"Evil" parts list? bipods?

[JRyan]

I know a new AR-15 already has the two "evil" things it can - pistol grip and high capacity. I am told optics and flashlights are fine, but I've not found any info on bipods. Are bipods OK?

I just saw a list of of parts that make liberals feel all squishy inside on this site but I can't seem to find it again.

Thanks in advance for any link or advice.

 

[drgrant]

The most common evil parts are-

-Flash Suppressor (although I find this one somewhat dubious... as I've
never found a federal thing actually describing what constiutes the
difference between a flash supressor and a muzzle brake, as some of them
serve both purposes, or often are brakes which suppress flash by accident!)

-Threaded Barrel (although this doenst matter much, many rifles a nut is
welded over it to make it unuseable)

-Bayonet Lug

-Collapsible or Folding Stock

-Pistol Grip

-Detachable magazine (it doesn't have to be high capacity)

I've never seen a "bipod" listed as an evil feature.

I might be missing one or two items, but I know for a fact that a bipod
isn't one of them.

-Mike

 

[JRyan]

Thanks!

I thought I was good with optics and maybe a flashlight, but I think I want a bipod too.

 

[LoginName]

The "high capacity" capability is not one of the countable "evil" features.
It's an entirely separate feature as defined by law.

The actual definition is...

a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of--

`(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;

On an AR-15 (and the vast majority of semi-automatic, military style rifles), the pistol grip is pretty much the given 1 allowable feature (some builders/manufacturers have substituted it with a thumbhole stock or hook-like device).

 

[EddieCoyle]

(iv) a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor;

Is there a statutory difference between a flash hider and a compensator?

 

[LoginName]

Is there a statutory difference between a flash hider and a compensator?

Doesn't appear to be. Even the BATF admits it...

This refers to your letter of January 13, 1999, in which you ask
about flash suppressors. As you are aware, the term flash
suppressor appears in the definition of a semiautomatic assault
weapon in section 921(a)(30) of Title 18, United States Code. The
term flash suppressor is not specifically defined in the statute.

A flash suppressor is a device which diminishes the visible flash
which occurs at the muzzle of a firearm as the bullet leaves the
barrel. While certain devices are exclusively designed as flash
suppressors, many other muzzle attachments are designed to perform
multiple functions such as a combination flash suppressor and
grenade launcher, or a combination flash suppressor and muzzle
break. Any such combination devices which function as a flash
suppressor would qualify as a flash suppressor for purposes of
section 921(a)(30)(B)(iv).

A firearm silencer or muffler would also function as an effective
flash suppressor; therefore, a semiautomatic rifle, such as an AR-
15, having a silencer or muffler and a pistol grip would qualify as
a semiautomatic assault weapon as that term is defined in section
921(a)(30)(B).

We trust that the foregoing has been responsive to your inquiry.
If you have further questions concerning this matter, please
contact us.

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/atf_letter51.txt

Given that, it would be up to the ATF firearms examiner/technical branch to test the device and determine if it reduces or minimizes the muzzle flash.
(doesn't sound very comforting... does it? ).

Typically, companies developing new or different products that might be questionable or be in a grey area, will send an example to the BATF for testing and determination (recall the 10/22 bumpfire device that was initially approved then later determined to be a full-auto conversion?)

I've seen a few ads for a manufacturers/distributors muzzle brakes with the claim "BATF approved" (or similar wording), or "awaiting BATF approval).

The grenade launcher definition is another "gotch'ya" head scratcher.
I don't recall the exact size/diameter flash suppressor/muzzle brake (might be 22mm-24mm), that the BATF has determined is capable of accepting rifle launched grenades (as if they're easily obtainable at any gun store or flea market). Some of the dual purpose devices will have grooves/rings cut into them and either a snap ring/gasket or spring like addition to hold the grenade in place on the launcher. Not that long ago, I saw one manufacturer that was selling a US made dual-purpose muzzle device (US made to be 922r
compliant, made to resemble a grenade launcher to add authenticity to the firearm). The only difference was that there was no provision to install the retaining ring to hold the grenade properly in place on the "launcher".
I don't recall if it was submitted to the BATF to determine if it could still function as a grenade launcher or not (sounds a bit shaky to me).

