emulzhn 5 Posted May 18, 2014 http://www.slickguns.com/product/century-arms-catamount-fury-ii-shotgun-12-ga-49999-free-shipping thanks all e Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RecessedFilter 222 Posted May 18, 2014 I'd spend the extra 200 bucks and get a real Saiga 12, but that's just me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RobertJames 14 Posted May 18, 2014 I thought pistol grip on a semi-auto shotgun was no good. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
emulzhn 5 Posted May 18, 2014 I'd spend the extra 200 bucks and get a real Saiga 12, but that's just me. is it worth the xtra? thanks Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edwill86 0 Posted May 18, 2014 I thought pistol grip on a semi-auto shotgun was no good. Until NJ gets on top of the loophole a skeleton stock is not a pistol grip. That's legal. I'd still spend the extra on a saiga 12 as well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RecessedFilter 222 Posted May 18, 2014 is it worth the xtra? thanks Without a doubt. The Catamount is basically a chinese-knockoff of the Saiga12 as far as I know it. There is not much more that has to be said. I believe they are imported by Century. Plus it doesn't accept Saiga mags? Pretty lame. So you have to buy your own Catamount mags, and the market for Catamount Fury's is not large. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ogfarmer 138 Posted May 18, 2014 +100 for saiga 12 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vladtepes 1,060 Posted May 18, 2014 Until NJ gets on top of the loophole a skeleton stock is not a pistol grip. That's legal. I'd still spend the extra on a saiga 12 as well. I disagree.. completely.. NJ does not define thumbhole stock.. so therefore it is nonexistent in NJ law.. they do however define pistol grip.. and that is by NJ definition essentially a pistol grip.. take notice that the law does not state a pistol grip stops being a pistol grip if it is attached to the stock.. there is simply no mention of stock at all.. "Pistol grip" means a well defined handle, similar to that found on a handgun, that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon, and which permits the firearm to be held and fired with one hand. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edwill86 0 Posted May 19, 2014 Exactly, the loophole is that they don't define it. They will sooner or later but until then its legal! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PK90 3,569 Posted May 19, 2014 That stock doesn't look like a thumbhole stock, ie. a stock with a hole for the shooter's thumb to go through. I wouldn't try it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vladtepes 1,060 Posted May 19, 2014 Exactly, the loophole is that they don't define it. They will sooner or later but until then its legal! if they dont define it.. then it does not exist.. for it to be a loophole they would have to say something like "thumbhole stock - is any stock in which the stock is one complete piece attached to the rear of the rifle" that would create a loop hole because it would take that obvious pistol grip and turn it into a thumbhole stock by being one piece... since that is not the case then the piece protruding off the gun is judged solely on if it meets the criteria of a pistol grip... ask yourself.. you are in front of a jury.. the prosecutor holds of that gun, which he has already demonized.. and then begins to read the definition of pistol grip.. showing that the thing he is holding meets all that criteria... whats your defense? there isnt one.. because it is a pistol grip as pistol grip is clearly defined in NJ law.. "Pistol grip" means a well defined handle check, similar to that found on a handgun, check that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon, check and which permits the firearm to be held and fired with one hand. check it is.. as defined by NJ law.. a pistol grip.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
emulzhn 5 Posted May 19, 2014 thanks all for the valued opinion. As per my LGS, I believe this remains to be legal. It is obviously a 2nd looker and thus my query. I did consider at first as it just looks "Bad Ass", however will I research more as well as looking into the Saiga. there is certainly more than being a "bad ass".... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vladtepes 1,060 Posted May 19, 2014 thanks all for the valued opinion. As per my LGS, I believe this remains to be legal. It is obviously a 2nd looker and thus my query. I did consider at first as it just looks "Bad Ass", however will I research more as well as looking into the Saiga. there is certainly more than being a "bad ass".... ask him what part of the law makes it not a pistol grip... you have an FFL in this thread telling you its NOT legal... so just being an FFL is moot.. what matters is what the law literally says... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WP22 1,558 Posted May 19, 2014 If I were sitting in that jury box, as a reasonable man, I would not hesitate in calling that a pistol grip. Sorry, but I would stay away from it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edwill86 0 Posted May 19, 2014 Under current NJ law a thumbhole or skeleton stock is legal. That's not the reason to not buy it. The saiga 12 is better Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PK90 3,569 Posted May 19, 2014 Under current NJ law a thumbhole or skeleton stock is legal. That's not the reason to not buy it. The saiga 12 is better Link or Cite please. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edwill86 0 Posted May 19, 2014 Just was reiterating what Vlad had posted in the sticky. Its not defined. The definition of a pistol grip does not include it. I think I'll crawl back to my AK variant corner now thanks guys .... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vladtepes 1,060 Posted May 20, 2014 Just was reiterating what Vlad had posted in the sticky. Its not defined. The definition of a pistol grip does not include it. I think I'll crawl back to my AK variant corner now thanks guys .... I will go slower.. in the eyes of NJ law it is not a thumbhole stock.. because a thumbhole stock does not exist.. because thumbhole stock does not exist it can not be one in the eyes of the law... that leaves you with it being a pistol grip OR not a pistol grip.... since it meets the criteria of being a pistol grip it is by my best estimation a pistol grip.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
halbautomatisch 60 Posted May 20, 2014 if they dont define it.. then it does not exist.. for it to be a loophole they would have to say something like "thumbhole stock - is any stock in which the stock is one complete piece attached to the rear of the rifle" that would create a loop hole because it would take that obvious pistol grip and turn it into a thumbhole stock by being one piece... since that is not the case then the piece protruding off the gun is judged solely on if it meets the criteria of a pistol grip... ask yourself.. you are in front of a jury.. the prosecutor holds of that gun, which he has already demonized.. and then begins to read the definition of pistol grip.. showing that the thing he is holding meets all that criteria... whats your defense? there isnt one.. because it is a pistol grip as pistol grip is clearly defined in NJ law.. "Pistol grip" means a well defined handle check, - that's debateable since it's incorporated into an entire stock, "well defined" is less clear similar to that found on a handgun, check - Very rare to see a skelton stock on a handgun that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon, check - NO, that hand grip is clearly not "beneath" the action of the weapon, it is behind the action of the weapon. The hand grip also is not "protruding conspicuously" since it part of the skeleton stock. and which permits the firearm to be held and fired with one hand. check - Yes it is.. as defined by NJ law.. a pistol grip.. I'm not saying the NJSP or the AG's office will tell anyone it's legal, since they have their own agenda that isn't necessarly based interpreting our laws objectively, as we have seen time and time again with other firearms. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vladtepes 1,060 Posted May 20, 2014 I'm not saying the NJSP or the AG's office will tell anyone it's legal, since they have their own agenda that isn't necessarly based interpreting our laws objectively, as we have seen time and time again with other firearms. the issue is the law does not state that the grip needs to be separate from anything.. it does not state how it can or can not attach to the gun.. for it to be legal it would need to state that if it is connected to the stock it stops being a pistol grip.... remember we are viewing this as gun enthusiasts not law makers... the word similar is extremely vague.. most would argue intentionally vague.. the word beneath implies something is below something else.. it does not need to be directly below it to be beneath.. if you want to split hairs it is not really behind the action either.. technically of course.. the biggest issue is you are resting your freedom on the fact that it is attached to the stock.. "it is not because of this, which is ultimately it being attached to the stock" but the law does not address that.. a pistol grip can be part of a stock by the way it is worded... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites