Telescoping vs adjustable stock clarification please

[Chip 0]

The assault weapon checklist says a "folding or telescoping stock" counts as a scary feature that you cannot have more than one of. Where is the line drawn between telescoping and adjustable? It seems to me that if the shortest adjustable length is still above the minimum 26", it should be OK. But I know that logic and gun laws don't exactly mix in this state, so I figured I'd double check before I tried to order something.

 

Specifically, I'm looking at this. The description says the total length with the stock completely collapsed is 30", which should be fine. Would this still count as "telescoping" for the AW checklist? If so, does anybody happen to know if a non-adjustable M4 stock will bolt on to this carbine?

[Melgamatic 66]

There is no good definition, nor agreement on what they meant. I can tell you, however, that the stock in your link is what most people seem to think is covered, and would be an evil thing in NJ. This is the kind of stock that we spend thread after thread discussing how to pin most effectively / aesthetically.

[hmmjak 2]

this reminds of that one thread that was on here and the court case that brought up the same argument

 

http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php?/topic/24703-magpul-ubrdoes-this-need-to-be-pinned/page__view__findpost__p__325864

[DevsAdvocate 112]

Technically, a Magpul UBR does not telescope. So it would technically be NJ legal.

[david8613 69]

Technically, a Magpul UBR does not telescope. So it would technically be NJ legal.

 

are you sure? it awfully too cool for nj!

[JackDaWack 2,895]

Look up the definition of telescoping, if it does not meet the definition it is not telescoping it is adjustable, however, if you choose not to pin an adjustable stock(not telescoping) be prepared to fight it in court... Telescoping is something that folds into itself...however nj does not define it and you are taking a risk and if caught would have to prove it does not telescope. Something probably beatable in court, but that's if you want to risk it.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Look up the definition of telescoping, if it does not meet the definition it is not telescoping it is adjustable, however, if you choose not to pin an adjustable stock(not telescoping) be prepared to fight it in court... Telescoping is something that folds into itself...however nj does not define it and you are taking a risk and if caught would have to prove it does not telescope. Something probably beatable in court, but that's if you want to risk it.

 

+1 I agree with that for the most part..

 

with the law the situation is simple to me.. if the law defines something (like the do with the word pistol grip) then you read the law and definition as it is written.. if there is no clear definition established then one must utilize logic and look at the general accepted definition of a word and apply it to the reading of the law..

 

"telescoping stock" for example.. I run a Magpul PRS stock.. the STOCK does not move.. the butt plate is adjustable.. but the stock itself is fixed.. legal IMO..

[intercooler 41]

Well using that logic, an ak underfolder is legal. It folds, not telescope

[compujas 21]

Well using that logic, an ak underfolder is legal. It folds, not telescope

 

Folding is specifically called out as not legal. See OP.