| Author | Post |
|---|
a32guy
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Jun 29th, 2009 01:22 am |
|
Hi all, I realize this is a bit off topic but thought this would be a great community to ask.
Would the pinning of a telescoping stock on an AR-15 meet the criteria of CT law? A friend suggested drilling through the stock and threading a couple hex set screws through, to prevent it from telescoping.
Would this suffice? I've heard from someone that this is not sufficient and the rifle would still be illegal in CT.
Thanks in advance for your help!
ChrisLast edited on Mon Jun 29th, 2009 01:31 am by a32guy
|
GoldCoaster
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Jun 29th, 2009 02:54 am |
|
There are 3 things that make the venerable AR-15 illegal.
1. Telescoping stock (pinning would work)
2. Flash hider (if it has one, it has to be removed, replace it with a muzzle brake)
3. Bayonet holder (believe it or not they are more worried about bayonets).
If you have a Colt model AR-15 I think they go after them by name alone, the whole AWB for CT is stupid, for example if you got a Stag Arms version of the AR-15 you're ok but the Colt version is not - and I believe Stag make some parts for Colt anyway.
The whole thing needs repealing, if you're not a prohibited person, why would anyone care if you can stick a knife on the end of your barrel? is that any MORE dangerous than running around with a sword (legal) or a knife taped on the end of a broom stick? absolute stupidity.
If you were wanting to keep a real AT-15 un-buggered with, I'd see if you couldn't find a replacement stock for it (either solid or telescoping- and pin that) leaving the genuine one undrilled. Then when the AWB thingy gets struck down you can put it back the way the manufacturer intended.
|
a32guy
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Jun 29th, 2009 03:25 am |
|
Thank you for the info, GoldCoaster! I think the bayonet lug rule is absolutely ridiculous.
I have a solid A2 style stock for it as well, but I prefer the look of the original Rock River telescoping stock.
So I should not be hassled by anyone if the stock is pinned and cannot telescope? (even if the 'pins' are removable?)
Thank you,
Chris
|
GoldCoaster
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Jun 29th, 2009 05:17 am |
|
The whole thing is stupid.
Here's the relevant document from the DPS web page:
http://www.ct.gov/dps/lib/dps/special_licensing_and_firearms/assault_weapons.pdf
You will see that a Colt AR-15 is specifically prohibited by name, not sure you can do much about that other than get a non-Colt lower or other such bastardization of it.
On top of the list above, you also have to be in violation if your rifle has AT LEAST TWO of the following:
(2) A part or combination of parts designed or intended to convert a firearm into an assault weapon, as defined in subdivision (1) of this subsection, or any combination of parts from which an assault weapon, as defined in subdivision (1) of this subsection, may be rapidly assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person;
(3) Any semiautomatic firearm not listed in subdivision (1) of this subsection that meets the following criteria:
(A) A semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least two of the following:
(i) A folding or telescoping stock;
(ii) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
(iii) A bayonet mount;
(iv) A flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and
(v) A grenade launcher; or
(B) A semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least two of the following:
(i) An ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip;
(ii) A threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip or silencer;
(iii) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned;
(iv) A manufactured weight of fifty ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; and
(v) A semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm; or
(C) A semiautomatic shotgun that has at least two of the following:
(i) A folding or telescoping stock;
(ii) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
(iii) A fixed magazine capacity in excess of five rounds; and
(iv) An ability to accept a detachable magazine; or
(4) A part or combination of parts designed or intended to convert a firearm into an assault weapon, as defined in subdivision (3) of this subsection, or any combination of parts from which an assault weapon, as defined in subdivision (3) of this subsection, may be rapidly assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person.
(b) As used in this section and sections 53-202b to 53-202k, inclusive, the term "assault weapon" does not include any firearm modified to render it permanently inoperable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So if you get rid of the bayonet holder and the flash hider you don't have to pin your stock, or if you pin your stock and remove the flash hider you can keep the bayonet fixture.
Not to say you wouldn't get hassled for having any one of these items alone either, you're dealing with police not lawyers. I had contemplated getting an M4 and it was going to be made CT compliant.. how? by taking away ALL of the items not just limiting it to one.
