Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 7/5/2001 6:26:26 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/5/2001 6:52:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/5/2001 6:50:31 PM EDT by lordtrader]
Well I guess the final say so on this is the state AG office. I believe ASA has a contact there. You might want to start there. Then I have an FFL you can contact in Huntington Beach to do tfr. That should get you going in SoCal at least. That pistol grip thing is touchy though. BTW thanks for my B-Day present. mos and a half early but at least you remembered. [;)]
Link Posted: 7/5/2001 6:52:56 PM EDT
I also have an interest and just sent someone there an email. Just sell the receiver and pistol grip combo, not the complete rifle. I thought the butt stock and pistol grip were attached, which could then be replaced with a butt stock only. Some time in the future AG will list it.
Link Posted: 7/5/2001 6:55:09 PM EDT
I'm not a lawyer, but you might try the CA DOJ Firearms Division. Here are the telephone numbers [url]caag.state.ca.us/firearms/phonenum.htm[/url] The homepage is at [url]caag.state.ca.us/firearms/[/url] I'd love a LEGP, but if the pistol grip cannot be removed, then it's unlikely to meet the SB23 requirements.
Link Posted: 7/5/2001 8:36:16 PM EDT
Good luck with the PRK DOJ. I went to one of those BS23 hearings, and they are no friend of the law abiding gun owner. I just wish somebody would make a pistol grip on the side. Alternately, you could printed the word "top" on the right side of the reciever, and rotate the buttstock 90 degrees. It would work as long as there was no front sight on the upper. They would have to make a flattop mount to put a reddot on the side as well.
Link Posted: 7/5/2001 8:39:17 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/5/2001 8:46:48 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/5/2001 8:59:08 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 7:08:15 AM EDT
Be sure to ask about just selling the receiver in the PRK. We can get the upper later.
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 7:57:41 AM EDT
Hey Guys, I'm new here but this is what I found out: Aside from the Cavalry Arms lower, Fulton Armory has their own brand of lowers too. Their lowers are forged. They are standard lowers so the pistol grip is not part of the receiver. The representative I called said their receivers were made by a government contractor? I don't know if I believe him or not. =) Anyway, www.fulton-armory.com is their website.
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 8:30:55 AM EDT
orginally posted by Paul:
Many of the current rifles are not on the evil 1989 list - I think just Colts are in fact? God I've got to get boned up on the laws here. To me the pistol grip doesn't have to be a unique and distint part - heck a one piece thumb hole stock was declared a pistol grip in the past so why not the CavArm's?
View Quote
Yeah, it would not matter if the pistol grip is part of the receiver, would be illegal per SB-23. The problem about what is listed, is the add-on list with manufacturers names gonna be legit?
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 10:51:53 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 11:20:50 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 11:22:38 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 11:29:21 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 11:31:34 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/6/2001 11:47:00 AM EDT by WILSON]
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 11:39:57 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 12:48:59 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 2:28:30 PM EDT
Hey how about this thought, I email Gary this morning about this but I thought I would get some thought from all of you. Now in the 94 aw ban it states. Any semiautomatic rifle made after 9/13/94, which can accept a detachable magazine and which has two or more of the following characteristics is a banned AW: 1-Folding or telescoping stock, 2-Pistol grip which protrudes conspicuously below the action of the gun, 3-Bayonet mount, 4-Flash suppressor or a threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor, 5-Grenade launcher. Now we all now that the one "BAD" part that we use is the pistol grip. So if the CAV-15 lower is one whole piece and there fore has no pistol grip should that count towards one of the "BAD" parts. I know BATF would have to give the go ahead but what do all of you guys and gals think. It would be great to use number 4 as the "BAD" part
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 2:34:11 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 2:58:40 PM EDT
Garand Shooter, SB23 specifically prohibits thumbhole stocks as well as pistol grips. Ugh. I don't think the pistol grip needs to be a separate piece to be defined as a pistol grip. I think the best bet is the .22lr idea by shipping with a conversion kit. Oh, well, guess I better start talking the wife into one of those DSAs.
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 3:12:25 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Garand Shooter: How about making a PRK compliant one with a built in thumbhole stock? Not only would that allow them to get it, but it would allow the rest of us to have a flash hider since we would be dropping the pistol grip from the evil feature count.
View Quote
I was thinking the same thing. I hope that doesn't make me some sort of self righteous, fanatical Christian. [:)]
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 3:17:12 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 3:25:29 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 3:27:17 PM EDT
Pistol grip which protrudes conspicuously below the action of the gun
View Quote
I bet they will define [b]"the action of the gun"[/b] as the top of the bolt. Just like a belt becomes a 'high-cap' magazine.
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 3:28:02 PM EDT
Top Top