Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Is what he's doing legal?
Yes, it's legal. 25 78.13%
I guess it's legal. 2 6.25%
No, it's not legal. 3 9.38%
I guess it's not legal. 0 0%
It shouldn't be legal because it's not a mustkeet 0 0%
I don't know. 2 6.25%
Voters: 32. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-18-2016, 08:43 AM
 
26,694 posts, read 14,576,036 times
Reputation: 8094

Advertisements

Here's a classic example of gun control laws going asinine. I really don't see the freaking point of this.

Could anybody tell me if what the guy is doing in the picture is legal?

Here are some premises:
1. He's shooting a semi-auto pistol with a barrel length less than 16 inches that he legally owns.
2. The suppressor is registered and legal.
3. He's not in a state that mandates legal gun owners must use reduced capacity magazines.
4. It's not an assault rifle - it's not even a rifle.
5. He's in a shooting range compliant with all the regulations.
6. He's not shooting at a paper target, not at people or anybody's property.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-18-2016, 08:45 AM
 
Location: DFW
40,952 posts, read 49,213,992 times
Reputation: 55008
It's obvious we need to ban these "Weapons of War" (as Hillary calls them) from honest citizens so people in Chicago will stop killing each other.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2016, 09:21 AM
 
Location: NW Nevada
18,161 posts, read 15,638,146 times
Reputation: 17152
Is it legal? Ummm....yes. The weapon is an HK MP5. Its actually considered a band vu , and fires a handgun cartridge. All applicable laws are being followed. Why WOULDN'T this be legal? I'm not sure what your point is. Are you saying this shouldn't be legal, and if so...why not? Actually this weapon is considered a "pistol caliber carbine", because of the solid buttstock. Plus, the suppressor is added to the barrel for measurement of OAL. Its all on the up and up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2016, 09:34 AM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,473,071 times
Reputation: 9074
I guess that old commercial was wrong, sometimes it really is how long you make it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2016, 09:35 AM
 
Location: Chattanooga, TN
3,045 posts, read 5,247,343 times
Reputation: 5156
If that "brace" were properly strapped to his forearm as designed, then he would be shooting a pistol which is legal. Using the mag well as a foregrip is also legal, as long as it isn't modified specifically to be used as a foregrip.

If he rests the brace against his body as a shoulder stock (which is how most people use those so-called "braces"), then under the definitions used by the ATF that becomes a rifle. As it has a barrel less than 16" it must be registered as a Short Barreled Rifle. Assuming it is NOT registered, then it is illegal. Another way to make it legal is if the suppressor were permanently welded to the barrel. You didn't mention that, so I'm assuming it is removable so it does NOT count when measuring overall length.

He is resting the brace against his cheek and not his shoulder which is a legal gray area.


But ultimately, every time I've ever seen someone shoot with a forearm "brace" it was used as a shoulder stock at least a few times during the session. This makes it illegal under current definitions.

Last edited by An Einnseanair; 08-18-2016 at 09:47 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2016, 09:49 AM
 
34,619 posts, read 21,631,426 times
Reputation: 22232
Constitutionally legal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2016, 10:49 AM
 
26,694 posts, read 14,576,036 times
Reputation: 8094
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwkilgore View Post
If that "brace" were properly strapped to his forearm as designed, then he would be shooting a pistol which is legal. Using the mag well as a foregrip is also legal, as long as it isn't modified specifically to be used as a foregrip.

If he rests the brace against his body as a shoulder stock (which is how most people use those so-called "braces"), then under the definitions used by the ATF that becomes a rifle. As it has a barrel less than 16" it must be registered as a Short Barreled Rifle. Assuming it is NOT registered, then it is illegal. Another way to make it legal is if the suppressor were permanently welded to the barrel. You didn't mention that, so I'm assuming it is removable so it does NOT count when measuring overall length.

He is resting the brace against his cheek and not his shoulder which is a legal gray area.


But ultimately, every time I've ever seen someone shoot with a forearm "brace" it was used as a shoulder stock at least a few times during the session. This makes it illegal under current definitions.



Congratulations! You have the most correct answer.


The asinine part of the law is that if he, the shooter, put that stock thingy on his shoulder, he would instantly qualify for a felony charge but putting under his cheek is a OK!

How in the freaking world a normal citizen would know that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2016, 10:57 AM
 
Location: USA
31,086 posts, read 22,101,630 times
Reputation: 19101
How about if he was shouldering the post if he didnt have the Sig brace in place?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2016, 11:03 AM
 
26,694 posts, read 14,576,036 times
Reputation: 8094
Quote:
Originally Posted by LS Jaun View Post
How about if he was shouldering the post if he didnt have the Sig brace in place?
My non-ATF's understanding is that he would be fine as there's no modification to the gun.

Now the kicker is if he had a Sig stock laying around, not installed, that fits the pistol, he could qualify for the same felony charge too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2016, 11:07 AM
 
45,235 posts, read 26,464,208 times
Reputation: 24995
Looks scary. Let's ban it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:05 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top