Sucks.
|
2000army
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Jun 29th, 2009 07:56 am |
|
| Find a preban lower and you are good to go .... no worries ... I even put a silencer on my AR
|
buketdude
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sat Sep 22nd, 2007 |
| Location: | Connecticut USA |
| Posts: | 184 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 1st, 2009 05:32 pm |
|
| and just like how i cannot buy an AK-47 but i can buy an AK-74...this state is run by by a bunch of constitution hating tyrants...they will stop at nothing to take more of our liberty and money...
|
ESCH
Regular Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 15th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 55 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 01:44 am |
|
Just wanted to clarify Goldcoasters last post. He stated:
"So if you get rid of the bayonet holder and the flash hider you don't have to pin your stock, or if you pin your stock and remove the flash hider you can keep the bayonet fixture."
This is incorrect information. He is correct on his post of the statute. It lists that you can not have any TWO of the options listed.
One of the options is pistol grip. Once you have a pistol grip you are done. You can have no other options. None. So every AR in CT can only have the pistol grip and that's it. No flash hider. No bayonet lug. No folding-telescoping stock. No grenade launcher. Nothing else.
|
AWDstylez
Banned
| Joined: | Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | Connecticut USA |
| Posts: | 2715 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 02:54 am |
|
Not to hijack, but WTF is this??
iii) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned;
On a PISTOL? What gun(s) was that intended to make illegal? Does the slide on a semi-auto count as a "barrel shroud"? I can hold it with my "nontrigger hand without being bunred."
wtf... just.... wtf... I hate this state.
Last edited on Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 02:56 am by AWDstylez
|
2000army
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 04:42 am |
|
ESCH wrote: Just wanted to clarify Goldcoasters last post. He stated:
"So if you get rid of the bayonet holder and the flash hider you don't have to pin your stock, or if you pin your stock and remove the flash hider you can keep the bayonet fixture."
This is incorrect information. He is correct on his post of the statute. It lists that you can not have any TWO of the options listed.
One of the options is pistol grip. Once you have a pistol grip you are done. You can have no other options. None. So every AR in CT can only have the pistol grip and that's it. No flash hider. No bayonet lug. No folding-telescoping stock. No grenade launcher. Nothing else. Every AR that was produced after Sept 1994 but if you have a preban these rules do not apply
|
uskrusader
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 11:52 am |
|
I'm new to rifles...bear with me.
What about a ruger 10/22 with an after market pistol grip and folding stock bought at Cabelas (IN CT) for $89?
Is this now an AW?
|
AWDstylez
Banned
| Joined: | Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | Connecticut USA |
| Posts: | 2715 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 02:03 pm |
|
uskrusader wrote: I'm new to rifles...bear with me.
What about a ruger 10/22 with an after market pistol grip and folding stock bought at Cabelas (IN CT) for $89?
Is this now an AW?
Yes, it has three parts: detachable mag, folding stock, and pistol grip.
Does anyone care? Probably not. I saw one for sale at a local shop with an adjustable/pistol grip aftermarket stock.
|
GoldCoaster
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 03:16 pm |
|
Yes I mis-interpreted the statute, if you have ONE of any of the disqualifying items and only ONE you are ok, any more than one and you're in violation.
There was some talk earlier about having these unconstituional bans struck down based on some work being done in California. I read that here though and haven't seen any updates to it.
My thought would be if you're going to get a post-ban AR type rifle, pick which item you must have (telescoping stock, flash hider, bayonet lug) and keep just one and remove the other parts and store them safely away and replace with (non-telescoping stock, muzzle brake, etc) until such time as this stupid AWB gets struck down and you can put your rifle back together properly.
|
ESCH
Regular Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 15th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 55 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 07:21 pm |
|
GoldCoaster wrote: Yes I mis-interpreted the statute, if you have ONE of any of the disqualifying items and only ONE you are ok, any more than one and you're in violation.
There was some talk earlier about having these unconstituional bans struck down based on some work being done in California. I read that here though and haven't seen any updates to it.
