This looks interesting. What Would Stoner Do?
https://www.brownells.com/WWSD
https://www.brownells.com/WWSD
This looks interesting. What Would Stoner Do?
https://www.brownells.com/WWSD
I thought it sounded interesting, too.
Unfortunately it will not be available here in the People's Utopia, unless you build it with an HBAR, which would nullify the concept. Still, the lower itself sounds interesting, and perhaps you could seriously flute your heavy barrel...
It depends on how you interpret the law. You could argue that it is not a copy because of both the material and the fact that the stock and pistol grip are integral to the receiver. If changes because of caliber make a rifle not a copy why wouldn't a non copy of the receiver be any different? The receiver is the key part in determining if it is a copy
You could argue that, but you might be making your argument from behind the defense table in a courtroom. I wouldn't want to stake my freedom on a MD judge applying Rule of Lenity to something firearms related, assuming that's even within a judge's discretion in this state..
What is the basis of your claim? You would not be relying solely on the Rule of Lenity. The law gets very specific about particular models and their copies. How much different does something have to be to not be considered a copy?
How much different does something have to be to not be considered a copy?
Ask MSP, it's their list.
I'd advise asking at least 5 different troopers, and averaging the answers - it's certain they'd all be different.
I wonder if someone can convince them to make a WWSD pistol with a integral hook-style brace? It seems like it would be silly easy to design one like that.
I am not sure they still have the list on the website. I tried searching on the MSP website but could not find anything on that issue.
What is the basis of your claim? You would not be relying solely on the Rule of Lenity. The law gets very specific about particular models and their copies. How much different does something have to be to not be considered a copy?
To that end, the Maryland State Police has determined that, for enforcement purposes, a firearm is considered a copy if it is both cosmetically similar to and has completely interchangeable internal components necessary for the full operation and function of one of the enumerated banned weapons.
A 1 piece lower with integrated stock and grip will only help pass copycat test.
The receiver is 2 molded halves plastic welded together. I don't see how they can't sell each half separately as a 50%. I doubt they will though...
The AG published a letter, can be found here on MDS about "copies." It is also stated on the MSP firearms list.
If any one part is not interchangeable between the two, it is NOT a copy.
How do you interchange the AR buffer tube? It is certainly required for the operation of an AR, but the CAV Arms lower cannot accept that particular part. The stock and pistol grip are also distinguishing characteristics and needed for the full operation. They are not interchangeable either.
I would again ask if the Cav Arms lower truly a copy?