s8n 14 Posted August 22, 2010 Does anyone have one on an AR? Is it Nj legal? http://store.magpul.com/prod_detail_list/84/url] Just picked up a knock off to mess around with. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shane45 807 Posted August 22, 2010 Knock offs are for airsoft........ so you should be good. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BullzeyeNJ 104 Posted August 22, 2010 The PRS stock is Joisey legal for the AR15 type rifle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JimmyAGR 54 Posted August 22, 2010 I have one on an SPR type. Very nice stock, heavy compared to all other AR stocks. Just make sure if you are mounting a scope get high rings. Here is a pick of mine. Jimmy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted August 28, 2010 I have one and love it..... it is NOT folding... it is NOT collapsible... so you are ok.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mauser88 0 Posted August 29, 2010 The PRS stock is Joisey legal for the AR15 type rifle. Really??? The ATF says otherwise. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted August 29, 2010 The PRS stock is Joisey legal for the AR15 type rifle. Really??? The ATF says otherwise. ? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mauser88 0 Posted August 29, 2010 To: EPS Directorate Subject: Question about legality of Magpul PRS rifle stocks in New Jersey Hello, I have a question about the New Jersey Assault Weapons Ban. As you probably know, the federal ban expired in 1994, but certain states have their own AWB that did not expire. New Jersey's is similar to the federal ban in regards to flash hider, collapsible or telescoping stocks, bayonet lugs, etc on semiautomatic weapons. My question is in regards to a stock for AR-15 type rifles, known as the Magpul PRS. As quoted from Magpul's website, the stock is adjustable for length of pull. "Compared to the A2 stock, the PRS can shorten the LOP by 0.25" or extend it by 0.75"." (http://www.magpul.com/catalog/index.php ... o&cPath=70 _88_90&products_id=193). Does this constitute a collapsible or telescoping stock? It is my understanding that the Magpul PRS is designed to be adjustable only for shooter comfort, not for concealment purposes. The only part of the stock that is adjustable is the butt pad (which will only adjust 1''), whereas the main body of the stock is fixed and does not move. Thank you for your time Their response below: Thank you for contacting the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. The stock in question is a collapsible stock. ATF - Enforcement Programs and Services Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted August 29, 2010 what does NJ have to say about it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mauser88 0 Posted August 29, 2010 what does NJ have to say about it? No one knows. Why not write a letter to the AG's office and find out??? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cylinder Head 22 Posted August 30, 2010 what does NJ have to say about it? No one knows. Why not write a letter to the AG's office and find out??? That will most certainly fall on deaf ears. I have a hard time believing anyone would consider that stock collapsible. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shane45 807 Posted August 30, 2010 It wouldnt be the first time contradictory answers came out of that office. I think they would have a seriously hard time classifying it as collapsable when it uses a full length reciever extension making collapsing impossible. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JonF 79 Posted August 30, 2010 I think they would have a seriously hard time classifying it as collapsable when it uses a full length reciever extension making collapsing impossible. Shane, That's actually a very salient point. Because of the buffer tube it uses, the adjustability of the PRS LOP is more akin to swapping out a buttpad than being a collapsible carbine stock. If not, anyone whose put a limbsaver on thier A1 stock may have created an assault rifle! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FFDP82 4 Posted August 31, 2010 what does NJ have to say about it? No one knows. Why not write a letter to the AG's office and find out??? That will most certainly fall on deaf ears. I have a hard time believing anyone would consider that stock collapsible. That, or the AG will turn around and ban AR clones. You know, just to make sure no one has a collapsible stock. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted September 1, 2010 what does NJ have to say about it? I have had my 308 at the NJ RUN range on several occasions and the agreement there is it is not collapsible and therefore allowed to be used there.. the STOCK is NOT collapsible OR capable of being folded.. the BUTT PLATE is adjustable as is the cheek rest.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IronPriest 2 Posted February 28, 2011 Has anyone found out whether or not this stock is legal? I don't want to find out the hard way and I'd really like to replace the pinned "telescoping" stock on my Ruger SR-556. I have a Magpul CTR on my 12 gauge, which I'd gladly swap with the Ruger, but I couldn't bear to have a 'smith pin the CTR. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vladtepes 1,060 Posted February 28, 2011 Has anyone found out whether or not this stock is legal? I don't want to find out the hard way and I'd really like to replace the pinned "telescoping" stock on my Ruger SR-556. I have a Magpul CTR on my 12 gauge, which I'd gladly swap with the Ruger, but I couldn't bear to have a 'smith pin the CTR. I shoot my rifle equipped with one at a county run range all the time.. never had it questioned.. in NJ the laws are not always clearly black and white... so you have to sometimes take things at face value.. the stock in the purist simplest interpretation does NOT fold or telescope.. the stock is fixed.. as pointed out the cheek rest and butt plate adjust.. NOT the same as an adjustable STOCK in which the whole stock can collapse and aid in concealing.. IMO of course... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pizza Bob 1,488 Posted February 28, 2011 You guys keep trying to inject logic into this argument. Haven't you learned by now that there is no logic to NJ gun laws? The prohibition of collapsible or telescoping stocks has nothing to do with concealability, it has to do with how the weapon looks. If it had to do with concealability there would be length constraints. You can pin a stock at its shortest length or at its longest - both are legal in NJ. I have a hard time believing that ruling came from the BATFE. Usually they will not offer an opinion on something that has no relevance to Federal Law. At this point in time, this is strictly a NJ issue (and other states that still have AWB's). This issue is now between a rock and a hard place. Check with the AG and call attention to something that heretofore was a non-issue, and get exactly the answer you don't want to hear. Or, go ahead and install it and become the test case when someone else calls the AG's office. Think I'll stick with my A2 stock for now. Adios, Pizza Bob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shane45 807 Posted February 28, 2011 FWIW, Im hyper sensitive to NJ law as I have a lot to lose, but I ran a PRS. As I said earlier, I think it will be impossible to prove it as collapsible without a collapsible reciever extension. But hey, as Bob points out, this is NJ!!! 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vladtepes 1,060 Posted March 1, 2011 You guys keep trying to inject logic into this argument. Haven't you learned by now that there is no logic to NJ gun laws? The prohibition of collapsible or telescoping stocks has nothing to do with concealability, it has to do with how the weapon looks. If it had to do with concealability there would be length constraints. You can pin a stock at its shortest length or at its longest - both are legal in NJ. I have a hard time believing that ruling came from the BATFE. Usually they will not offer an opinion on something that has no relevance to Federal Law. At this point in time, this is strictly a NJ issue (and other states that still have AWB's). This issue is now between a rock and a hard place. Check with the AG and call attention to something that heretofore was a non-issue, and get exactly the answer you don't want to hear. Or, go ahead and install it and become the test case when someone else calls the AG's office. Think I'll stick with my A2 stock for now. Adios, Pizza Bob but even if you completely ignore the conceal ability factor.. the stock itself does not "telescope" the stock itself does not move.. you are essentially rolling the dice with a lot of stuff in this state.. but I will continue to be of the opinion that the stock doesn't move.. because it doesn't.. of course that opinion is not worth much.. lol as it is just my opinion.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PK90 3,569 Posted March 1, 2011 If you have to ask, then don't buy one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JimmyAGR 54 Posted March 1, 2011 Run a couple of PRS stocks on my rifles, no questions ever asked. That includes law enforcement neighbors, but hey this is NJ. Do what you feel comfortable with, but please don't start calling the SP, or any other entity. Like Bob said if you are worried an A2 is a fine stock. My 2 cents and worth what you pay for it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IronPriest 2 Posted March 1, 2011 Better to ask than not ask. But my mistake was in trying to inject logic into NJ gun laws. If I decide to spend the money and you guys read about me in the paper, well, then, we'll all know one more thing we can't put on our ARs. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pizza Bob 1,488 Posted March 1, 2011 Better to ask than not ask. No, it's not. All you do is call unwanted attention to the issue. It's like PK90 said - If you have to ask, don't buy one. Aside from the fact that the AWB laws make no sense, the problem, specifically, with the stock issue is that there is no definition of what a "collapsible or telescoping" stock is. I agree wholeheartedly with those on here that use the buffer tube as a "yardstick", but, again, there is no basis in law. While the PRS stock does not telescope in the truest sense of the word, it could be construed to be collapsible - albeit only an inch, but collapsible nonetheless. Yes it is ridiculous, but that is the state in which we live. Personally, I'd be pretty comfortable with the PRS stock because I think it is easily defensible, but again, that is that pesky logic talking again. Just stop calling anyone but your personal attorney. You call the local or state police, or the AG's office and you're liable to get 3 or 4 different answers to the same question and all of them are worth what you paid for them. Adios, Pizza Bob 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dan 177 Posted March 1, 2011 Just stop calling anyone but your personal attorney. You call the local or state police, or the AG's office and you're liable to get 3 or 4 different answers to the same question and all of them are worth what you paid for them. +1 Bob The laws are written to be ambiguous for the state's own self-interests. When dealing with anything that raises a doubt in your mind, put yourself in a gun-hating DA's shoes and go at it from their perspective. Do you think they could convince a jury that a little buttplate moving 1" back and forth is defined as a "collapsible, folding,or telescoping stock"? As the gun-hating DA, wouldn't you feel kinda silly trying to pass that hogwash? If you still feel nervous, get a plain Jane fixed stock, period. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vladtepes 1,060 Posted March 1, 2011 No, it's not. All you do is call unwanted attention to the issue. It's like PK90 said - If you have to ask, don't buy one. Aside from the fact that the AWB laws make no sense, the problem, specifically, with the stock issue is that there is no definition of what a "collapsible or telescoping" stock is. I agree wholeheartedly with those on here that use the buffer tube as a "yardstick", but, again, there is no basis in law. While the PRS stock does not telescope in the truest sense of the word, it could be construed to be collapsible - albeit only an inch, but collapsible nonetheless. Yes it is ridiculous, but that is the state in which we live. Personally, I'd be pretty comfortable with the PRS stock because I think it is easily defensible, but again, that is that pesky logic talking again. Just stop calling anyone but your personal attorney. You call the local or state police, or the AG's office and you're liable to get 3 or 4 different answers to the same question and all of them are worth what you paid for them. Adios, Pizza Bob I will forever stand by the fact that the stock itself is %100 fixed.. the stock does not "telescope" as the law restricts... the law does not define "telescope" so I would have to assume that the term "telescoping or folding stock" means quite literally what it says.. a stock (not butt plate, not cheek rest).. but a stock that folds or telescopes.. the PRS does not do either.. and I will leave it at that to avoid an endless circle of debate.. but even with that said I respect and get what you are saying.. that someone (politician, untrained LEO, reporter, etc..) untrained in firearms might assume that the PRS is a telescoping stock.. but there comes a point where you have to do what you think is right.. all of my guns and accessories are %100 legal as defined by NJ and federal law.. everyone I know in real life involved in the firearms community (FFLs, COUNTY range officers, NRA instructors, etc..)has never so much as batted an eye at that gun (or stock)... that coupled with the literal interpretation of "folding or telescoping stock" leads me to believe that my use of the rifle and stock setup is NJ compliant.. also.. just to add.. in the AG guidelines for AW charges there is the following major catch... IV. Purpose and Effect of these Guidelines In enforcing this law, prosecutors and police should remember that an assault firearms offense requires proof that the defendant knows he or she possesses an assault firearm, e.g., that the defendant knows that the firearm is "substantially identical" to one of the named assault weapons. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vladtepes 1,060 Posted March 1, 2011 Do you think they could convince a jury that a little buttplate moving 1" back and forth is defined as a "collapsible, folding,or telescoping stock"? no I do not.. +1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DevsAdvocate 112 Posted March 1, 2011 +1 Bob The laws are written to be ambiguous for the state's own self-interests. When dealing with anything that raises a doubt in your mind, put yourself in a gun-hating DA's shoes and go at it from their perspective. Do you think they could convince a jury that a little buttplate moving 1" back and forth is defined as a "collapsible, folding,or telescoping stock"? As the gun-hating DA, wouldn't you feel kinda silly trying to pass that hogwash? If you still feel nervous, get a plain Jane fixed stock, period. You probably can. You have a stock with a minimum length and can be extended beyond that incrementally. How is that fundamentally different from a 6-position CAR Stock? Sure, it's only a small piece, but you can change the weapon length at will. Pretty sure a DA with a sexual fetish involving the mass-arrest of gun owners will make the case. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vladtepes 1,060 Posted March 1, 2011 You probably can. You have a stock with a minimum length and can be extended beyond that incrementally. How is that fundamentally different from a 6-position CAR Stock? Sure, it's only a small piece, but you can change the weapon length at will. Pretty sure a DA with a sexual fetish involving the mass-arrest of gun owners will make the case. In a 6 position CAR stock the STOCK moves.. In a PRS stock the butt plate and cheek riser move.. there is a pretty substantial difference.. it is like saying "pistol grip" and trying to count pistol grip twice when utilized with a forward grip, but because a pistol grip is a grip that is conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon.. only the first grip counts... you can say "no telescoping stocks" but regardless of how firearms hating the government is.. you can not make something into something it is not.. a butt plate is a plate attached to the back of a stock.. by definition they are not the same item a butt plate can not be a stock.. because by definition it is not.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites