AR pistols are "assault weapons" in CA.

Pistols with a magazine that does not go through the handle are a no-no.

Rifles can't have a detachable magazine if they have a pistol grip, it's just stupid.

I just came from my local gun shop and purchased a AR lower (Stripped) He told me that if ur gonna have the pistol grip the mag can't come out. But u can make it so that u have this little wrench so once its twisted the mag falls out. Im prolly gonna have that feature cause i want my P/G.

Let me know how that works out.

I like the FAL because all it takes is a properly sized socket head cap screw to fix the magazine, a real easy CA conversion and 100% reversible. It also can use stripper clips if you have the right top cover, so the fixed magazine isn't a big deal.

If there is a clean way to build an AR that isn't legally questionable, I'm interested. All that I have seen use a pinned magazine and even if you don't care about the pin, you still have to open the action to load it.

The other way, a fixed stock without a pistol grip will let you keep the detachable magazine but they look pretty ugly except for one that used a ~$300 stock which is a lot more than I want to spend to stay on the good side of a stupid law.

Ok so once i complete my lower all i need is something like this to finish it???

http://www.del-ton.com/Del_Ton_AR_15_Barrel_Assembly_p/dt2000.htm

That will do it. Although if I were you I would buy a Bushmaster or Rock River Arms complete upper.

The Ace stock is very nice. The entry stock is a bit too short for me, even with thicker pad.. (the charging handle is really in your nose, a Tac-latch makes it even worse). The standard ace if very nice... especially with the thinner shoulder pad.

Thanks for the info. I do plan on going with a complete upper buy rock river arms. I was just using that as an example.

As for stocks im realy liking the standard ace or the stubby stock.

Is that a pic of ur lowers iron or did u just find those on the net. I noticed the pistol grips are sawed off. Makes it look ugly but if its a kali AR then makes since. If say i were to do that to my AR then i could keep the detacable mag right?

I did read somewhere that AR's are hard to fire when the pistol grip is removed.

Stupid Gun Laws!!!

I thought about changing the Buttstock, but I have that 20" bull barrel, and don't really want a little M4 stock hanging off of that when I change uppers!!

those are mine...
The grip is the first generation 'monster man' grip. The idea is with this grip (no pistol grip) and no collapsable stock, and no flash hider, then you can keep detachable mags. Otherwise you can have flash hider, collapsable stock, and pistol grip, but then need to 'lock' the mag on a 10rounder. Gotta love CA.

The monstermags are much better now, and professionally made, these were from a first run/proto design almost.

Diceman ,is it you that has the AR with the 7.62 upper and M16 stock? If it is I
love that rifle. I never really got putting a collapsible stock on when it only makes it a couple of inches shorter and adds a lot of complexity unless you are going really short like the AR with the 7 inch barrel I posted earlier. I think that 7.62 AR is about the perfect social rifle.

The California laws are not so bad, we can have removable mags but they have to be pinned at 5. Those monster grips are hideous though.

Yeah, thats me w/ the 7.62x39 upper. One of my problem w/ the full size stock is that its about 2 inches too long to fit in an M4 assault bag. The other being that I just feel like having 2 complete rifles. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />