SAFE or Not SAFE?

[Phazer]

Some info on this monstrosity:

TKB-022

The TKB-022 came with a grip mounted magazine as a means of making magazine reloading quicker, but was found to have nasty ergonomics for the intended user.​

Modern Firearms - Korobov TKB-022

 

[Marine Cpl]

Regardless, that gun sucks ergonomically. This is much better.

 

[Phazer]

Regardless, that gun sucks ergonomically. This is much better.

I'd forgotten about the Keltec RDB-Survival rifle.

RDB-S

With 11 game-changing innovations, the RDB™ is the new definition of bullpup. Its downward shell ejection system eliminates the side ejection disadvantage of ordinary bullpups. The result is casings that eject out of your line of sight and a truly ambidextrous, high performance rifle. The RDB is also adjustable for a wide variety of ammunition. It’s definitely the bullpup done right.

 

[RDN]

No worse than..... View attachment 10246

I use to think that AR configuration was dumb until I seen the original post pic above.

But seriously. Look what these gun-grabbers are making us go through to enjoy/exercise our 2nd Amend. gun rights. HOW CAN A LAW THAT DICTATES WHAT ERGONOMIC ITEMS GOES ON A FIREARM PASS STRICT SCRUTINY IN ANY COURT OF LAW !!

 

[CarpNY]

RDN is right, of course, but I like to design. So, who wants to engineer this AR-type lower that might actually use the AR bolt carrier ...

(Forgive the rough and two-tone concept drawing.)

 

[spat]

I use to think that AR configuration was dumb until I seen the original post pic above.

But seriously. Look what these gun-grabbers are making us go through to enjoy/exercise our 2nd Amend. gun rights. HOW CAN A LAW THAT DICTATES WHAT ERGONOMIC ITEMS GOES ON A FIREARM PASS STRICT SCRUTINY IN ANY COURT OF LAW !!

Strict scrutiny ?

SAFE can't even pass the "remotely plausible" scrutiny test.

You might as well argue that we need to ban adjustable stocks to stop the spread of malaria for all the sense it makes.

 

[Magnus]

Gotta have one hell of a long trigger finger just to reach the trigger Although, the ladies would take a liking to ya...

That is one ugly ass gun, it should be banned on that alone.

 

[Duke]

RDN is right, of course, but I like to design. So, who wants to engineer this AR-type lower that might actually use the AR bolt carrier ...

(Forgive the rough and two-tone concept drawing.)

American Ingenuity....

 

[Phazer]

I'd forgotten about the Keltec RDB-Survival rifle.

RDB-S

With 11 game-changing innovations, the RDB™ is the new definition of bullpup. Its downward shell ejection system eliminates the side ejection disadvantage of ordinary bullpups. The result is casings that eject out of your line of sight and a truly ambidextrous, high performance rifle. The RDB is also adjustable for a wide variety of ammunition. It’s definitely the bullpup done right.

Too bad this is built with an intrinsic collapsible stock (which, of course, is practical). So, it's not unSAFE-compliant.

 

[Duke]

 

[Marine Cpl]

Too bad this is built with an intrinsic collapsible stock (which, of course, is practical). So, it's not unSAFE-compliant.

Phazer, the California version which is the RDB C comes with a fixed stock and a 20 inch barrel to bring it up to California's overall legal length of 30 inches. You can have a smith cut and crown or thread and attach a flash can to bring it down to a 16 inch barrel length and an overall length of 26 inches just like the survival model.

It is also a thicker barrel unlike the pencil thin barrel that the survival version uses which helps with accuracy when the barrel gets hot. NutnFancy's only gripe on the survival version was the pencil thin barrel when he reviewed it.

 

[BLAMMO!!]

NFW that is a "thumb"hole stock. No...way....

That is simply a skeletonized stock. After all, if you put your thumb through that stock, there is no anatomical way that a real human could reach the trigger with that hand.

...

Yeah, Magpul and others make loads of stocks that have fully enclosed openings in them. That doesn't make them thumb holes. As long as they're pinned so as not to telescope.

But that rifle is so butt ugly, if I were the governor, I would pass a law against it. So, fuck me.

 

[stuck in ny]

Don't care, this gun/idea is plain ugly!

I would say it would have to be legal. You couldn't say the magazine is a pistol grip, otherwise all magazine rifles would be illegal for a "second forward grip " if magazine are now grips.

 

[MilesTeg]

I would say it would have to be legal. You couldn't say the magazine is a pistol grip, otherwise all magazine rifles would be illegal for a "second forward grip " if magazine are now grips.