 

[KMaurer]

Better watch out if you've got anything with a barrel longer than the absolute minimum required by law, since we all know that shorter barrels result in more muzzle flash. Between the idiots who write these laws and the droids who are charged with interpreting them ...

Ken

 

[JRyan]

The "high capacity" capability is not one of the countable "evil" features.
It's an entirely separate feature as defined by law.

The actual definition is...



On an AR-15 (and the vast majority of semi-automatic, military style rifles), the pistol grip is pretty much the given 1 allowable feature (some builders/manufacturers have substituted it with a thumbhole stock or hook-like device).

Ok thanks. I had hear the detachable magazine thing before but forgot it.

Looks like my bipod, scope and possible flashlight are OK then.

 

[USMA-82]

In a related question - what about forward vertical grips?

I had a student ask this question in a Home Firearms Safety Class, and I really didn't have an answer for him. Specifically, If I have a tactical 3-rail forearm on my AK-47 and mount a vertical grip, do I now have two "pistol grips" and therefore trip the ban wire?

Inquiring minds want to know!

 

[LoginName]

In a related question - what about forward vertical grips?

I had a student ask this question in a Home Firearms Safety Class, and I really didn't have an answer for him. Specifically, If I have a tactical 3-rail forearm on my AK-47 and mount a vertical grip, do I now have two "pistol grips" and therefore trip the ban wire?

Inquiring minds want to know!

A front pistol grip is only an issue with handguns (the BATF has ruled that it's an AOW... Any Other weapon).

For a rifle, the definition of a pistol grip is that it "protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon".

I recall reading some minor debate (during the 94 ban), whether or not the gas system mounted above the barrel of an AR (or AK), could be defined as part of the action, but that definition was pretty much laughed at.

During the 94 ban a lot of "EBR" owners were mounting front vertical grips to their firearms without any legal problems.

 

[Scrivener]

A pistol is designed to be fired with one hand. The objection to pistol grips on rifles is that it supposedly allows them to be used with one hand (and the other is doing what? Firing an RPG?).

As a vertical foregrip does not allow one to fire the rifle, or even hold it effectively, with one hand, it would be a strain to call it the forbidden "pistol grip."

Then again, the Feds think a shoestring converts a semi-auto into a machine gun.......

 

[meth0d]

The most common evil parts are-

-Flash Suppressor (although I find this one somewhat dubious... as I've
never found a federal thing actually describing what constiutes the
difference between a flash supressor and a muzzle brake, as some of them
serve both purposes, or often are brakes which suppress flash by accident!)

-Threaded Barrel (although this doenst matter much, many rifles a nut is
welded over it to make it unuseable)

-Bayonet Lug

-Collapsible or Folding Stock

-Pistol Grip

-Detachable magazine (it doesn't have to be high capacity)

I've never seen a "bipod" listed as an evil feature.

I might be missing one or two items, but I know for a fact that a bipod
isn't one of them.

-Mike

So these things are not allowed on an AR?

 

[drgrant]

So these things are not allowed on an AR?

Well, you can't have more than a certain quantity of them on
a "post ban" AR in MA (eg, anything made after 9/94.)

Read LoginName's post #4 earlier in this thread, it's clearer than my
response was.

-Mike

 

[meth0d]

Ohhh, I see!

"has the ability to accept detachable magazine and at least 2 of the following..."

Thanks.

 

[matt]

A pistol is designed to be fired with one hand. The objection to pistol grips on rifles is that it supposedly allows them to be used with one hand (and the other is doing what? Firing an RPG?).

As a vertical foregrip does not allow one to fire the rifle, or even hold it effectively, with one hand, it would be a strain to call it the forbidden "pistol grip."

Then again, the Feds think a shoestring converts a semi-auto into a machine gun.......

A grip under the forend would not matter as it would not be "protruding conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon". Otherwise there would be problems with rifles like the SOCOMII with pistol grip mounted under the forend and a flash suppressor. That it is not useful seems to be irrelevant, is this correct?