AK Pistol + Brace + Folded

[Euphoria526]

What does that mean? Is it something real, or is it Nguyen type of joke?

http://www.lawtactical.com/ar_folding_stock_adapter_gen_3_m_p/99312.htm

Oh it's real. You'll just need an ar adapter for it

[Sniper3142]

In CA, arm stabilizing braces are a "gray area" which can lead to felony charges.

CA SBR/SBS laws could allow any of the 58 DA's to determine that a folding stabilizing brace that is added to a handgun to be a SBR.


To be not a "gray area" under CA laws, the handgun will need to be a Title 2 AOW.
This is because Title 2 AOW are exempt from CA SBR/SBS laws.

There are a LOT of AR and AK Pistols in California with these SB15 Arm Braces (just check out the AR Pistol thread). I own 2 of them. So I'm not worried about some "Gray Area" stuff.

[Nguyen]

All my pistols have braces on them. If you're a law abiding citizen then you got nothing to worry about. If you use that firearm in a crime then maybe the doj can use it against you, but I highly doubt it. Haven't seen anyone get charge for a crime for using their brace or even shouldering it.

Plus, ATF says that handguns are made to be shot with one hand... Are we redefining it by shooting it with both hands?

[CalGunPro]

Thanks to some useful replies.
A lot of you guys went off topic...
I am not asking if pistol with a brace is legal,
I am asking if pistol with a fold-to-side brace is legal.

[Jedediah Munroe]

AK Pistol + Brace + Folded

The folding apparatus makes no difference. There is no law against having a folding adapter on a pistol. The question is how comfortable are you about legality of pistol + brace.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gene1986]

Can anyone show the law how it is legal or not legal

[Nguyen]

Can anyone show the law how it is legal or not legal

Theres no law regarding how to shoot your pistol. Therefore, its not a law.

[stix213]

I don't see how the folding mechanism does anything with regards to legality. You're basically just facing the current ambiguity of a Sig Brace possibly making it an SBR in CA in the first place.

Can anyone show the law how it is legal or not legal

Here's what you're dealing with. Will a prosecutor or judge believe this firearm's configuration was "designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder"? Note that since this is CA law, BATFE opinions on the matter are in no way binding. CA can come to a completely different opinion. Notice that it comes down to their interpretation of your intentions, and nowhere does the part that contacts your shoulder need to actually be defined as a "stock" (stocks are mentioned several times in the PC, but not in the rifle definition, and stocks don't appear to actually be defined in the PC). Getting caught shouldering it would probably be some clear evidence of your intentions, but I believe the bar to be far lower than that. IANAL

17090. As used in Sections 16530, 16640, 16650, 16660, 16870, and
17170, Sections 17720 to 17730, inclusive, Section 17740, subdivision
(f) of Section 27555, Article 2 (commencing with Section 30300) of
Chapter 1 of Division 10 of Title 4, and Article 1 (commencing with
Section 33210) of Chapter 8 of Division 10 of Title 4, "rifle" means
a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be
fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade
to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed cartridge to fire only
a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of
the trigger.

If they believe so, then you have a CA defined SBR:

17170. As used in this part, "short-barreled rifle" means any of
the following:
(a) A rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in
length.
(b) A rifle with an overall length of less than 26 inches.
(c) Any weapon made from a rifle (whether by alteration,
modification, or otherwise) if that weapon, as modified, has an
overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less
than 16 inches in length.
(d) Any device that may be readily restored to fire a fixed
cartridge which, when so restored, is a device defined in
subdivisions (a) to (c), inclusive.
(e) Any part, or combination of parts, designed and intended to
convert a device into a device defined in subdivisions (a) to (c),
inclusive, or any combination of parts from which a device defined in
subdivisions (a) to (c), inclusive, may be readily assembled if
those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same
person.

If you're comfortable with installing a Sig Brace though, then I don't see any reason why you couldn't install the folding mechanism. Again IANAL.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=16001-17000&file=16100-17360

[CalGunPro]

I don't see how the folding mechanism does anything with regards to legality.
--
If you're comfortable with installing a Sig Brace though, then I don't see any reason why you couldn't install the folding mechanism.

That's what I am thinking too. If there is no law it is illegal, then it's not. Problem is what will a cop think?

Tomorrow will be a week past my visit to the gunstore for a PPT of an AK pistol. There was two cops in line and I talked to them about it. They basically pointed fingers at each other and said: "I don't know. Ask him" and then I asked one of them what would he actually do if something like this came up on his duty. He said he would call to a supervisor who would figure it out.

Then my next question is. Once a supervisor on the phone will have to decide, what will he refer to? Is it his personal belief at this point? So if an anti-gun supervisor picks up the phone then I am going to jail, and a pro-gun one will let me go? Doesn't make sense.

Here's what you're dealing with. Will a prosecutor or judge believe this firearm's configuration was "designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder"

I am not talking about misusing and shouldering. That is clearly illegal federally. I am talking about before it gets to the judge/prosecutor, a cop would have opened my trunk or saw it at the range. How can I prove it is not illegal because it is not an SBR, but a pistol with a folding brace.

So there is no actual CA law of how brace+pistol=SBR, but CA government is not clear about if there should be one? How can federal laws not be relevant at that point?

I am calling to CA DOJ tomorrow to ask them about it and let you guys know what they say.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/di...le=16100-17360

This link you posted. Are these ALL the CA laws in regards to firearms, or there is more? Is there a link like that for federal firearm law? I am trying to put together print outs with laws and keep them inside my rifle case.

[IncVoid]

I've heard "4 points of contact" or was it three? hands, shoulder, cheek, wrist or something like that. How people were shooting is why a range or two don't let the "braced" pistols at their range anymore.

I was wondering, I always thought some shooting events had gloves that locked into the grip of the firearm, but maybe it was some syfy stuff going on. I always wanted a whole paddle above the wrist...
which leads me to think, a brace that locks your hand with your wrist might be the next way to go if you aren't confident in the legality of the brace. Like a splint I suppose.
Hell there is nothing that says you can't shoot with something bracing your elbow or shoulder either, just not attached to the gun?
Maybe a lil elysium braces going on

[stix213]

That's what I am thinking too. If there is no law it is illegal, then it's not. Problem is what will a cop think?

Tomorrow will be a week past my visit to the gunstore for a PPT of an AK pistol. There was two cops in line and I talked to them about it. They basically pointed fingers at each other and said: "I don't know. Ask him" and then I asked one of them what would he actually do if something like this came up on his duty. He said he would call to a supervisor who would figure it out.

Then my next question is. Once a supervisor on the phone will have to decide, what will he refer to? Is it his personal belief at this point? So if an anti-gun supervisor picks up the phone then I am going to jail, and a pro-gun one will let me go? Doesn't make sense.

I am not talking about misusing and shouldering. That is clearly illegal federally. I am talking about before it gets to the judge/prosecutor, a cop would have opened my trunk or saw it at the range. How can I prove it is not illegal because it is not an SBR, but a pistol with a folding brace.

So there is no actual CA law of how brace+pistol=SBR, but CA government is not clear about if there should be one? How can federal laws not be relevant at that point?

I am calling to CA DOJ tomorrow to ask them about it and let you guys know what they say.

This link you posted. Are these ALL the CA laws in regards to firearms, or there is more? Is there a link like that for federal firearm law? I am trying to put together print outs with laws and keep them inside my rifle case.

The DOJ will be of no help. When actually getting someone on the phone they are notorious for giving incorrect information. Following the advice of someone at the DOJ's phone bank is not a legal defense if advised poorly.

There are many more laws that apply to firearms in CA, with new ones on the way. I can't find them all for you on my phone, but what I linked is the primary law concerning your specific topic. As far as new law you're going to be specifically dealing with the new bullet button ban, which I'm not sure how you will avoid registering this as a Registered Assault Weapon next year.

I can't speak to how this will work with a supervisor getting called in. Anything from a have a nice day, to confiscation to be sorted out later, to overzealous charges are possible. I am not a lawyer.

[dekul34]

I am not talking about misusing and shouldering. That is clearly illegal federally.

I'm not sure that's actually clear. There is no federal law regarding how it is used... only how it is designed. There is an atf OPINION letter which states that shouldering it may be considered 'redesigning the brace as a stock' but I have very large doubts that would hold up in court. Federal law also says that handguns are 'designed to be fired by one hand' but shooting them with two hands doesn't 'redesign them' into SBRs or AOW's.

[CalGunPro]

I'm not sure that's actually clear. There is no federal law regarding how it is used... only how it is designed. There is an atf OPINION letter which states that shouldering it may be considered 'redesigning the brace as a stock' but I have very large doubts that would hold up in court. Federal law also says that handguns are 'designed to be fired by one hand' but shooting them with two hands doesn't 'redesign them' into SBRs or AOW's.

You're right.

[CalGunPro]

What do you guys suggest I print to be able to explain/prove that this configuration is legal?

Does it have to be an AOW in a gun-trust when you submit a configuration and ATF approves it? That sound the most useful thing I can do, but I just found out you have to build for that.

[geoint]

I Had one like that. Bought the folding adapter and AR brace (ak braces have the fixed prongs so they can't be folded) from usmachinegun. Great company. Loved how it shot but I sold it along with all my other AK pistols just a few months ago.

Not being able to shoulder them made hen totally boring and pointless IMO. I know you can rest it on your cheek but I figured no cop (whose an anti gun JBT) is going to care about that distinction and a cop who cares about his oath wouldn't enforce such an idiotic law.