Magpul UBR...does this need to be pinned?

[Dan 177]

Sorry to throw a wrench into your logic, but the problem with your statement is that 2C:39-1 says "Avtomat Kalashnikov type semi-automatic firearms", but "Colt AR-15 and CAR-15 series". It is funny how some guns, including the M1 carbine, use type, while others are specifically named. Unfortunately, it makes the whole situation even muddier, and more open to AG interpretation.

 

It doesn't matter guys. They like things being "muddy", as they can twist and contort their "guilty before innocent" laws to do their bidding.

 

Living in NJ, there are tons of ways simply being found in possession of a gun opens you up to potential prosecution even if you are 100% legal operating under the exemptions. For instance, transporting a handgun to the range... So what if the cop doesn't believe you are really going to or from a range, place of business, or for service or repair... guess what... "tell it to the judge" and you could face illegal possession charges and have to prove you were operating under transport exemptions in court.

 

Same goes nearly any SA gun that the cop or prosecutor thinks cosmetically "gee that looks like it might be illegal". This is the reality we live with.

 

As people get prosecuted under these arcane laws...case by case juries try to decide whether or not people get thrown in jail for 10 years based on ridiculous exemptions, ambiguous prohibitions, insufficient definitions, and just plain absurd statutes. Until we can challenge the constitutionality of these laws directly, and have them stricken from the statutes... things will stay this way.

 

NJ's gun laws are like quantum physics... gun owners are always in a state of being legal and illegal simultaneously until observed by the legal system.... where one or the other will lock in.

[Joelk 61]

I agree Dan. The part that sucks the most is that if they decide to go after you, for whatever reason, even if you are completely legal and eventually are proved so in court, you may well still go broke defending yourself

[The Dark Knight 11]

not sure what your obsession is with the AK variant discussion.. but..

 

the law says "telescoping stock" but then the law does not define "telescoping stock" so the only recourse is to take those words and define them.. to obtain a meaning.. the term "telescoping stock" to anyone not looking to get around something would basically describe the workings of MOST AR style stocks..

 

"substantially identical" IS fortunately defined so no need to guess... and a NJ compliant Saiga, WASR, etc.. is not substantially identical as it is literally described.. doesn't matter how much it LOOKS like one.. because LOOKS is a very subjective thing... unlike function.. which can be more clearly defined..

 

I mean the end result is of little consequence to me as I should be out of this state for good within the next 4 months.. but I fail to see the leverage you create for the firearms community as a whole (yourself included) by implying that the reach of the ban effects more guns than it actually does.. you assume a bizarre interpretation for someone who should be "pro gun"... but really keep crying from the rooftops about how they are assault weapons.. and maybe just maybe if you yell loud enough they will hear you... maybe they will get a little looser with the interpretations and ban one of your favorite guns..

 

we have this discussion time and time again.. agree or disagree.. the standard has been simple..

 

is the gun banned by name?

is the gun substantially identical as defined by law?

 

if the answer to both of those questions is NO then the gun in NJ is legal.. it is honestly irregardless as to what the intent was.. it doesn't matter that the evil features game was ONLY supposed to apply to clones of the list... because all of that has fallen by the wayside.. and now at this point in NJ.. (with the exception of the M1 carbine nonsense..) if it is a semi auto.. and has too many evil features.. it is OUT.. not too many features.. you are good to go.. again.. I do not believe that was the original intention.. but you and I both KNOW that is how business is done now..

 

Wow, what a lengthy post. Seems like you took the bait....and damn I hooked a big one!

 

Come on man, a little touchy, aren't you? This is like the third time you've given me this rant. Why so heated so fast?

[vladtepes 1,060]

Why so heated so fast?

 

I think you answered your own question.. lol

 

This is like the third time you've given me this rant.

[DevsAdvocate 112]

Vlad, as much as it pains me to agree with DK..I think you are missing his point. The VERY SAME THINGS that keep a Saiga, WASR, Arsenal, or other "Legal" variant not Substantially Identical to the Dreaded "Avtomat Kalashnikov" were deemed NOT TO COUNT when it came to the Auto-Ordnance "Carbine" We can play the semantics game all we want, but the bald, and pure truth is, the AG can declare your Saigs, WASRS and whatever other rifle Instantly Unlawful on a WHIM. Sorry Brother, but you can on one hand say "What it;s called doesnt matter" then in the next, Argue that it Does. Auto ORdnance was an opportunistic break for her..if it hadnt been brought directly to her attention, it would have flown under the radar, and we'd actually have something to work on lessening the AWB. That however isnt what happened...With the IO corp rifles, the took a BRAND NEW MANUFACTURER..an American manufacturer at that, and declared theit products "Substantially Identical" to a "Named Weapon" and since nobody answerd the challenge I put here before. Cheyenne Mountain no longet carries Saigs, or any other "AK" because they were told by NJSP that there was NO Variant including Saiga and WASR that is acceptable under the NJ State AWB. Will we win the court battle in the end? Almost certainly..however at what cost? How many people will have their proeprty taken and destroyed, or lose it to forced sales out of state before it's won?

 

The same can be said for AR-15s too. What's the big deal then? We're all criminals in the eyes of the state of NJ.

 

As for the Auto Ordinance "Carbine", has there been any official directive issued from that or no? I've asked this before and no one could really send me the link.

[Cylinder Head 22]

Back on topic, love the verdict, and I want the name of that lawyer.

[Zed's_Dead 16]

Back on topic, love the verdict, and I want the name of that lawyer.

 

Joseph Chiarello out of Millville.

[KpdPipes 388]

The same can be said for AR-15s too. What's the big deal then? We're all criminals in the eyes of the state of NJ.

 

As for the Auto Ordinance "Carbine", has there been any official directive issued from that or no? I've asked this before and no one could really send me the link.

 

The Autorization letter from NJSP FIU was rescinded on the direct order of the AG.. I havenews for you too, the guy that issued the original Order, is going to be retiring before too long, and the one who will take his place is the guy that most likely went to the AG with the Authorizarion letter in the first place.

 

Oh and Vlad, Cheyenne was told by someone from NJSP not to carry any AK variant, and informed that they are "All Illegal".

[DevsAdvocate 112]

The Autorization letter from NJSP FIU was rescinded on the direct order of the AG.. I havenews for you too, the guy that issued the original Order, is going to be retiring before too long, and the one who will take his place is the guy that most likely went to the AG with the Authorizarion letter in the first place.

 

Oh and Vlad, Cheyenne was told by someone from NJSP not to carry any AK variant, and informed that they are "All Illegal".

 

Wait, so the guy who wanted to allow us AO Carbines is going to take over? That's good, right?

[The Dark Knight 11]

Oh and Vlad, Cheyenne was told by someone from NJSP not to carry any AK variant, and informed that they are "All Illegal".

 

Yeah, see, we seem to have a big lapse in communication here between certain members of the forum and the NJSP. I hope the two parties get that sorted out before anyone finds themselves in some serious ****.

 

Hey guys, downvote me all you want. I don't care. Here you have a law enforcement officer giving you "inside information" telling you that high-ranking NJSP firearms unit personnel told an FFL that "All AK variants are illegal" so take that however you'd like. Sure vlad's got a nice little rant to copy/paste (or so i hope) and I know you want to believe it and for it to be true. Hey I'd like it if Santa Claus was real too but that won't change the fact that it was my dad eatin those cookies on Christmas Eve all those years.

 

All I'm saying is, don't shoot the messenger.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Yeah, see, we seem to have a big lapse in communication here between certain members of the forum and the NJSP. I hope the two parties get that sorted out before anyone finds themselves in some serious ****.

 

look.. maybe we got off on the wrong foot or something.. but the reality is you know no more than I do.. we read the laws.. we go to gun shops.. we fill out the paperwork.. and go through the motions.. following the laws and guidelines as best as possible..

 

Do I want to be the "AK variant test case" no.. of course not.. especially since as I stated I am moving.. but back to the point at hand.. someone (I do not recall who) was posting about how "the list" was EXCLUSIVELY what was banned.. and the evil features game ONLY applied to clones of things on the list.. meaning that guns like an ACR are not even covered and therefore can have evil features.. I would not personally take that chance.. To me it seems we have reached a point where maybe for convenience sake we just use the "evil features" game for ALL semi auto rifles.. while I do not think that was the intention that seems to be the current NJ rule of thumb..

 

but at the end of the day this is where I am at...

 

I.. along with others.. have purchased Saigas and other similar variants..

I ONLY buy firearms that can be purchased in NJ from licensed dealers...

I have not accessorized any of them in a manor which would make them substantially identical to said banned guns as defined by law..

