Thread: Any rhing wrong with this

So if i get a 22 and thread it 1/2x28 get a suppressor from a you know what and fit it how will they determine if its got a prohibited part on it just a thought as there will be plenty of suppressors floating around with that thread on them now

Originally Posted by northdude

So if i get a 22 and thread it 1/2x28 get a suppressor from a you know what and fit it how will they determine if its got a prohibited part on it just a thought as there will be plenty of suppressors floating around with that thread on them now

The suppressor is only a prohibited part when it is attached to a prohibited firearm

If it was attached to an AR15 lower that has a 22LR upper & a 10 round or less magazine, it is completely legal as it the AR15 lower

If a centrefire upper is attached to that lower it then becomes a prohibited firearm

As far as I could tell it's only prohibited if it COULD ONLY BE USED on a prohibited weapon.

My guess is that the law is intended to encourage people to reuse accessories on permitted firearms partly so they dont have to pay out compensation but mostly so shooters and people dont lose so much due to the prohibition program.

Originally Posted by Bagheera

As far as I could tell it's only prohibited if it COULD ONLY BE USED on a prohibited weapon.

My guess is that the law is intended to encourage people to reuse accessories on permitted firearms partly so they dont have to pay out compensation but mostly so shooters and people dont lose so much due to the prohibition program.

I dont think there is an ounce of consideration for any potential losses we the shooters may face.
If a part is prohibited if it is ONLY suitable for use on a prohibited gun, then that is them bastards trying to weasel out of paying for something.

They would rather we had a drawer full of accessories that are of no use to us than pay us for them.

Always assume the worst from politicians, and you will never be let down.

Originally Posted by Kiwi Greg

The suppressor is only a prohibited part when it is attached to a prohibited firearm

If it was attached to an AR15 lower that has a 22LR upper & a 10 round or less magazine, it is completely legal as it the AR15 lower

If a centrefire upper is attached to that lower it then becomes a prohibited firearm

im curious about this ar lower with a 22lr upper, has it been confirmed by the police?

Originally Posted by holdover

im curious about this ar lower with a 22lr upper, has it been confirmed by the police?

Yep Arms officer told me a month or two ago, I thought Yeah-Nah

Asked him again last week & he still had the same story, can have a free standing pistol grip too, no more E-Cat restrictions

If you were silly enough to put a big mag & or centrefire upper on it you would be in deep trouble

Originally Posted by Kiwi Greg

Yep Arms officer told me a month or two ago, I thought Yeah-Nah

Asked him again last week & he still had the same story, can have a free standing pistol grip too, no more E-Cat restrictions

If you were silly enough to put a big mag & or centrefire upper on it you would be in deep trouble

Have heard the opposite from another arms officer, her words were something along the lines of "if the lower can still accept an AR15 mag then it's a prohibited part no matter what upper it has attached to it" all the dedicated 22lr ar style rifles I have seen on the shelf for sale right now actually have a slightly different mag well that will not accept an ar mag.
And here lays one of the frustrating things before us right now, different arms officers and police in general have differing interpretations of the law and just generally dont have any kind of clarity around what the hell is going on any more than you or I

Originally Posted by Ryan_Songhurst

Have heard the opposite from another arms officer, her words were something along the lines of "if the lower can still accept an AR15 mag then it's a prohibited part no matter what upper it has attached to it" all the dedicated 22lr ar style rifles I have seen on the shelf for sale right now actually have a slightly different mag well that will not accept an ar mag.
And here lays one of the frustrating things before us right now, different arms officers and police in general have differing interpretations of the law and just generally dont have any kind of clarity around what the hell is going on any more than you or I

Jordan who shoots at ASRA is modifying ARs with .22 uppers to account for that.
He fills in the slot at the back of the magwell and then removes the corresponding ridge on the Blackdog type mags. Basically they become the S&W style mags and magwell.

So normal AR centrefire mags won't fit the lower.

He also permanently blocks the buffer tube with an alloy plug. No buffer and spring can be inserted and no centrefire BCG can now cycle using that lower.

Originally Posted by Ryan_Songhurst

Have heard the opposite from another arms officer, her words were something along the lines of "if the lower can still accept an AR15 mag then it's a prohibited part no matter what upper it has attached to it" all the dedicated 22lr ar style rifles I have seen on the shelf for sale right now actually have a slightly different mag well that will not accept an ar mag.
And here lays one of the frustrating things before us right now, different arms officers and police in general have differing interpretations of the law and just generally dont have any kind of clarity around what the hell is going on any more than you or I

And that is when it is time to ask the police man or woman to show us their qualifications in legal matters.

Originally Posted by Ryan_Songhurst

Have heard the opposite from another arms officer, her words were something along the lines of "if the lower can still accept an AR15 mag then it's a prohibited part no matter what upper it has attached to it" all the dedicated 22lr ar style rifles I have seen on the shelf for sale right now actually have a slightly different mag well that will not accept an ar mag.
And here lays one of the frustrating things before us right now, different arms officers and police in general have differing interpretations of the law and just generally dont have any kind of clarity around what the hell is going on any more than you or I

Gee and not including firearms owners, arguably the biggest and most experienced, stakeholders in this whole schmozzle, along with a severely limited timeframe wouldn't have anything to do with it?
Sarcasm font.

Originally Posted by holdover

im curious about this ar lower with a 22lr upper, has it been confirmed by the police?

Yep, and this is the view of Nick Taylor, Lawyer.
I'm hoping its in his 12,000 commentary on the Arms Act changes that he has produced for COLFO.

Originally Posted by northdude

So if i get a 22 and thread it 1/2x28 get a suppressor from a you know what and fit it how will they determine if its got a prohibited part on it just a thought as there will be plenty of suppressors floating around with that thread on them now

My 223 & 6x45 bolt guns are threaded 1/2x28 and both wear ODL Titanium supressors that were intended to be used on AR15's. These to me are completely legal as they have been re-purposed. Same applies to some optics, if they are used on the currently "allowed" firearms then they are legal.

It has nothing to do with the farkn thread size ffs

Originally Posted by Mathias

My 223 & 6x45 bolt guns are threaded 1/2x28 and both wear ODL Titanium supressors that were intended to be used on AR15's. These to me are completely legal as they have been re-purposed. Same applies to some optics, if they are used on the currently "allowed" firearms then they are legal.

It has nothing to do with the farkn thread size ffs

didnt say it did but it just so happens ars seem to be the only firearm that come standard with that thread that im aware of so i thought maybe a suppressor with that thread could possibly be considered an ar only part which would be prohibited just asking as the dumb fuks playing law makers wouldnt have a clue

I suspect that 'legal' with respect to firearms will henceforth be up to police, judges, and OICs based on scared pollies' scared constituents. Let's not forget Nash was worried by a gun he was shown because it 'looked scary' - his exact words.

Originally Posted by sightpicture

I suspect that 'legal' with respect to firearms will henceforth be up to police, judges, and OICs based on scared pollies' scared constituents. Let's not forget Nash was worried by a gun he was shown because it 'looked scary' - his exact words.

Did he really say that?
He looks pretty fucken scary