Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Posted: 1/26/2017 12:44:38 AM EDT
I know the jury is still out on exactly what is a legal break or a grip on AR's these days, but I read that the AR can not have a threaded muzzle which could be used with a suppressor.   All mine are threaded of course, do I have to have "a legal muzzle break" pinned or welded to become a featureless AR?
Link Posted: 1/26/2017 2:03:33 AM EDT
[#1]
No.  The only time a muzzle device has to be permanently fixed is if it's used to meet minimum barrel length requirements.  Threaded barrels are not an issue in California.  Since thread protectors don't typically have crush washers, lock nuts, etc., loctite or something similar is probably a good idea.  Note that California's and other restrictive states' laws can differ on what features may or may not be included in making a determination as to whether a rifle is an "assault" weapon or not, etc., be sure you are looking to California requirements.
Link Posted: 1/26/2017 1:06:58 PM EDT
[#2]
Thanks, I am watching very carefully at what this state throws out, just was not sure on the muzzle brake as I had seen references to welding/pinning and did not understand.
Link Posted: 1/27/2017 1:04:37 AM EDT
[#3]
I think it's open to question what might be a legal muzzle brake as well.  The law says essentially only that it can't have a flash suppressor.  But then you get into the definitions of what is considered a flash suppressor.  I believe this is the latest definition actually incorporated into the code:   ""flash suppressor" means any device designed, intended, or that functions to perceptibly reduce or redirect muzzle flash from the shooter's field of vision."  I think there are several flaws remaining in the def. even after comment periods and an assessment of what the legislative intent may have been.   I don't know that there has been any court action actually hinging on this in a way that might clarify the issue and this is a somewhat old definition as assault weapon laws have been around for a while and a couple of iterations.
Link Posted: 1/28/2017 5:59:17 AM EDT
[#4]
I think this is all going to change soon with Trump at the helm, from what i have been reading. He believes our Second Amendment rights shall not be infringed.
Link Posted: 1/28/2017 3:18:22 PM EDT
[#5]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
No.  The only time a muzzle device has to be permanently fixed is if it's used to meet minimum barrel length requirements.  Threaded barrels are not an issue in California.  Since thread protectors don't typically have crush washers, lock nuts, etc., loctite or something similar is probably a good idea.  Note that California's and other restrictive states' laws can differ on what features may or may not be included in making a determination as to whether a rifle is an "assault" weapon or not, etc., be sure you are looking to California requirements.
View Quote


Featureless,

I'm not sure but betting that any muzzle device must be pinned and welded. Like the others have said the DOJ is continuing to add more rules right now as we speak so expect changes.


Impala
Link Posted: 1/29/2017 2:44:50 AM EDT
[#6]
Well we wouldn't want citizens having anything that would prevent their vision from being degraded, harmed, or dazzled by muzzle flash.



At least they seem to have dropped the old nonsense about making it hard for authorities to spot a criminal shooting at night.

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I think it's open to question what might be a legal muzzle brake as well.  The law says essentially only that it can't have a flash suppressor.  But then you get into the definitions of what is considered a flash suppressor.  I believe this is the latest definition actually incorporated into the code:   ""flash suppressor" means any device designed, intended, or that functions to perceptibly reduce or redirect muzzle flash from the shooter's field of vision."  I think there are several flaws remaining in the def. even after comment periods and an assessment of what the legislative intent may have been.   I don't know that there has been any court action actually hinging on this in a way that might clarify the issue and this is a somewhat old definition as assault weapon laws have been around for a while and a couple of iterations.
View Quote
Link Posted: 1/29/2017 3:27:00 AM EDT
[#7]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Featureless,

I'm not sure but betting that any muzzle device must be pinned and welded. Like the others have said the DOJ is continuing to add more rules right now as we speak so expect changes.


Impala
View Quote


The DoJ can't create new requirements, only define/apply the laws as written.  The laws that were passed did nothing to change the defining characteristics of an assault weapon when it comes to muzzle devices.  Haven't changed in California in what, 15 or so years?  If you want to go featureless, it can't have a flash suppressor as defined by California. As long as the barrel length is 16" or longer, the law is silent as to how a device, if any, is attached.
Link Posted: 1/29/2017 5:41:07 AM EDT
[#8]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


The DoJ can't create new requirements, only define/apply the laws as written.  The laws that were passed did nothing to change the defining characteristics of an assault weapon when it comes to muzzle devices.  Haven't changed in California in what, 15 or so years?  If you want to go featureless, it can't have a flash suppressor as defined by California. As long as the barrel length is 16" or longer, the law is silent as to how a device, if any, is attached.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:


Featureless,

I'm not sure but betting that any muzzle device must be pinned and welded. Like the others have said the DOJ is continuing to add more rules right now as we speak so expect changes.


Impala


The DoJ can't create new requirements, only define/apply the laws as written.  The laws that were passed did nothing to change the defining characteristics of an assault weapon when it comes to muzzle devices.  Haven't changed in California in what, 15 or so years?  If you want to go featureless, it can't have a flash suppressor as defined by California. As long as the barrel length is 16" or longer, the law is silent as to how a device, if any, is attached.


There is also the 30" OAL requirement for AWs.  Under the new regulations, the muzzle device is not counted towards length if it is not permanently attached, whereas before it was.  So a number of legal semi-autos outside of the scope of the recently passed legislation became AWs overnight.  If you want to go fixed-mag or featureless on a semi-auto centrefire rifle that measures under 30" with the muzzle device removed and with any adjustable or folding stock in its shortest form (if applicable), you'll need to permanently attach a muzzle device that brings the OAL measured this way to 30" or more in order to be compliant under the new regulations.  You'll also need to do it for anything with a barrel under 16" to bring up to or over that length under separate SBR laws, although this does not apply to C&R firearms as far as CA law goes, as C&R SBRs are not specially regulated unless they cause a weapon to become an AW due to OAL.  For anything else, permanent attachment is not required.
Link Posted: 1/29/2017 12:28:55 PM EDT
[#9]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I think this is all going to change soon with Trump at the helm, from what i have been reading. He believes our Second Amendment rights shall not be infringed.
View Quote


I'd like to see ALL of California's gunlaws go away.

If you are a violent criminal, then you are prohibited to legally own/possess all firearms.

Case closed.
Link Posted: 1/29/2017 12:31:14 PM EDT
[#10]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


The DoJ can't create new requirements, only define/apply the laws as written.  The laws that were passed did nothing to change the defining characteristics of an assault weapon when it comes to muzzle devices.  Haven't changed in California in what, 15 or so years?  If you want to go featureless, it can't have a flash suppressor as defined by California. As long as the barrel length is 16" or longer, the law is silent as to how a device, if any, is attached.
View Quote


You can count on new firearms laws continually being cranked out until no one can own/possess ANY firearms, except for
Police and Politicians, of course.
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top