The problem arises in the wording of the law, "(ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon". With no definition of pistol grip an argument could be made using the wording "grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon". Once that argument is made they could argue that the hand is held on the firearm in the same manner as a pistol. Of all the compliant options I think this one is the most precarious. Even the MR-2 holds more legal water than this in my non lawyer brain.

 

[stuck in ny]

The problem arises in the wording of the law, "(ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon". With no definition of pistol grip an argument could be made using the wording "grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon". Once that argument is made they could argue that the hand is held on the firearm in the same manner as a pistol. Of all the compliant options I think this one is the most precarious. Even the MR-2 holds more legal water than this in my non lawyer brain.

But that would make all mags a "forward grip". In the military, when you grip the mag to fire the m203, do they call the mag a pistol grip? I wouldn't think so.

 

[MilesTeg]

Again the devil is in the wording of the law, "(iv) a second handgrip or a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand". They don't define any of the terms which leads to the confusion and until we have some case law to go bye this is all guessing. When this first went into effect there was talk that magazine wells that where specially cut as to give the shooter better grip was in question legally. That whole argument came down again as no one knows. It's fine if you want to push the envelope no skin off of my back but know that this isn't black a white.

 

[Eddie Gunks]

but know that this isn't black a white.

As i keep saying, we want ambiguous. You can not get convicted on a gray area.

No matter what all the internet chicken littles say, the safe actnis kinda "safe " for use as we can mot get convicted on the gray area as it is written.

No matter what CL thinks, test case or not. No conviction for most of what we are talking about. (Posses on a full featured scary ar may get you convicted , but we are not talking about that)


.

 

[MilesTeg]

As i keep saying, we want ambiguous. You can not get convicted on a gray area.

No matter what all the internet chicken littles say, the safe actnis kinda "safe " for use as we can mot get convicted on the gray area as it is written.

No matter what CL thinks, test case or not. No conviction for most of what we are talking about. (Posses on a full featured scary ar may get you convicted , but we are not talking about that)


.

Agreed 100%. My issue is when people start arguing "facts" on what is legal and what isn't. The truth of the matter no one knows until they define items or there's case law to guide us. I really don't care what other people do but come and try to convince the world what you are doing is 100% legal because no one can do that yet.

 

[Marine Cpl]

As i keep saying, we want ambiguous. You can not get convicted on a gray area.

I see it different. The more ambiguous a law, the easier it is arrested. They may have a harder time convicting you, but a much easier time arresting you.

For example. If a pistol grip is defined like in California as a grip that has X, Y ,and Z features, an arrest is much more unlikely then if it wasn't defined.

You may beat the conviction, but you cannot beat the arrest that costs you everything else while you try to explain it isn't a pistol grip.

The goal here is to have things clearly defined so that you don't get arrested and if you do get arrested, it never makes it past a District Attorney and, or a Grand Jury.

 

[laney50w]

SAFE...or...UN-SAFE?

Wait! Wait! I know... UN-SAFE!

 

[Eddie Gunks]

SAFE...or...UN-SAFE?

Wait! Wait! I know... UN-SAFE!

Safe. No shoulder thing that goes up. All good.

 

[stuck in ny]

Wait a minute, could we have bullpups with spur grips?

 

[BLAMMO!!]

I see it different. The more ambiguous a law, the easier it is arrested. They may have a harder time convicting you, but a much easier time arresting you.

For example. If a pistol grip is defined like in California as a grip that has X, Y ,and Z features, an arrest is much more unlikely then if it wasn't defined.

You may beat the conviction, but you cannot beat the arrest that costs you everything else while you try to explain it isn't a pistol grip.

The goal here is to have things clearly defined so that you don't get arrested and if you do get arrested, it never makes it past a District Attorney and, or a Grand Jury.

Has anyone been charged under the SAFE Act with possession of an AW, absent of any other charges? I mean, an otherwise law abiding gun owner getting jammed up for having a pistol grip, muzzle brake, telescoping stock, or any of the features listed in the law.

I still have not heard of anyone being charged just for possession of an assault weapon.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Has anyone been charged under the SAFE Act with possession of an AW, absent of any other charges? I mean, an otherwise law abiding gun owner getting jammed up for having a pistol grip, muzzle brake, telescoping stock, or any of the features listed in the law.

I still have not heard of anyone being charged just for possession of an assault weapon.

You have to do something to get charged otherwise how on earth would they know? It's not like they drive around with Assault Weapon detectors.

 

[capitalcrew]

There's a lot of lakes and rivers that would be in BIG trouble if they had those.