Turn Your Pistol Into An Assault Rifle

FLECOM said:
adding a stock to a pistol makes it a rifle, a barrel shorter than 16" makes it an SBR... which means putting that on your gun without an approved stamp would in fact make you a criminal...
Click to expand...

Ooo...boy is my face red.:D

Still cool.
 
FLECOM said:
adding a stock to a pistol makes it a rifle, a barrel shorter than 16" makes it an SBR... which means putting that on your gun without an approved stamp would in fact make you a criminal...

also I love how he is wearing a Brietling Emergency... half the people I see wearing that watch dont even know how it works, or why they would ever use it lol
Click to expand...

Im sure the drunks that fall off cruise ships can figure it out pretty quick lol
Posted via [H] Mobile Device
 
pc299 said:
You ARE attaching a stock to a pistol, which makes it a SBR (if the barrel length is less than 16")

The bullpups you're thinking of still had > 16" barrels, or would also be SBRs.
Click to expand...

They have laws about what kind of handle you can put on a gun? That's completely moronic. It doesn't even fire rifle ammo.
 
Keiichi said:
Anyone notice the camera person being in the line of fire while it's being shot? Either it was firing air rounds or that camera person has got some balls.
Click to expand...
That was the only noteworthy thing I saw in the video. I thought WTH is this cameraperson doing?!? Blanks or not, yikes!
 
Jailer said:
What an incredible waste of time and money.

Besides, if you want a completely impractical pistol to waste tons of ammo on you might as well do it right. :D

ARpistol.jpg
Click to expand...

no.

shit like that is the reason we can't buy armor piercing .223/5.56 anymore.
 
yes, it is.

it's illegal to sell armor piercing ammunition in a pistol caliber.

once people started making ar15s as "pistols", batf said it is illegal to sell AP 223.
 
That looks pretty cool on video, but there really is no advantage to doing this.
 
Castor Troy said:
yes, it is.

it's illegal to sell armor piercing ammunition in a pistol caliber.

once people started making ar15s as "pistols", batf said it is illegal to sell AP 223.
Click to expand...

You have no idea what you are talking about. We aren't allowed to buy stuff like that in pistol calibers because the damn gun grabbers and politicians have control issues. Their desire for control has to due with them projecting their worst fears and insecurities on other people. Banning things they know nothing about makes them feel good. It has nothing to do with the existence of AR-15 pistols.
 
So it is a felony for me to be able to more accurately fire my pistol? Awesome. We should ban these from police use too.
 
Dan_D said:
We aren't allowed to buy stuff like that in pistol calibers because the damn gun grabbers and politicians have control issues. Their desire for control has to due with them projecting their worst fears and insecurities on other people..
Click to expand...

This pretty much confirmed exactly what I said??
 
I would be nervous doing any modifications, even cosmetic, to a weapon without full knowledge of federal and state laws. One little slip up of some vague law and you are doing some hard time with a big fine.:eek:
 
Obi_Kwiet said:
They have laws about what kind of handle you can put on a gun? That's completely moronic. It doesn't even fire rifle ammo.
Click to expand...

Yes. There are laws regarding barrel length, pistol grips, stock length... Was it the assault weapons ban that said you had to have x amount of US made parts on a firearm to make certain modifications to it or something? The laws are asinine.

I'm a bit behind the times, I haven't been in the market for a firearm for a long time, but I did go shooting this summer with girlfriend and fam. Imagine my 5'2" girlfriend shooting 12 gauge (and sincerely enjoying it)!. Good stuff. :D
 
I don't know where you guys are getting that this CAA Roni: Pistol rifle is coming out of UK. The company is based in Israel.

Simply owning one of those RONI: Pistol Rifle system is not illegal in the US. But assembling the system with a pistol without the proper permits is illegal. Eg: owning an AR SBR upper is not illegal, but putting it together with the lower without the permits/stamps will get you thrown in the pokey.
 
I for one think it's awesome. I can definitely see this being a gray area when it comes to weather or not it's classified as an SBR though. Not sure i'd take the risk but if there was some hard evidence that it would be ok i'd go buy a handgun just to make it into one of these.

and THANK you for reminding me about the Bullpup Ruger 10/22 mod. I've got a Ruger and completely forgotten about this. off to google i go :)

As an aside. Nice shot grouping on the paper.
 
Dan_D said:
You have no idea what you are talking about. We aren't allowed to buy stuff like that in pistol calibers because the damn gun grabbers and politicians have control issues. Their desire for control has to due with them projecting their worst fears and insecurities on other people. Banning things they know nothing about makes them feel good. It has nothing to do with the existence of AR-15 pistols.
Click to expand...

True enough, and (as far as ammunition goes) it started back in the early 90's when they started yanking the newer, better designed hollow points (like black talons) off the market because they "explode". . .

BTW . . . just to prove that the stereotypes aren't always true . . . I'm probably one of the most liberal folks on this board, but I'm . . . center-right I guess would be accurate, when it comes to 2nd Amendment issues (i.e., I think there have to be some reasonable limitations, such as real background checks and I can't see any reason anyone would need a .50 Cal Browning machine gun or a howitzer, but an AR15, AK-47, MP-5 . . hell yeah, let me at 'em :).
 
I don't get ShotGun News anymore but I do remember seeing an ad for a .45acp UPPER that you mated to your registered lower and it kinda turned it into a rifle. Does anyone A) remember this gizmo, and more importantly, B) remember seeing it advertised recently? (I got freaked out when they tried to nail David Koresh of the Branch Davidians because he subscribed to Shotgun News...I mean, really, folks!!
 
supports every glock but the 23, which is what i have. bummer!
 
Meh! Looks like fun but I prefer the revolver. Specifically, the .357 Magnum hand cannon.

smith_wesson_highway_3.jpg
 
Castor Troy said:
$625 + shipping from the UK, plus a $200 tax for the SBR registration for you Glock, plus 3-5 months for the BATF to run the background check and approve your Form 1.
Click to expand...

Oh... I rather buy an AK then... keep the glock as my secondary until I pick up a new weapon from a downed NPC.
 
ekierce said:
True enough, and (as far as ammunition goes) it started back in the early 90's when they started yanking the newer, better designed hollow points (like black talons) off the market because they "explode". . .

BTW . . . just to prove that the stereotypes aren't always true . . . I'm probably one of the most liberal folks on this board, but I'm . . . center-right I guess would be accurate, when it comes to 2nd Amendment issues (i.e., I think there have to be some reasonable limitations, such as real background checks and I can't see any reason anyone would need a .50 Cal Browning machine gun or a howitzer, but an AR15, AK-47, MP-5 . . hell yeah, let me at 'em :).
Click to expand...

Black Talons were terribly misunderstood weren't capable of any of the feats attributed to them. Black Talons were simply the best JHP design on the market at the time they were new. They never cut like razor blades, exploded, fragmented, they weren't armor piercing, nor are they Teflon coated. They were also never even banned, but that didn't stop the gun grabbers from trying to get them banned. Winchester voluntarily took them off the market to avoid the bad PR.

Why restrict .50BMG rifles? What would be the point? What's the reasoning behind that? "Reasonable limitations" is laughable at best. Such "reasonable limitations" are just reasonable to people who don't know what they are talking about. What I want and why is none of anyone's business but my own. I'll not have anyone deciding for me what I am responsible enough to handle.
 
Dan_D said:
Why restrict .50BMG rifles? What would be the point? What's the reasoning behind that? "Reasonable limitations" is laughable at best. Such "reasonable limitations" are just reasonable to people who don't know what they are talking about. What I want and why is none of anyone's business but my own. I'll not have anyone deciding for me what I am responsible enough to handle.
Click to expand...

That's the problem, some people just aren't responsible, and it takes the rest of us down with them.
 
jeremyshaw said:
That's the problem, some people just aren't responsible, and it takes the rest of us down with them.
Click to expand...

You can't have it both ways. Either you are a free state, or a nanny state. I prefer the former. If people screw up you take their toys away from THEM. Not the rest of the public.
 
Dan_D is exactly correct- settling for anything else is absolutely wrong.

The only thing to add, is if they are not safe enough to have full rights restored afterwards, keep them locked up or put the mad dogs down.
 
Well just want to point this out it mentions silencers, which are a no-no period as silencers are destructive devices and require you to have a reason to own them.

This is bad idea all around you can get a legal gun to do everything this does better for less money. Oh and it won't get you sent to jail. Modifying any firearm depending on the state you live in can get you in serious hot water. The Dakotas, Montana, Arizona, Florida and Texas are really the only states were the second amendment means anything.

Final thoughts until the laws that challenge the constitution are changed you have to live with in them, and the only person who wants to take your guns from you is the person who wants to put a boot on your neck. An armed society is a free and polite society. Last it was not until FDR welfare (state, I mean) program was established that anyone ever considered taking military arms away from the people.
 
drakken
Silencers are not DDs they are simply silencers and are 100% legal in most states if you pay the $200 tax stamp. Some people use them just for plinking thats easier on the ears.
I think the assault pistol is a joke and ugly as Im a long gun guy.
Looks like a Entry Mosin Nagant mod I saw :
2635022443_cabe134070.jpg
 
drakken said:
Well just want to point this out it mentions silencers, which are a no-no period as silencers are destructive devices and require you to have a reason to own them.
Click to expand...

I have a very good reason to own one. I like to shoot. Frequently. But I also respect my neighbors and do not want to annoy them with all the racket that comes with popping off a bunch of rounds. But, unfortunately I can't show that level of courtesy to my neighbors since I live in a nanny state that does not allow you to own or posses a silencer.

Silencers don't make you commit crimes just as bullets don't kill people. People commit crimes. Punish the ones that commit the crimes and leave me and my possessions alone.
 
vonviener said:
I would be nervous doing any modifications, even cosmetic, to a weapon without full knowledge of federal and state laws. One little slip up of some vague law and you are doing some hard time with a big fine.:eek:
Click to expand...

Not only that, but then you have a criminal record and you'll have a hell of a time buying a gun ever again.
 
if you DID get the kit, and DID add it to your pistol, and DID start all your forms BEFORE ordering the kit, and DID get the stamp BEFORE assembly, thanks to the ridiculous rules, it's a one way trip. you could put the pistol into the stock, but once it's status changed to sbr, it's illegal to make it ANYTHING else. gotta love it.
 
Why not just ban steak knives, butter knives, and anything that could be remotely manipulated to have a sharp, pointy end. Those kill people...


Ohhh cars and trucks.. those can get quite a few before your radiator is trashed, and the engine block overheats and seizes up.

Don't forget deer.. Those fuzzy brown fuckers can kill too.. Lets ban them to Canada. It can't be Mexico, because they will probably develop the next generation of deer flu, and will kill 80% of the population, right before a small black hole swallows the earth from the LHC, like a porn star with the money shot.

Sigh... Group think + fear (whore) mongering = retarded laws, and those flat faced, ears higher than their eyes, tuffy haired retards that create them.

Wait... didn't we vote them in office?
 
I love my sig..and I'd never surround it with a bunch of plasticy addon crap for fear of what it would do to the gun itself. I paid a lot of money for it, and take care of it like its worth that amount of money.

Do these "kits" allow your parts to breathe/cool down correctly and evenly?
How much "play" is acceptable in the kit? Where are the attachment points and how do they affect wear on your firearm?

All those were the first things that came to mind when I saw it..they might be fun to shoot once or twice but definately not worth the money and no way you'd get me to put any of my guns in one. :p
 
Actually, wasnt there a group in Europe that just did a study calling for all consumer kitchen knives to be rounded? I thought this was the same group that found mugs in bars to be deadly and are pushing for plastic ones
 
Vaulter98c said:
Actually, wasnt there a group in Europe that just did a study calling for all consumer kitchen knives to be rounded? I thought this was the same group that found mugs in bars to be deadly and are pushing for plastic ones
Click to expand...

The UK has turned into a land of pussies. They want to ban anything that could be used to cause harm. Soon they will all be forced to walk around in straight jackets and everything will have pillowes attached to it to protect them. Meanwhile the rich and politically connected will continue to have fox hunts (which means they can still use guns).
 
ICOM said:
Meh! Looks like fun but I prefer the revolver. Specifically, the .357 Magnum hand cannon.

smith_wesson_highway_3.jpg
Click to expand...

The .357 Magnum can hardly be considered a hand cannon by today's standards. Most of them are dwarfed by the .44 Magnum revolvers like Smith & Wesson's Model 21. For reference I've shot some images of my Smith & Wesson Model 19 and my Model 500 so you can see the difference. I believe the Model 19 is what you posted a picture of. So here is the same gun compared to a .500 Magnum. I've also taken pictures of the ammunition side by side for further comparison.

1-4.jpg

2-3.jpg

3-3.jpg

4-2.jpg
 
overthetop said:
Simply owning one of those RONI: Pistol Rifle system is not illegal in the US. But assembling the system with a pistol without the proper permits is illegal. Eg: owning an AR SBR upper is not illegal, but putting it together with the lower without the permits/stamps will get you thrown in the pokey.
Click to expand...

actually it is, if you own the pistol that goes in it and you own the pistol rifle thing it shows intent to manufacture and they can still fuck you... same as if you own a short barrel and a lower without the permit/stamp they can get you for intent to manufacture or whatever...

thats why if you want to get a short barrel before your stamp comes in you need to get a registered pistol lower to mate with it... then you have a reason to own it besides making an SBR
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top