clear that that is the only definition and it leads to ridiculous results (like 16"+ barreled AK/AR pistols not being limited by AW ban, concealed carry ban, or roster of handguns).

Also, there is a definition of rifle under CA law, which is identical to the fed version (rifled-barreled firearm designed to be fired from the shoulder), but it only explicitly applies to 12020 (the SBR/SBS dangerous weapon section of CA law). Most likely is the fired from the shoulder definition is the one applied wherever the word rifle is used because that is the only one I've ever seen anywhere. Of course, this is weird, because 99% of the time CA law does not distinguish between "pistol" and "handgun" and "other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person" which makes an SBR both a rifle and in the "pistol" category (as a firearm capable of being concealed upon the person).

Alternatively, a court could interpret pistol as the BATF does and find the CA "definition" is meant to be an inclusive definition and not the exclusive definition of a pistol, which would result in making a "pistol" any firearm with a rifled barrel, held by one grip below the action (essentially). Oh and neither rifles or pistols are "machine guns" (one trigger pull = more than discharge).

I do not think OAL matters for whether something is a rifle or pistol, but whether it is an SBR (26") and/or an AW (if centerfire semiautomatic, 30").

You really need some context for this to get a better answer, but read this thread.

I think the take away is that there might be some loopholes but you would probably get arrested trying to work on them, because the law isn't perfectly clear and it would lead to crazy results.

[lorenolson888]

Hi all,

The build in question would be a SP89 like build.. maybe about 1.5 inches longer on the butt...


The SP89 is not on the list so we could even just say sp89 with 10rnd fixed mag.

So is it an SBR by definition? seems not... just wondering to see if I should slowly collect the parts or maybe get an SP89 in...

What if the SP89 had a full stock installed... then is it an illegal SBR?

I am stumped... these laws can be interpreted in too many ways.

LO

[lorenolson888]

Another thought is that the 94 like clones coming with a 16" barrel are not my style... I would rather go for a g3 or 33 like build at that point...

But the SP89 is kind of a pistol and kind of a subgun... And I could actually take it to the indoor range...

The question is really about of SBR status if I fit certain furniture to it...

Thanks,

LO

[aplinker]

Putting a stock on a gun that shoots a standard cartridge makes it a rifle. All rifle laws apply (length, barrel length)

An SP89 is a pistol because its barrel is <16" and it doesn't have a stock. Putting a forward PG on it is a no-no, too, as this pulls it into AOW status with the feds.

It's legal without a stock. If you put a stock on it, it must be longer than 30" overall and 16"+ barrel

This is assuming you follow the AW laws, too, from SB23

[dawson8r]

You mean kind of like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D99NHb6B03s

A replacement stock for a Glock that uses the slide and barrel.

[lorenolson888]

If I assume a SP89 or cloned "pistol" to be legal under federal, NFA, etc... So a shroud or front grip is legal as far a federal laws go?

And to make it Kali compliant seems like a mag lock device would allow it to be legal regardless of a 2nd handgrip or shroud to be installed?

This is from the 2007 DOJ docs...

(4) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and
any one of the following:
(A) A threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash suppressor, forward handgrip,
or silencer.
(B) A second handgrip.
(C) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel that
allows the bearer to fire the weapon without burning his or her hand, except a slide
that encloses the barrel.
(D) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the
pistol grip.
(5) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more
than 10 rounds.