Does HK MP5A3 Collapsible Stock Meet Minimum 29" OAL Requirement?

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Slim

    Active Member
    Sep 13, 2015
    489
    HoCo & Worldwide
    It's pretty easy. I even bent my own sttgu out of 3/16" round stock. I used another puece of it as the stop in the up position and black domed screw covers to hold it in the down position.
    Good luck
    Ah, I thought the uncoated piece above the pivot was the end of the opposite side, but it’s a different piece. Good to know. And I see the screw heads serving as detents now, too. Thanks! :party29:
     
    Last edited:

    hiattda

    Member
    Aug 30, 2018
    10
    Just as a heads up I sent that original pic of the shoulder brace from the M249 to MSP and they said it does not count towards the measurement. They also said that any distance added to the buttstock that is determined to be added for length requirements and not actual usability will not count. The M249 shoulder addition will just lead you to a possible felony charge and the destruction of a pricey stock.
     

    DaemonAssassin

    Why should we Free BSD?
    Jun 14, 2012
    23,970
    Political refugee in WV
    Just as a heads up I sent that original pic of the shoulder brace from the M249 to MSP and they said it does not count towards the measurement. They also said that any distance added to the buttstock that is determined to be added for length requirements and not actual usability will not count. The M249 shoulder addition will just lead you to a possible felony charge and the destruction of a pricey stock.

    So you trust MSP over ATF regs? Good luck with that one.
     

    danb

    dont be a dumbass
    Feb 24, 2013
    22,704
    google is your friend, I am not.

    Attachments

    • not banned today.jpg
      not banned today.jpg
      20.9 KB · Views: 335

    Slim

    Active Member
    Sep 13, 2015
    489
    HoCo & Worldwide
    Just as a heads up I sent that original pic of the shoulder brace from the M249 to MSP and they said it does not count towards the measurement. They also said that any distance added to the buttstock that is determined to be added for length requirements and not actual usability will not count. The M249 shoulder addition will just lead you to a possible felony charge and the destruction of a pricey stock.
    :sad20: Hmm...

    As it turns out, I was looking at a simplified version of the extendable A2 stock posted in the other thread. But, using threaded flat-head bolts through the buttplate, and threaded inserts epoxied in the stock body.

    Stand by for that one...
     

    dontpanic

    Ultimate Member
    Jul 7, 2013
    6,631
    Timonium
    Just as a heads up I sent that original pic of the shoulder brace from the M249 to MSP and they said it does not count towards the measurement. They also said that any distance added to the buttstock that is determined to be added for length requirements and not actual usability will not count. The M249 shoulder addition will just lead you to a possible felony charge and the destruction of a pricey stock.

    Show us the correspondence. BTW the STTGU helps stabilize the firearm and position it on your shoulder. It is utile. Why do you think the govt added it to the M249? Why do you think the M14 stock does the same thing?
     

    hiattda

    Member
    Aug 30, 2018
    10
    I am not saying whether it should or should not count. MSP are the ones who could arrest you and the charges going forward are up to the DA. If the MSP says it's a no go then you run the risk of being arrested and possibly charged with a felony.

    It depends on the interpretation of the law by the officer who see's your SBR. If he/she chooses to arrest you and the MSP brings charges to the DA you could lose all of your firearms rights and potentially be a convicted felon. Say goodbye to your beloved hobby and welcome to a world of crappy jobs.

    MSP are the ones who were granted the authority to determine the Firearms Safety Act. If you call and the person you talk to tells you it's a no go then it's probably illegal. It could always be the opinion or uninformed position of the individual officer you talk to.

    Debating its usefulness with me is irrelevant. I have no say so on whether it should be or shouldn't be allowed. I am just passing on what I found in my research to get it to 29 inches.

    Some things are not worth gambling on but that is up to the individual's decisions.
     

    Hawkeye

    The Leatherstocking
    Jan 29, 2009
    3,971
    MSP are the ones who were granted the authority to determine the Firearms Safety Act.

    No. MSP has no authority to determine anything about the FSA. The statute is as written. MSP has chosen to interpret it certain ways, and they have their BS published list of banned rifles, but whenever they've been challenged about any of that they back down because they know they have no legal authority to decide that stuff.

    An MSP officer can choose to arrest someone or not based on a given interpretation of the law, but that's about it.

    If you call and the person you talk to tells you it's a no go then it's probably illegal.

    Except for all the times that they've been totally wrong about stuff related to that law. You call them, you're getting whoever is sitting the desk that shift, not a legal expert.
     

    hiattda

    Member
    Aug 30, 2018
    10
    “The Maryland State Police is responsible for reaching its own conclusions with respect to whether particular firearms are copies of enumerated banned firearms.”

    People can take whatever risk they want but if the MSP can decide what will or not be allowed then why chance it. If the have the authority to make their own determination and you reach out to them and you get a no, then it’s dangerous to do it anyway.

    Arguing their authority doesn’t make sense. They have a long list with constant additions of newly identified assault weapons. They say no and it’s illegal.

    One could always call or email them to see if they get a different answer. I would go the email route and save it in case you get a yes it’s okay answer. If you get an officer who sees you at the range and feels it’s illegal you have proof you took strides to make sure it was lawful.

    The M249, M240 and M14 have these devices because they’re machine guns. It’s meant to provide more support while firing full auto. I never notice a difference using them. I’ve shot all but the full auto M14. I’m a Marine but the M14 was out of regular service before I joined.
     

    Attachments

    • 2AD952C1-ECD7-4880-9E46-A142EBC34546.jpg
      2AD952C1-ECD7-4880-9E46-A142EBC34546.jpg
      93.4 KB · Views: 443

    Hawkeye

    The Leatherstocking
    Jan 29, 2009
    3,971
    Arguing their authority doesn’t make sense. They have a long list with constant additions of newly identified assault weapons. They say no and it’s illegal.

    It makes a TON of sense, because their list of weapons is, by their own admission, not legally binding and is only provided as "helpful advice." They said this in writing, in response to a lawsuit which was filed against them by Engage Armament down in Rockville about the "banned rifle list" on their website being full of crap and containing rifles which were not, in fact, banned in Maryland. They make stuff up by the seat of their pants all the time, and it's up to us, the educated citizenry, to call them on their BS.

    They have removed many, many rifles from their ban list after it was pointed out to them that the language in the actual statute which is the only thing that matters, did not ban them.
     

    Slim

    Active Member
    Sep 13, 2015
    489
    HoCo & Worldwide
    Back to making SBRs short again...

    Looked for a beater A3 stock at the gun show this weekend, no luck. Will keep looking online for a cheap one to attempt to mod. Actually, it’ll probably take two stocks...

    Who’s got other ideas?
     

    schnejerator

    dabbled in pacifism once
    Sep 26, 2014
    116
    haggistucky
    Back to making SBRs short again...

    Looked for a beater A3 stock at the gun show this weekend, no luck. Will keep looking online for a cheap one to attempt to mod. Actually, it’ll probably take two stocks...

    Who’s got other ideas?

    I've been WAY out of the loop on this thread but love my A2 and MPX solutions. What are you going to try on the A3, Slim? The folding bar?

    Kind of wish I hadn't sold my A3 stock because I want to figure it out now hah. IIRC the bars on the A3 aren't easily removable from the buttpad like the MPX?
     

    Slim

    Active Member
    Sep 13, 2015
    489
    HoCo & Worldwide
    I've been WAY out of the loop on this thread but love my A2 and MPX solutions. What are you going to try on the A3, Slim? The folding bar?

    Kind of wish I hadn't sold my A3 stock because I want to figure it out now hah. IIRC the bars on the A3 aren't easily removable from the buttpad like the MPX?
    Still haven’t purchased an A3 stock. I think the easiest way to make it happen would be to buy two, sacrifice one, cutting off the molded-on butt portion, and weld an H-shaped assembly with a reinforcing bridge between the legs.
     

    erwos

    The Hebrew Hammer
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 25, 2009
    13,866
    Rockville, MD
    Has anyone in this lovely state of ours actually gotten this done?
    The MSP have stated that they're not going to count it as part of OAL, and there is nothing whatsoever in the law that forces them to use the ATF OAL calculation method. This has made it a somewhat unpopular method of dealing with the OAL restrictions.

    ETA: at this point, it might make more sense to see if you could pull off OAL using a picatinny adapter.
     

    Eastwind

    Nice!
    May 3, 2020
    119
    The MSP have stated that they're not going to count it as part of OAL, and there is nothing whatsoever in the law that forces them to use the ATF OAL calculation method. This has made it a somewhat unpopular method of dealing with the OAL restrictions.

    ETA: at this point, it might make more sense to see if you could pull off OAL using a picatinny adapter.
    I think I intend on going the collapsing A2 stock route, but I wouldn't mind having both. Sad to hear that the MSP can just pull new rules out of their ass like the ATF. Might have to find some way to extend the entire back of the stock. If I get an A3F I'll only need, oh, 2 inches of padding added to the back. I could just desecrate the stock and screw it on there...
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,918
    Messages
    7,258,713
    Members
    33,348
    Latest member
    Eric_Hehl

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom