
The advantage is that it's not scary and evil. Really. :icon_tongIt may sound like I'm answering my own question, but does the grip illustrated have an advantage over the pistol grip, or is that just to meet the requirments of the ban?
Yes that is accurate, but, California also banned some lower recievers by name which means that even if he had set the rifle up in that same configuration, but used a listed lower reciever as per the ban, the rifle would be considered an "Assault Weapon"One serious error that man makes is "off-list" lowers... California comprehensively banned ANY AR-15 pattern rifle with the "evil" features. What makes that legal is the stock type.
and would be illegal (for the most) part to own. Thanks to the Harrot v. Kings County decision, California cannot ban lower recievers by type (e.g. AR-15, AK-47) they can only ban by combination of feautures and by specific makes and models on a publicized, state-maintained list. Category III assault weapons are defined by characteristic features listed in PC 12276.1:
RIFLES:
A semiautomatic centerfire rifle capable of accepting detachable magazines and any of:
▪ a pistol grip protruding conspicuously below the weapon’s action
▪ a thumbhole stock or folding or telescopic stock;
▪ a flash suppressor, grenade launcher or flare launcher;
▪ a forward pistol grip.
A semiautomatic centerfire rifle with overall length of less than 30 inches;
A semiautomatic centerfire rifle with a fixed magazine holding over 10 rounds.
It may sound like I'm answering my own question, but does the grip illustrated have an advantage over the pistol grip, or is that just to meet the requirments of the ban?