testtest

Should AR Owners Love the Hellion (or Hate It)?

TacticalPirate said:
The bullpup is the perfect example of the absurdity go SBR rules, if concealability is really the argument then bullpups wouldn't be legal. Reality is that for now they're just forgotten about by the feds.
Click to expand...
Bullpups marketed in the US have to meet the established OAL requirements.

My Aug has the same OAL as a pinned 14.5" AR, but it has a 20" barrel so that's the advantage of the bullpup approach.
 
Talyn said:
Bullpups marketed in the US have to meet the established OAL requirements.

My Aug has the same OAL as a pinned 14.5" AR, but it has a 20" barrel so that's the advantage of the bullpup approach.
Click to expand...
I know what the barrel lengths are. And yet a Tavor X95 is shorter from end to end than an 11.5 inch AR pistol, especially if the brace is extended. It's just absurd that the law's alleged rationale is concealability.
 
Bassbob said:
The law is the law. Manufacturers found a way to comply. There's no going back now. They said 16" barrel or 18" shotgun barrel. That's the law.

By the way, the only bullpups that do anything for me are shotguns.
Click to expand...
Pistol braces were fine with the law as well a week ago. I think you misunderstood my post, I know bullpups have 16 inch barrels, but they're more concealable than an AR pistol.
 
Bassbob said:
No they aren't. AR pistols are 26" or under by definition. The Hellion is 28.25 inches. The IWI TS-12 is 28.34 inches.
Click to expand...
Let me repeat this empirical fact yet again, an 11.5 inch AR (The ideal SBR barrel length according to most) with its brace extended is longer than an X95, I have owned both and know this, it's not up for dispute.

So, if the idea of the SBR is that it is uniquely concealable in the eyes of the NFA, the reality is that it is humorous that a bullpup is not considered an SBR, it mocks the alleged purpose of the law.
 
Last edited:
Take the brace off. Or put a folding unit on. Bullpups have legal length barrels, so their concealability is irrelevant because BY DEFINITION OF THE LAW THEY ARE NOT SBRs or SBSs. I guess you could lobby the ATF to increase the barrel length restrictions or strike that language from the law and only consider OAL.

The ATF considers 26" the cut off for concealability. So a braced pistol has a longer OAL than 26", therefore concealability is NOT the criteria they are basing the new rule change regarding braces on. And it is still unclear that if my UNBRACED AR pistol is 26.25" OAL without a brace, which by legal definition makes it a firearm NOT a pistol, how is this affected by the proposed new rule change.

We have enough ambiguity from the ATF. I'm not sure why you would even pose the idea of adding bullpups into the conversation.
 
Bassbob said:
Take the brace off. Or put a folding unit on. Bullpups have legal length barrels, so their concealability is irrelevant because BY DEFINITION OF THE LAW THEY ARE NOT SBRs or SBSs. I guess you could lobby the ATF to increase the barrel length restrictions or strike that language from the law and only consider OAL.

The ATF considers 26" the cut off for concealability. So a braced pistol has a longer OAL than 26", therefore concealability is NOT the criteria they are basing the new rule change regarding braces on. And it is still unclear that if my UNBRACED AR pistol is 26.25" OAL without a brace, which by legal definition makes it a firearm NOT a pistol, how is this affected by the proposed new rule change.

We have enough ambiguity from the ATF. I'm not sure why you would even pose the idea of adding bullpups into the conversation.
Click to expand...
No offense, but I don't think you're reading.

I know the damn definition of an SBR, you're being incredibly obtuse.

I am saying it's a laughable definition if bullpups are legal inspite of the definition, how this concept makes you unable to comprehend this simple logic makes you look mindlessly argumentatative.

Let me spell it out slowly for you, even an 10.3 inch Saint Pistol without the Maxim Brace extended, is shorter than a Tavor X95, so, if concealability is the concern of the NFA that makes no sense.

There is ZERO to argue here. So stop.
 
TacticalPirate said:
No offense, but I don't think you're reading.

I know the damn definition of an SBR, you're being incredibly obtuse.

I am saying it's a laughable definition if bullpups are legal inspite of the definition, how this concept makes you unable to comprehend this simple logic makes you look mindlessly argumentatative.

Let me spell it out slowly for you, even an 10.3 inch Saint Pistol without the Maxim Brace extended, is shorter than a Tavor X95, so, if concealability is the concern of the NFA that makes no sense.

There is ZERO to argue here. So stop.
Click to expand...

Likewise, this is inarguable.

"Bullpups have legal length barrels, so their concealability is irrelevant because BY DEFINITION OF THE LAW THEY ARE NOT SBRs or SBSs"
 
TacticalPirate said:
Pretty sure describing your behavior accurately isn't name calling.

Retire, you don't know what you're talking about and are being obnoxiously argumentative about an accurate observation that required no argumentative interaction.

You misunderstood the topic and didn't know when to quit.
Click to expand...
Your stellar logic at work again. By that logic me calling you an A-hole would not violate forum rules.
 
Bassbob said:
Your stellar logic at work again. By that logic me calling you an A-hole would not violate forum rules.
Click to expand...
Cool, so in conclusion SBRs are often shorter and more "concealable" than bullpups, making a mockery of the NFA and you're mad on the internet that this was pointed out.
 
Furthermore they are a lot wider and heavier and nowhere near as concealable. You can use a single point sling on an AR pistol and hide it under a coat. You ain't hiding a TS-12 on your person period.
 
TacticalPirate said:
there are threee definition to the word dumb: unable to speak, low intelligence, or unitneitniona haphazard

Cool, so in conclusion SBRs are often shorter and more "concealable" than bullpups, making a mockery of the NFA and you're mad on the internet that this was pointed out.
Click to expand...
The NFA is a mockery without any help from me. Making suggestions of extra stuff they should add to the list is definitely one of the definitions of dumb.
 
Bassbob said:
The NFA is a mockery without any help from me. Making suggestions of extra stuff they should add to the list is definitely one of the definitions of dumb.
Click to expand...
So in other words you don't know what you're arguing about. Thanks for clarifying, though it was self evident.

And no one but you made suggestion of expanding the NFA, so nice strawman Don Quixote, keep charging at those wind mills.
 
TacticalPirate said:
So in other words you don't know what you're arguing about. Thanks for clarifying, though it was self evident.

And no one but you made suggestion of expanding the NFA, so nice strawman Don Quixote, keep charging at those wind mills.
Click to expand...
I'm not the one who suggested bullpups meet the ONLY DEFINITION CONSIDERED IN THE ATF RULE ABOUT SBRs.
 
Bassbob said:
I'm not the one who suggested bullpups meet the ONLY DEFINITION CONSIDERED IN THE ATF RULE ABOUT SBRs.
Click to expand...
You're obtuse and argumentative and projecting your poor reading comprehension as someone else's problem. Learn when to quit.

You were diplomatically told from the start that you seemed to misunderstand the conversation and have done nothing but obnoxiously confirm it.
 
TacticalPirate said:
You're obtuse and argumentative and projecting your poor reading comprehension as someone else's problem. Learn when to quit.

You were diplomatically told from the start that you seemed to misunderstand the conversation and have done nothing but obnoxiously confirm it.
Click to expand...
Go back and read my original comment on the topic. Tell me again how I am wrong. You escalated it from there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top