Is Luth-AR MBA-1 NJ-legal?

[sorvanetzsorv 1]

I decided to start a new thread to make this visible after I posted this question in an older thread where Luth-AR MBA-1 was used in a build. This is a new rifle length stock:

 

http://www.luth-ar.com/the-mba-modular-buttstock-assembly/

 

The length of pull can be adjusted by slightly over an inch, but it requires unscrewing and tightening - see:

 

 

So, it's not as fast to change the length of pull as using a standard M4 adjustable stock. The stock itself is fixed, only the butt plate can be moved out by about an inch. This is very similar to Magpul PRS (but lighter). There have been spirited discussions about the legality of Magpul PRS in NJ - see e.g.

 

http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php/topic/63689-another-is-this-legal-in-nj-question/

 

Magpul PRS has been used in NJ and sold by some NJ FFLs, but I do not know if its legality has ever been challenged. So, what about Luth-AR MBA-1 - is it good to go here?

 

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

Yes

[vjf915 456]

 

The length of pull can be adjusted by slightly over an inch, but it requires unscrewing and tightening - see:

 

 

From what I understand, this is not the deciding factor in whether this stock is legal or not.  If I drill a hole through the adjustment rail of a buffer tube and a telescoping stock, and thread a bolt through it and tighten a nut on the end, that is not permanent, and would not be legal.  This however should be legal because you are adjusting the LOP, not the stock itself.

 

I agree with Bob.

[RobertJames 14]

It is an adjustable stock, not a collapsible stock.  I have one and I like it.  If you decide to get one, get it from Midwest PX.

[Melgamatic 66]

To be fair, we have no idea what level of adjustment is legal in stocks.  It's an unanswered question.

 

The wording in the AG's guidelines is "a folding or telescoping stock" - the letter doesn't give anymore details.

 

We've had many debates about which Magpul stocks are legal, what's the difference between "telescoping" and adjustable, etc.  No actual answers.

 

I think the real answer is that it is legal unless you get into some other kind of trouble, in which case they will add assault weapon violations to the list of charges.

[vladtepes 1,060]

not a lawyer.. but IMO..

 

a STOCK that folds or telescopes is illegal.. think unpinned CTR

a STOCK that is FIXED but has an adjustable butt plate, and or cheek rider is LEGAL.. think PRS

 

the law states that to be illegal the STOCK must fold or telescope... the law does not mention butt plates or cheek risers..

[Melgamatic 66]

the law does not mention butt plates or cheek risers..

 

I agree cheek risers should be OK since they don't change the length of the stock.

 

Otherwise, who knows?

 

It's too bad we can't get them to clarify that they just don't want the rifle to be able to be adjusted below the legal minimum length.  If the adjustability of the rifle's length is 40" to 44", it ought to be legal, since you can't make it too short.  They were clearly trying to prevent people from having telescoping stocks that made rifles illegally short, but screwed up on the wording like all the other parts of the document.

[vladtepes 1,060]

I agree cheek risers should be OK since they don't change the length of the stock.

 

Otherwise, who knows?

 

It's too bad we can't get them to clarify that they just don't want the rifle to be able to be adjusted below the legal minimum length.  If the adjustability of the rifle's length is 40" to 44", it ought to be legal, since you can't make it too short.  They were clearly trying to prevent people from having telescoping stocks that made rifles illegally short, but screwed up on the wording like all the other parts of the document.

 

 

if you can make it longer.. you can then make it shorter.. when laws are not defined I take them at face value... a cheek riser is not a stock.. a butt plate is not a stock.. yes they are attached to the stock.. but they are still not a stock.. a gun stock is the main body of the stock.. the stock in its entirety.. I would be willing to rest my freedom on a fixed stock.. with an adjustable butt plate and cheek riser.. sure easy for me to say since I am no loner in NJ.. but I feel that it is a more than fair argument that reflects both the law literally.. and the spirit of the law which in general exists to limit how compact the gun can be.. the intention of all the AWB features is to limit access to military style weapons.. so again.. a large fixed style stock.. can't really see any issue in that..

[Vlad G 345]

On another note, when playing with that stock I personally found its cheek riser useless, but being to far back for my stance. Some people really like it though