Posted: 2/15/2007 10:18:43 AM EDT
|
Has anyone considered the option of making the "pistol grip" detachable? That is, the grip is not a part of the rifle. The grip would NOT be part of the rifle. Unless gripped by the shooter's hand the grip would fall free from the rifle. Alternatively, it could be incorporated into a glove worn by the shooter. When you want to shoot, you slip the grip over a rod and grasp the grip. The grasp would "lock" (provide enough friction to enable you to control the rifle for accurate marksmanship) the grip onto the rod. You could also make the rifle with a small bracket and the grip would engage this bracket and clamp onto it when you squeeze the grip. In this way, you would have a conventional looking pistol grip, with all the ergonomic features that derive from that, while not having an assault rifle just because you want to use a pistol grip. With this you could have a rifle that conceptually is an AR look-alike with a plain muzzle, non-collapsible, non-thumbhole stock that accepts detachable magazines. This is what we used to call a "post ban" rifle, referring to the Federal assault weapons ban. I think most of us in California would be happy to legally own a rifle in this "post-ban" configuration. Hey, I should file a patent application on this. Oops!, too late, public disclosure has just been made. 12276.1 (a) Notwithstanding Section 12276, "assault weapon" shall also mean any of the following: (1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following: (A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon. (B) A thumbhole stock. (C) A folding or telescoping stock. (D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher. (E) A flash suppressor. (F) A forward pistol grip. (2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds. (3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches. |
No, cuz we wanna stay outta jail. Even if not screwed down, when used it's still attached.
You're about a year late. This was on Calguns last year and we had a good laugh. We were taking bets on who'd go to jail most quickly... You just pushed the bounds of constructive possession. BTW, Mike, I really suggest Calguns for CA gun-legality discussions. Quite a bit of misinfo here - I try to do my part, but stuff gets lost in translation... Bill Wiese San Jose |
|
The concept relies upon the fact that if you do not hold the grip and squeeze it, it will fall off and away from the firearm. It is not attached toi the firearm. It is not a pistol grip that is temporarily attached. It is a tool to grasp a fitting which is attached to the firearm - not unlike a paier of pliers would be used to grasp teh shank of a bolt. |
 Oy vay. HEY! at least we have the balls to try. You know the other 49 states are going to be looking to us for ideas when the dems take the white house in 08. YOU LISTENING MONSTER MAN?? 
|
Absolutely 100% irrelevant. There's no standard of permanence of retention. A pistol grip touching the rifle and not screwed down is still a pistol grip. The fact that it touches, allows a pistol grip with web of hand behind it, etc. under the line crossing the top of the trigger, etc. is what makes it a no-no. Your item, whether or not a glove is attached, etc. is described by the 11 CCR 5469(d) regulatory definition of 'pistol grip...' Bottom line: anything hanging below the trigger should not allow a pistol-style grasp (gloved or otherwise, etc) if it's a semiauto centerfire rifle w/detachable magazine. The MonsterMan grip can hang below because you can't get teh we However, we do need some heroes here for test case(s). If you have $25+ K in savings, get in touch w/NRA lawyers and tell 'em 'I wanna be a test case', call DOJ and your local DA, and go to the range with your rifle. Bill Wiese San Jose CA |
Where are the constructive possession laws for AWs in CA? |
There are no constructive possession laws relating to feature-based AWs in CA. Separating them in theory could/should be good enough. HOWEVER I would encourage disassembled 'evil features', though, to be far far away and locked separately if transporting (i.e, driving with a gripless AR out of state - don't have the grip right nearby, it should be locked separately). Attorneys I have spoken to do have concerns with how-close-to-the-line you run. The above "grip in a glove" that isn't screwed down certainly makes an (illegal, unreg'd) AW when the rifle is resting in it. Perhaps with $45K (up thru appeals court) you might prove otherwise. Bill Wiese San Jose CA |