If I were to put a bullet button on an AR10, could I legally have a threaded barrel (or in my case, an un-pinned JP Bennie Cooley muzzle brake)?

I plan on ordering a Krieger M110 barrel and dont want to have to pin anything to it.

Thanks!

This must be one of those CT questions.

you betcha!

That's the first I've heard of the Bullet Button.  I wouldn't want to be the guinea pig in court on that one, but I have thought about bolting in a mag (permanently) so I could do whatever I want to the rest of the rifle (here in CT). I've certainly got enough stripped lowers hanging around that it wouldn't hurt anything.

It would depend on if CT views the BB the same way California does...I guess, technically speaking, the magazine still is detachable...  BTW, I'm not saying that I agree with it still being "detachable" I'm just saying that, with wingnuts like Lawlor, et al, and their severe cases of cranio-rectal inversion, you never know how they'll interpret it...

The bullet button meets specific criteria/language that's in California law.  There's no similar language in Connecticut law.  The topic has been raised on this forum and others and there's no warm & fuzzy.  



Anyone wishing to be test case will get a free medium-sized bag of pretzel M&Ms for their efforts.

Alrighty

So much for wishful thinking.  While I'd love the free bag of M&M's, I'll have to pass on being the test case.  I wouldn't do well in prison.

Here's one explanation for a bullet button. Confused me too. Its a CA thing.

While it apparently satisfies the CA AWB regulations (if used with magazines that are 10 rounds or less), don't know if CT would also accept it. I wouldn't want to be the test case when our AWB clearly state's; "ability to accept a detachable magazine". And all the bullet button conversion does is modify the magazine release so that a "tool" is required to release the magazine.

The other option, short of buying a pre-ban lower, is to do away with the pistol grip on the AR. Someone once posted a link to a rifle stock or gip for an AR that didn't have a pistol grip or didn't have a grip that "protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon". Looked fuggly, but its a possible workaround for having a threaded barrel.

ETA: OK fround a link and pictures of fuggly AR stock without pistol grip. Here's the apparently CA legal stock for AR's to get around the pistol grip issue. Its called a "U-15" or something like that. More info including places to possibly order it can be found in this 2007 Calguns.com thread. Unknown if CT legal though.





ETA2: There are also these guys who sell a non pistol grip device to replace the pistol grip that is apparently CA compliant. They are used with an A2 style stock. Don't know if CT would see this as legal.
http://www.monstermangrip.com/
Monstermangrip.com Legal Info

I saw an even better stock on a Remington AR at Hoffman's last weekend.


Florida Gun Works sells the stocks in black for $119.

B-Croft!



I guess your going to have to get a pre-ban sr-25!



RJ

I kind of like that U15 stock

Someone had to say it.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Cali-AR's just make me uneasy in the stomach.










































 

There are no AR10s on the banned list.  AR10 is an Armalite.  I don't know if they made any pre '94 AR10s.

There are some preban KAC SR25s, though.

AR10 has been around longer than the AR15.  I'll see what I can dig up.  Pre-eagle arms armalite that is.  Have to be 60's to 70's  production.






 

I thought about it but for now, I figured I would spend the extra $$ on some goodies.

With any luck, this state will get rid of the AWB and then I can buy an actual M110

That's kinda of what I was getting at.  Although they existed for a long time they weren't exactly sold on the commercial market in the way that ARs have been for years.