Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Benelli Forums

LJinFLA

Members
  • Content Count

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Good

About LJinFLA

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  • Birthday 09/06/1960
  1. SOCOMGuy Thanks for the reply. I do not know what impacts the cost of these for the M2 vs. M4. I leave that to your experience and expertise. However, the cost may not be an issue for many who are looking for such a part. what is driving it is Part 922r regulations and how they relate to the M2 Tactical model with the pistol grips. The problem is that to modify the gun with additional items such as rails, extensions and other things that make this a bad Foreign Gun as described in Part 922r of the regs, and the the BATF is not able to agree whether or not such additions will put the M2 Tactical over the number allowed "evil parts" (ie: pistol grips, foreign made followers etc). IF there were a full length magazine tube for the gun, it would eliminate the foreign made existing tube and eliminate the need for the extension thus positively bringing this gun into compliance with some room to spare for additional "evil parts" like collapsible stocks!. Are you familiar with 922r? There is some debate about it related to M2 since the BATF has issued definitive and consistent written statements about the number of foreign made parts for the M4 and exempt some for the M4 since it is the official military gun. However they have not done so for the M2. I have seen different letters from the BATF that shows different counts of "evil parts" on the standard M2 Tactical. I know that this has never been enforced but the last thing we want to worry about after defending my family and home is some smart Lawyer who will bring this up and convince a jury that i am some kind of militaristic freak waiting to kill someone for having a non-compliant gun with too many evil parts. What all this means is that people might pay more for the part. I agree $250 is a bit steep but maybe there is something that can be done about that. If you would like to share the design concerns with me in a PM maybe i can make some suggestions or brainstorm some solutions. LJ
  2. SOCOMGuy, Any chance you will be making them for the M2 this year? As I mentioned above, I know I would take one, but It looks like there is a market for them out there. Is there a start-up cost that is preventing you from making these? Maybe I can help. Otherwise, please consider making these as well. What do you think? LJ
  3. Has anybody done this kind of due diligence with BATF for the M2 Tactical? I have read of all kinds of speculation about how many parts are in the M2 that are on the 922r list, but I have not seen any letters or proof from the BATF about their position on what parts would be on their list for the M2. Has anybody seen such evidence?
  4. I want to put a vote in for a full length tube for the M2 as well. There a lot of us M2 Tactical Owners out here that would jump at checking off another 922r part. If you are looking for investors to help defray costs, We should talk about it. Otherwise, why not make one. There is money to be made my friend. LJ
×
×
  • Create New...