Interesting approach to fixed magazine... (Fixed It For You (FIFY) Fixed Magazine Device)

[SomeSoldier]

Its Cali Law .. they didn't define where the fixed magazine had to be .. it just had to have a fixed mag ..

hell you could weld one to the barrel shroud .. the gun has a fixed mag .. per CaliFacebook.

Someone should weld a double stack mag to the bottom rail and use it as a forward grip.

 

[Grimscale]

A magazine is where rounds are stored prior to being fed into the chamber.

The law didn't state what chamber. Nothing in their law says the rounds have to be able to be fed into the chamber of the gun the magazine is in.
That device employs an item commonly known as a "magazine" in a fixed mount. Technically it satisfies the requirement of their stupidly worded attempt to restrict the 2nd Amendment.

If I were in a jury in CA and someone was being charged who had this device I would absolutely vote "innocent". Worse criminals have gotten off on technicalities even stupider than this one.

 

[spat]

The law didn't state what chamber. Nothing in their law says the rounds have to be able to be fed into the chamber of the gun the magazine is in.
That device employs an item commonly known as a "magazine" in a fixed mount. Technically it satisfies the requirement of their stupidly worded attempt to restrict the 2nd Amendment.

If I were in a jury in CA and someone was being charged who had this device I would absolutely vote "innocent". Worse criminals have gotten off on technicalities even stupider than this one.

If I were on a jury for an AW possession trial and the entire defense consisted of the lyrics of "row row row your boat" I would acquit, so that's not much of a metric

 

[Saltwater60]

The law didn't state what chamber. Nothing in their law says the rounds have to be able to be fed into the chamber of the gun the magazine is in.
That device employs an item commonly known as a "magazine" in a fixed mount. Technically it satisfies the requirement of their stupidly worded attempt to restrict the 2nd Amendment.

If I were in a jury in CA and someone was being charged who had this device I would absolutely vote "innocent". Worse criminals have gotten off on technicalities even stupider than this one.

Your vote and the legality of it means nothing as mine doesn’t either. If I was on a jury for a non-violent person that committed no other crimes and the guy had a fully functional AR-15 with a 30-round magazine that was detachable I’d bite not guilty. There are many times I’d vote not guilty over gun charges or vigilante Justice cases. Now if that guy was a drug dealer with that same case I’d vote guilty.

 

[RedBreast21]

This is really interesting and we have all seen obscure ways to skirt other laws. Aside from the obvious, in that it is a fixed mag, it would also call into question the pistol grip isn't attached but held in place by a fixed magazine. So therefore the grip isn't attached. I know its a stretch but Bill Clinton once called into question the definition of "is" so lol. Lawyers live for this shit. lol