New Ruger PC Charger?

[Vandal320]

Remember, it's a derivative of the current PCC which is a takedown model.

For the slow and ignorant like myself, do you need any special regulation licenses or fees to own this?

You can attach the Carbine forend to the PC Charger.

[OlongJohnson]

Remember, it's a derivative of the current PCC which is a takedown model.

For the slow and ignorant like myself, do you need any special regulation licenses or fees to own this?

CA and perhaps other jurisdictions clinging to or "welcoming" new "assault weapon" bans define any semi-auto handgun that does not feed the magazine through the pistol grip as an AW.

In America, it's just a handgun.

[El Cid]

According to this article it takes AR pistol grips. That’s good news for many of us who prefer a more vertical grip.

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/gu...er-9mm-pistol/

[Totem Polar]

You can attach the Carbine forend to the PC Charger.

Serious related question then: if it’s the case that the charger and carbine barrels are interchangeable, could you get hemmed up for having both in taken down form, given that the charger barrel likely fits the carbine?

[GearFondler]

Serious related question then: if it’s the case that the charger and carbine barrels are interchangeable, could you get hemmed up for having both in taken down form, given that the charger barrel likely fits the carbine?

Potentially, I suppose, but it's not any different than having an AR Pistol and an AR Rifle living together... Just don't get caught being stupid.

[awp_101]

Serious related question then: if it’s the case that the charger and carbine barrels are interchangeable, could you get hemmed up for having both in taken down form, given that the charger barrel likely fits the carbine?

IIRC on the original .22 LR Chargers the barrel was different enough to keep it from being a plug and play install on a 10/22. I don't know if that's still true or if the same thought process carried over to the 9mm version. Does he compare the two or just install the carbine barrel on the pistol? I'm guessing he doesn't show putting the pistol barrel on the carbine unless he's already gotten it papered...

[OlongJohnson]

Serious related question then: if it’s the case that the charger and carbine barrels are interchangeable, could you get hemmed up for having both in taken down form, given that the charger barrel likely fits the carbine?

I forget the exact phrasing, but the standard for constructive possession of an SBR is something like "no other reasonable use" for the parts. So if you have a short upper (or even just barrel) and a rifle lower and nothing else, but they're not pinned together, you can get hemmed up. It's designed to keep shitbirds from saying, "Ha ha, you can't get me, they aren't assembled!" when it's obvious they fully intend to assemble an illegal combination at some point. But if you have a long upper and a rifle lower and a short upper and a pistol lower, you're good, even if they're stored or transported all together, because there is an obvious reasonable and legitimate purpose for the short upper and pistol lower to be assembled and used without the rifle lower being involved in any way. Just don't have only the bad combination, and don't put the bad combination parts together, even when nobody's looking.

IANAL. Look up the actual code before taking action. Don't rely on this discussion.

[whomever]

Serious related question then: if it’s the case that the charger and carbine barrels are interchangeable, could you get hemmed up for having both in taken down form, given that the charger barrel likely fits the carbine?

My memory agrees with OlongJohnson, but I just a fair amount of time trying to find an authoritative (.gov, Adam Kraut, ...) site to confirm - if anyone has one please share.

I think it kind of has to work that way:

1)Constructive possession is a thing: you can't just have a complete disassembled Ma Deuce and call it good (IIRC some novel ('Unintended Consequences'??) said it used to be that way, so people would just store their machine gun w/o the firing pin ... but that can't still be true or lots of people would have AR's with an extra hole and a baggie with an FA trigger group).
2)Similarly, it can't be that just possessing an AR rifle and pistol constitutes constructive possession, even disassembled, or every Type 01 gun shop that has rifle and pistol uppers and lowers for sale would be in big trouble.

So I think it has to be OlongJohnson's way - you are OK as long as A)what you have isn't assembled in an illegal way (duh!) AND B)there is a legal way to assemble whatever parts you have.

But I'd love to see an authoritative source.

(There are still gray areas: what if you have a rifle lower and plan to assemble an upper with a 14.4 barrel and pinned/welded 1.5 inch brake? Are you in trouble in the interval between the box with the barrel and brake arriving and when you pin/weld them? Maybe, I just dunno).

[OlongJohnson]

My memory agrees with OlongJohnson, but I just a fair amount of time trying to find an authoritative (.gov, Adam Kraut, ...) site to confirm - if anyone has one please share.

I think it kind of has to work that way:

1)Constructive possession is a thing: you can't just have a complete disassembled Ma Deuce and call it good (IIRC some novel ('Unintended Consequences'??) said it used to be that way, so people would just store their machine gun w/o the firing pin ... but that can't still be true or lots of people would have AR's with an extra hole and a baggie with an FA trigger group).
2)Similarly, it can't be that just possessing an AR rifle and pistol constitutes constructive possession, even disassembled, or every Type 01 gun shop that has rifle and pistol uppers and lowers for sale would be in big trouble.

So I think it has to be OlongJohnson's way - you are OK as long as A)what you have isn't assembled in an illegal way (duh!) AND B)there is a legal way to assemble whatever parts you have.

But I'd love to see an authoritative source.

(There are still gray areas: what if you have a rifle lower and plan to assemble an upper with a 14.4 barrel and pinned/welded 1.5 inch brake? Are you in trouble in the interval between the box with the barrel and brake arriving and when you pin/weld them? Maybe, I just dunno).

There may have been opinions issued since it was published, but this is a good place to start:

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/nationa...s-act-handbook

(There are still gray areas: what if you have a rifle lower and plan to assemble an upper with a 14.4 barrel and pinned/welded 1.5 inch brake? Are you in trouble in the interval between the box with the barrel and brake arriving and when you pin/weld them? Maybe, I just dunno).

That's not gray at all if the parts are in the same location - you're in trouble. Best practice would be to have the parts shipped to the shop that is going to do the work for you. Or assemble a pistol lower before ordering the barrel.

[whomever]

There may have been opinions issued since it was published, but this is a good place to start:

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/nationa...s-act-handbook

Do you have any hints on where in those 220 pages it talks about e.g. possessing AR rifle and pistol upper/lowers and constructive possession. I read the definitions section, searched for 'constructive', 'upper', 'lower', etc w/o finding anything addressing the question.