Flash suppressor vs. "muzzlebrake/stabilizer"

jsergovic

August 01, 2004 00:25

I'm drooling checking out an SA MA9822 Loaded, Walnut stock, stainless steel barrel rifle.
http://www.springfield-armory.com/images/rifles/MA9822Large.jpg
Then the fine print ... "CA" version doesn't have the flash suppressor.

I think if it was a manual bolt, I could have the flash suppressor, but since it is a semi-auto, the flash suppressor makes it an "Assault Weapon***"

So, if SA puts a flash suppressor on their M1A, it must be their call that it is preferred to a muzzlebrake. Yes? No?






*** Boy, those pine cones @ 200 yards are in for a wupping! Never did understand just who I'd be assaulting, aside from the senses of a senseless twit who thinks I'm a danger to the propogation of the forests!

0

• 

  STRIPPER-TIPPER

  August 01, 2004 03:30

  Yes, here in CA flash hiders are a no no on a semi auto. The "flash hiders" are just for looks as the slots are not cut all the way through. They are just a cover for the threads. Another reason why I am moving to Nevada.I am sick and tired of having to deal with the BS gun laws along with other issues,39 years here and I don't see any improvements coming anytime soon. You may want to rethink the Springfield as I have heard some bad reports concerning the new ones-poor quality,foreign parts,etc..

  0
• 

  gunnut505

  August 01, 2004 07:03

  Sorry, whatever "we" call it is irrelevant; some bureaucrat in Sacramento will "clarify" that law soon enough, and then there won't be any more.
  
  If you know it all; you must have been listening.<br>WEAR EAR PROTECTION!

  0

Please sign in to leave a comment.