My thought would be if you're going to get a post-ban AR type rifle, pick which item you must have (telescoping stock, flash hider, bayonet lug) and keep just one and remove the other parts and store them safely away and replace with (non-telescoping stock, muzzle brake, etc) until such time as this stupid AWB gets struck down and you can put your rifle back together properly. Yes One and only one will make it illegal unless, as pointed out, it is a preban manufactured rifle not on the "list." The pistol grip is your one and only one on an AR for a post ban AR. If you have a different kind of carbine without the pistol grip you can have one more "feature." As to the 10/22 "assault weapon." The same rules apply. Check the serial number against the history database on Ruger's web site. It may be a preban. Then you can add whatever evil features not normally allowed. There have been so many 10/22 produced for so long, finding a preban is not overly difficult.
|
JUMPMASTER
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 08:51 pm |
|
GoldCoaster wrote: Yes I mis-interpreted the statute, if you have ONE of any of the disqualifying items and only ONE you are ok, any more than one and you're in violation.
There was some talk earlier about having these unconstituional bans struck down based on some work being done in California. I read that here though and haven't seen any updates to it.
My thought would be if you're going to get a post-ban AR type rifle, pick which item you must have (telescoping stock, flash hider, bayonet lug) and keep just one and remove the other parts and store them safely away and replace with (non-telescoping stock, muzzle brake, etc) until such time as this stupid AWB gets struck down and you can put your rifle back together properly.
Since these types of firearms are "in common use" through out the country then they should fall under the Heller Decision's reference of the Miller case. The way I read it is that any ban on them is in direct violation of the 2nd Amendment. What we need is a person or a group to challenge the Assualt Weapons Ban in court. I would have liked to see the law repealed but no one proposed it this past legislative session.
|
JUMPMASTER
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 08:58 pm |
|
You can buy a Stag Arms M4 post ban style CT legal rifle. Mine is a Model 2 in post ban configuration. The stock is pinned and there is no bayonet lug. I got mine at Hoffmans a couple of years ago. Stag Arms Rifles are made in New Britain. They don't show the model on their website but it is available.
http://www.stagarms.com/index.php
|
a32guy
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 4th, 2009 05:32 pm |
|
Thanks everyone for the replies. I understand how the CT laws work on ARs, however my question is--
Does the pinning of a telescoping stock nullify it as an illegal option? Even though the stock can still telescope with the removal of a pin, I would be A-OK in CT to have this in my possession (and be stopped by a police officer) providing I had it pinned?
|
GoldCoaster
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Jul 5th, 2009 07:42 pm |
|
well it depends on what your definition of "pinning" is. A split pin that could be easily removed wouldn't qualify as they could prove it could be brought "out of compliance" easily. A roll pin pressed in there would be hard to remove without a punch, that might do it. Drilling the stock and putting rivets in the holes would do it and would have to be drilled out. The bottom line is you would have to talk to the DPS who made up the stupid rules and are responsible for enforcing them. Get something in writing from them to prove you are complying with the letter of the law.
That's why I wanted to get a solid stock for the one I want to get and keep the non-pinned telescoping butt safe at home for when the AWB is struck down.
|
a32guy
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Jul 5th, 2009 08:02 pm |
|
| Thank you for the excellent reply. Enjoy the rest of your weekend!
|
Hef
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Jul 5th, 2009 11:05 pm |
|
AWDstylez wrote: Not to hijack, but WTF is this??
iii) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned;
On a PISTOL? What gun(s) was that intended to make illegal? Does the slide on a semi-auto count as a "barrel shroud"? I can hold it with my "nontrigger hand without being bunred."
wtf... just.... wtf... I hate this state.
1) Intratech TEC-DC9
2) Any weapon similar in design and mode of operation to the TEC-DC9, in existence at the time the ban is enacted and unknown to the ban's authors, or designed after the ban is enacted. It's a CYA move to make sure no evil black handgun goes unbanned.
|
GoldCoaster
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Jul 5th, 2009 11:34 pm |
|
It's completely asinine.
If I put a handle on the front of my pistol which would attach to the 1" picatinny rail underneath I'd be out of compliance because I have a threaded barrel on it. Oh the horrors!
I should just get one of those bayonets for pistols that fit on the pic rail.. would make it a bitch getting in the holster though! haha
|
Current time is 03:37 am | |
|