 

At the end of the day I am just a firearms enthusiast trying to enjoy the hobby.. like you are.. I have by my greatest estimation done nothing illegal..

[KpdPipes 388]

Wait, so the guy who wanted to allow us AO Carbines is going to take over? That's good, right?

No, the opposite. The Lt in charge of the unit is actually pretty pro-gun..althouygh some here will go to their graves believing the opposite. he's gone out of his way to make calls to assist FFL's stay in the right, and be on time with recerts, and license renewals. HE is the one who issued the Authorization letter after recieving Documentation from AO that cause him to determine that it met the burden needed statutorily and within the guiselines of the Administrative Code to NOT be "Sunstantially IDentical" to the named firearm, namely the US Carbine Cal .30. He ALSO fielded most of the Mother May I calls and reassured people that yes, the Authorization letter was reakl. it was His Subordinate that went to the AGand go the autnorization rescinded. The Lt will be retiring in the next couple of years, and that subordinate is the one taking over in all likelihood.

[KpdPipes 388]

Yeah, see, we seem to have a big lapse in communication here between certain members of the forum and the NJSP. I hope the two parties get that sorted out before anyone finds themselves in some serious ****.

 

Hey guys, downvote me all you want. I don't care. Here you have a law enforcement officer giving you "inside information" telling you that high-ranking NJSP firearms unit personnel told an FFL that "All AK variants are illegal" so take that however you'd like. Sure vlad's got a nice little rant to copy/paste (or so i hope) and I know you want to believe it and for it to be true. Hey I'd like it if Santa Claus was real too but that won't change the fact that it was my dad eatin those cookies on Christmas Eve all those years.

 

All I'm saying is, don't shoot the messenger.

Stop right there pardner....

That Info came 2nd hand through 2 other FFL's from Cheyenne Mtn, NOT NJSP to me. Cheyenne is telling other FFL's that is what NJSP told them..whether that is the case or not, and they are just playing CYA and Blaming it on NJSP i dont know....OR it could be the exact type of Mis-communication we've discissed already, where the NJSP said one thing ( Avtomat kalashnikovs are all illegal) and Cheyenne took it to mean ANY Rifled Configured that way is Illegal. I've found that FIU has a tendency (Other than their boss) to be VERY literal when you ask them a question..I once got some very screwed up information from them because I asked a relatively simple question in the wrong manner.

[Anselmo 87]

Everything is clear besides the car accident part. If the guy hit the other guy, why didn't they both stop, call the PD, and swap insurance info? Something else might be going on there... like the Caddy "victim" perhaps was acting violent and the GG decided to get out of dodge while calling 911?

 

If we seperate out the car accident part... and fast forward to the GG having his gun at his side (not aiming it at the "victim") on his OWN property, that is entirely legal under the firearms statutes. I suppose if the "victim" and his wife both said he was aiming the gun at them, I guess the cops had no choice but to arrest and let the courts figure it out.

 

I'm also confused as to why the cops searched his home. He must have consented or they got a warrant as since this all occurred outside the home, there was no legal cause for the police to search the home that I can think of. Never consent and STFU until you get your lawyer, I'm betting he broke these cardinal rules.

 

This is a good example of a previous thread where we discussed HD with a gun. There is almost no benefit in defending your home on the outside when your family is safe inside. Best to lock the doors, family in safe area taking cover, gun at your side in a defensive position calling while calling 911.

 

Also, this kind of crap is why I have CCTV cameras at strategic locations. Any crap goes down around my house, I know where to stand to be recorded. Cheaper than going to court and playing the he said she said game.

 

Sounds like GG was brandishing outside his house. That would give cause to search the house.

 

This case, getting back to the OP, confirms my thoughts that you don't want a Nappen for criminal defense. You want a good defense attorney and a good expert witness.

 

In the end, the jury interprets these vague laws. These questions like is the stock telescoping or adjustable are answered by a jury.

 

I don't understand why everyone seems to jump on the side of the GG. It would be very easy to see someone here write that they got side swiped in their Cadillac by some old pick up truck that, despite horn honking and yelling, wouldn't pull over and attempted to escape the situation. Followed the guy home and he runs in the house and comes out with a gun. This is definitely a story with two sides.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Stop right there pardner....

That Info came 2nd hand through 2 other FFL's from Cheyenne Mtn, NOT NJSP to me. Cheyenne is telling other FFL's that is what NJSP told them..whether that is the case or not, and they are just playing CYA and Blaming it on NJSP i dont know....OR it could be the exact type of Mis-communication we've discissed already, where the NJSP said one thing ( Avtomat kalashnikovs are all illegal) and Cheyenne took it to mean ANY Rifled Configured that way is Illegal. I've found that FIU has a tendency (Other than their boss) to be VERY literal when you ask them a question..I once got some very screwed up information from them because I asked a relatively simple question in the wrong manner.

 

 

+1

[Pew Pew Plates 358]

[Zed's_Dead 16]

Sounds like GG was brandishing outside his house. That would give cause to search the house.

 

This case, getting back to the OP, confirms my thoughts that you don't want a Nappen for criminal defense. You want a good defense attorney and a good expert witness.

 

In the end, the jury interprets these vague laws. These questions like is the stock telescoping or adjustable are answered by a jury.

 

I don't understand why everyone seems to jump on the side of the GG. It would be very easy to see someone here write that they got side swiped in their Cadillac by some old pick up truck that, despite horn honking and yelling, wouldn't pull over and attempted to escape the situation. Followed the guy home and he runs in the house and comes out with a gun. This is definitely a story with two sides.

 

I'm with you right up until the part about following the person home. We are not the police...we don't have any authority to pull someone over no matter how much we honk or yell. If you get hit by another car, the safest, smartest thing to do is get the plate number and call 911. You have insurance for just these kind of incidents. Following someone to their home, especially in a manner that makes it clear you are angry is just a recipe for disaster, for either or both parties.

[Anselmo 87]

I'm with you right up until the part about following the person home. We are not the police...we don't have any authority to pull someone over no matter how much we honk or yell. If you get hit by another car, the safest, smartest thing to do is get the plate number and call 911. You have insurance for just these kind of incidents. Following someone to their home, especially in a manner that makes it clear you are angry is just a recipe for disaster, for either or both parties.

 

I can fully agree with you.

[Dan 177]

Sounds like GG was brandishing outside his house. That would give cause to search the house.

This case, getting back to the OP, confirms my thoughts that you don't want a Nappen for criminal defense. You want a good defense attorney and a good expert witness.

 

In the end, the jury interprets these vague laws. These questions like is the stock telescoping or adjustable are answered by a jury.

 

I don't understand why everyone seems to jump on the side of the GG. It would be very easy to see someone here write that they got side swiped in their Cadillac by some old pick up truck that, despite horn honking and yelling, wouldn't pull over and attempted to escape the situation. Followed the guy home and he runs in the house and comes out with a gun. This is definitely a story with two sides.

 

I don't buy that. There are no "brandishing laws" that I'm aware of in NJ. He was charged with aggravated assault, which implies he intended to cause harm to the other guy with a deadly weapon.

 

Even so, aggravated assault outside the persons home on the lawn, down the street, in the next town, does not give the police PC needed to search the accused house. They would have to get a warrant as to why they have PC that there is some type of criminal activity in the home and what it is. The HG was not illegal, unless it came up stolen on a serial # search. So what PC does a cop have to either immediately do a legal warrant-less search (would have to see or hear directly the criminal activity in the home), or even to get a warrant from a judge?

[Vlad G 345]

Small thread drift here, but if someone is aggressively following you and you don't know why, don't bring them to your house and family, even if there are guns there. Have them follow you to the police station. I'm all for personal responsibility and all that, but right now the guy fallowing you may not know where you live. Why change that?

[vladtepes 1,060]

They would have to get a warrant as to why they have PC that there is some type of criminal activity in the home and what it is

 

 

unless it went as simply as this...

 

insert a ton of stress and confusion..

in the heat of all this the following occurs..

 

officer: "we understand you were just trying to be careful and protect yourself and your family.. but for your safety and ours we would like to know if I have your permission to take a quick look inside your home.. just to be sure there are no other weapons or threats present"

 

good guy: "oh well I guess that makes sense? you can just come in and look around for a second"

 

in high stress situations where people feel overwhelmed they do not always make the best choices.. sometimes questions seem more innocent than they actually are.. you know there are a ton of factors..

[Dan 177]

unless it went as simply as this...

 

insert a ton of stress and confusion..

in the heat of all this the following occurs..

 

officer: "we understand you were just trying to be careful and protect yourself and your family.. but for your safety and ours we would like to know if I have your permission to take a quick look inside your home.. just to be sure there are no other weapons or threats present"

 

good guy: "oh well I guess that makes sense? you can just come in and look around for a second"

 

in high stress situations where people feel overwhelmed they do not always make the best choices.. sometimes questions seem more innocent than they actually are.. you know there are a ton of factors..

 

Yup, that's what i said earlier, that the guy must have given consent one way or another for the search. I'm sure the cops made it sound like a friendly game of Hungry Hungry Hippo..

 

- Keep silent

- Do not consent to anything

- Call your lawyer

[KpdPipes 388]

I don't buy that. There are no "brandishing laws" that I'm aware of in NJ. He was charged with aggravated assault, which implies he intended to cause harm to the other guy with a deadly weapon.

 

Even so, aggravated assault outside the persons home on the lawn, down the street, in the next town, does not give the police PC needed to search the accused house. They would have to get a warrant as to why they have PC that there is some type of criminal activity in the home and what it is. The HG was not illegal, unless it came up stolen on a serial # search. So what PC does a cop have to either immediately do a legal warrant-less search (would have to see or hear directly the criminal activity in the home), or even to get a warrant from a judge?

 

Pointing a firearm at someone Is considered Agg Assault, Nj has that in place of the separate "Brandishing" statute other states have. as for the rest, there isnt enough information, although the fact that it wasnt tossed completely tells me there had to be some sort of consent, or other articulable reason to make the search.

[DevsAdvocate 112]

It is telescoping, so, yes, I would say it still needs to be pinned.

 

Disagree, it's method of operation does not meet the definition of 'telescoping'.

[bbk 188]

Disagree, it's method of operation does not meet the definition of 'telescoping'.

 

1. Holy dead-thread

2. I still think you're wrong.

 

First, the definition of telescope. Boldfaced being the most relative.

 

 

tel·e·scope

   [tel-uh-skohp] Show IPA noun, adjective, verb, -scoped, -scop·ing. noun 1. an optical instrument for making distant objects appear larger and therefore nearer. One of the two principal forms (refracting telescope) consists essentially of an objective lens set into one end of a tube and an adjustable eyepiece or combination of lenses set into the other end of a tube that slides into the first and through which the enlarged object is viewed directly; the other form (reflecting telescope) has a concave mirror that gathers light from the object and focuses it into an adjustable eyepiece or combination of lenses through which the reflection of the object is enlarged and viewed. Compare radio telescope. 2. ( initial capital letter ) Astronomy . the constellation Telescopium. adjective 3. consisting of parts that fit and slide one within another.

verb (used with object) 4. to force together, one into another, or force into something else, in the manner of the sliding tubes of a jointed telescope. 5. to shorten or condense; compress: to telescope the events of five hundred years into one history lecture. verb (used without object) 6. to slide together, or into something else, in the manner of the tubes of a jointed telescope. 7. to be driven one into another, as railroad cars in a collision. 8. to be or become shortened or condensed.

 

[Source]

 

The official Magpul UBR installation and usage manual then states under the "Stock Mission and Information" section (p.1):

"Seven-position length-of-pull (LOP) adjustment is quickly executed with gross motor movement while the integral preset system allows direct access to a preferred position"

 

Under the "Usage Instructions" section (p. 7):

"Fully depress the Release Latch and pull the stock rearward to extend, or push stock forward to collapse."

 

The word telescoping isn't used officially, of course, but from what I can tell according to the official Magpul UBR manual, the operation of the UBR indeed functions in a telescoping motion, as the action of the stock does indeed become "shortened [and]or condensed."

Further, the UBR does in fact use a [buffer] tube, similar to a telescope, and, in the adjective/describing sense, the UBR consists of sliding parts similar to how a telescope functions. Add in that with manual motion the parts can shorten or condense, it seems pretty obvious that the UBR does indeed have a telescoping function.

[Source for Magpul UBR]

 

I'm not saying I like the rule, but if you want to hang yourself with it, go for it. I won't take my chances, and I can't in good faith say that this stock is completely safe-- instead I would side with safety.

 

If you want to argue semantics, argue with a lawyer or the state, IMO. Arguing this on a forum, as proven, gets this no where. If you're just pursuing general discourse, then be weary of what you say because some poor soul might go out and slap this on their rifle. And even if it's proven in court that they're not guilty, they'll be in a bad spot all because of one ideology found on some forum.

 

Mind you, I'm not saying to not argue this topic-- it's good discourse for all of us, newbies, and, if they're reading, the antis because it takes discourse to actually learn and progress from stupid and archaic legislation that doesn't make sense. I'm simply saying that doling out advice is not the right step. Of course, I'm not completely blaming you if the theoretical situation were to happen because anybody who takes advice on any forum or from any one source is kind of asking for "IT".

[DevsAdvocate 112]

1. Holy dead-thread

2. I still think you're wrong.

 

First, the definition of telescope. Boldfaced being the most relative.

 

 

tel·e·scope

   [tel-uh-skohp] Show IPA noun, adjective, verb, -scoped, -scop·ing. noun 1. an optical instrument for making distant objects appear larger and therefore nearer. One of the two principal forms (refracting telescope) consists essentially of an objective lens set into one end of a tube and an adjustable eyepiece or combination of lenses set into the other end of a tube that slides into the first and through which the enlarged object is viewed directly; the other form (reflecting telescope) has a concave mirror that gathers light from the object and focuses it into an adjustable eyepiece or combination of lenses through which the reflection of the object is enlarged and viewed. Compare radio telescope. 2. ( initial capital letter ) Astronomy . the constellation Telescopium. adjective 3. consisting of parts that fit and slide one within another.

verb (used with object) 4. to force together, one into another, or force into something else, in the manner of the sliding tubes of a jointed telescope. 5. to shorten or condense; compress: to telescope the events of five hundred years into one history lecture. verb (used without object) 6. to slide together, or into something else, in the manner of the tubes of a jointed telescope. 7. to be driven one into another, as railroad cars in a collision. 8. to be or become shortened or condensed.

 

[Source]

 

The official Magpul UBR installation and usage manual then states under the "Stock Mission and Information" section (p.1):

"Seven-position length-of-pull (LOP) adjustment is quickly executed with gross motor movement while the integral preset system allows direct access to a preferred position"

 

Under the "Usage Instructions" section (p. 7):

"Fully depress the Release Latch and pull the stock rearward to extend, or push stock forward to collapse."

 

The word telescoping isn't used officially, of course, but from what I can tell according to the official Magpul UBR manual, the operation of the UBR indeed functions in a telescoping motion, as the action of the stock does indeed become "shortened [and]or condensed."

Further, the UBR does in fact use a [buffer] tube, similar to a telescope, and, in the adjective/describing sense, the UBR consists of sliding parts similar to how a telescope functions. Add in that with manual motion the parts can shorten or condense, it seems pretty obvious that the UBR does indeed have a telescoping function.

[Source for Magpul UBR]

 

I'm not saying I like the rule, but if you want to hang yourself with it, go for it. I won't take my chances, and I can't in good faith say that this stock is completely safe-- instead I would side with safety.

 

If you want to argue semantics, argue with a lawyer or the state, IMO. Arguing this on a forum, as proven, gets this no where. If you're just pursuing general discourse, then be weary of what you say because some poor soul might go out and slap this on their rifle. And even if it's proven in court that they're not guilty, they'll be in a bad spot all because of one ideology found on some forum.

 

Mind you, I'm not saying to not argue this topic-- it's good discourse for all of us, newbies, and, if they're reading, the antis because it takes discourse to actually learn and progress from stupid and archaic legislation that doesn't make sense. I'm simply saying that doling out advice is not the right step. Of course, I'm not completely blaming you if the theoretical situation were to happen because anybody who takes advice on any forum or from any one source is kind of asking for "IT".

 

Telescoping describes the physical arrangement of the mechanics in shortening the object, not the fact that an object can be shortened. I.E. like a telescope where you have one cylinder sliding within another. This would adequately describe your run of the mill CAR stocks, but not the UBR.

 

Telescoping (mechanics): Telescoping in mechanics describes the movement of one part sliding out from another, lengthening an object (such as a telescope or the lift arm of an aerial work platform) from its rest state. In modern equipment, this is often done by hydraulics. Wiki

 

The UBR utilizes a rail/friction system to adjust the LOP while maintaining a solid cheek rest. There is no telescoping in the design. Collapsible maybe, but the AC guidelines only state the following:

 

"A. semi-automatic rifle that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of the following:

a folding or telescoping stock;

a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;

a bayonet mount;

a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and

a grenade launcher;"

 

It says nothing about adjustable stocks that don't utilize a folding or telescoping action.

 

Honestly: if a PRS is legal, then a UBR is legal. I'd buy one myself if I had the money to throw down for a $250 stock.