ATF redefines what a “pistol” is?

The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Strick8

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    84   0   0
    Jan 16, 2018
    1,142
    48
    Hammond, LA
    Saw this on the Mrgunsngear youtube channel and didn’t see anything posted here about it. I honestly can’t make heads or tails out of it. But I want to share and get the thoughts of those of you who are much brighter than I when it comes to these things.

    ATF Letter 6/25/2019
    https://princelaw.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/atf-folded-brace_redacted.pdf

    “The ATF has refined what a pistol is”
    https://youtu.be/Epcfx5WdVtc

    “What is a vertical grip and how to avoid getting arrested by the ATF”
    https://youtu.be/Ti87Ve9A598


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,712
    113
    Baton Rouge, LA
    What I gathered from it, the brace does not effect the length measurement because it is not an essential part for the weapon to function. I have an AR9 with a 4.5" barrel. I have an extended flash can and a 7" handguard. The muzzle device is not pinned. Neither the flash can nor the handguard are needed for the thing to function so they do not count toward the length. The thing has an SBA3 brace on it. The brace is not essential to function so it does not count. The buffer tube is needed. So the length would be from the end of the buffer tube to the end of the barrel. This seems to clarify their method of measurement. This is also the reason you can have a not-a-shotgun with a 14" barrel and a brace. Because a stock is part of the definition of a rifle, it is counted in the length. So if a brace is to be counted, it would be viewed as a stock. And if it's a stock, you are not looking at an SBR and the total length would not be a factor when looking at a VFG. I may be missing something but it all seems pretty straightforward to me. Is there a specific part of that you'd like to discuss?
     

    Magdump

    Don’t troll me bro!
    Rating - 100%
    163   0   0
    Dec 31, 2013
    9,396
    113
    Hammond, Louisiana
    Basically, if it’s shorter than 26 inches to include any parts needed to make the firearm function, you can’t legally have a vertical grip without clearance and paying more taxes... what I mean to say is, it’s the same old over reach and part of the whole attack on the second amendment... they’ve been doing little grabs here and there a lot.
    So, what does and does not constitute a vertical grip? What about hand stops? And are they simply trying to stop me from holding a pistol with 2 hands? Because that would be retarded...whoever can tell what they’re thinking.
     
    Last edited:

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,712
    113
    Baton Rouge, LA
    Basically, if it’s shorter than 26 inches to include any parts needed to make the firearm function, you can’t legally have a vertical grip without clearance and paying more taxes... what I mean to say is, it’s the same old over reach and part of the whole attack on the second amendment... they’ve been doing little grabs here and there a lot.
    So, what down and does not constitute a vertical grip? What about hand stops? And are they simply trying to stop me from holding a pistol with 2 hands? Because that would be retarded...whoever can tell what they’re thinking.

    I don't think the ATF is changing what they consider a VFG. The letter reference in the video with the ATF interpretation is from 2013.
     

    Bangswitch

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jan 10, 2019
    2,221
    38
    a location near you
    Bringing back a phrase I haven’t heard this year. This is a big nothing-berger.

    Now I’m not the brightest but it seems the ATF is leaning into the 26 inch length rule for a pistol and clarifying that the not-a-stock braces are not getting included in the required to function length.

    Now I started to trip over myself when the got specific about the folding not-a-stock buffer tubes, but I think they are saying unless the gun can’t be fired folded the folded length become the minimum functioning length length. I believe the law tactical was meant to allow for locked bolt firing, but don’t take my word for it. I would hate to see someone with a bolt carrier in their orbital socket.

    Now everyone knows my opinion of this administration’s 2A policies and it’s no secret I’m highly skeptical of the ATF but if the 26 inch rule is easier to meet and pistols don’t need stamps (yet) I would like to think this may be better for us gun nuts.

    Edit:
    Ok correction here: 26 inches doesn’t mean pistol it means ‘concealable’. The goal is to get a ‘firearm’ with a folding stock (folded its less than 26 inches) and smooth bore that requires two hands to operate would be an AOW. Because it can function while folded has a smooth bore and concealable, it is not a pistol, not a ‘firearm’ (anymore) it’s now an AOW.
     
    Last edited:

    Bangswitch

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jan 10, 2019
    2,221
    38
    a location near you
    Basically, if it’s shorter than 26 inches to include any parts needed to make the firearm function, you can’t legally have a vertical grip without clearance and paying more taxes... what I mean to say is, it’s the same old over reach and part of the whole attack on the second amendment... they’ve been doing little grabs here and there a lot.
    So, what down and does not constitute a vertical grip? What about hand stops? And are they simply trying to stop me from holding a pistol with 2 hands? Because that would be retarded...whoever can tell what they’re thinking.

    I thought a forward grip on anything shorter than a ‘long gun’ required a stamp was I wrong?
     
    Last edited:

    Strick8

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    84   0   0
    Jan 16, 2018
    1,142
    48
    Hammond, LA
    Yeah I think I understand the vertical grip thing, however ridiculous I find it to be. I understand the 26” rifle/pistol better after Perez’s explanation, thanks for that.

    Being that the ATF clarification letter came out 6/25/19, I was interested in knowing if anything changed, and I was finding myself confused reading the letter(I ain’t real bright!).

    Mrgunsandgear’s video is helpful too. If you didn’t get a chance to watch his video on the vertical grip issue it’s worth a watch. His interpretation of what constitutes a violation/vertical grip is interesting.

    Thanks for the responses.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

    Bangswitch

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jan 10, 2019
    2,221
    38
    a location near you
    Ok so the ACE firearm with a folding brace was classified as a ‘firearm’ because it wasn’t a rifle it was too long to be a pistol and required 2 hands to operate. Because the folding not-a-stock is basically an accessory it is going to reclassify the ACE to an AOW requiring a stamp.

    Seems I was wrong they were out to rewrite the rules to ‘screw’ the American people.

    edit:

    interestingly enough if they made an ACE in semi-auto it may could be classified as a pistol.

    Just kidding it would have to be rifled also.

    I believe I’ve proven my earlier statement: I’m not the brightest.
     
    Last edited:

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,712
    113
    Baton Rouge, LA
    I thought a forward grip on anything shorter than a ‘long gun’ required a stamp was I wrong?

    Yeah I think I understand the vertical grip thing, however ridiculous I find it to be. I understand the 26* rifle/pistol better after Perez’s explanation, thanks for that.

    Being that the ATF clarification letter came out 6/25/19, I was interested in knowing if anything changed, and I was finding myself confused reading the letter(I ain’t real bright!).

    Mrgunsandgear’s video is helpful too. If you didn’t get a chance to watch his video on the vertical grip issue it’s worth a watch. His interpretation of what constitutes a violation/vertical grip is interesting.

    Thanks for the responses.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Are you referring to the Black Aces pump firearms?
     

    Bangswitch

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jan 10, 2019
    2,221
    38
    a location near you
    I guess you could make the point that Black ACE Tactical pushed limits (others as well I’m sure) and the ATF finally said ‘enough is enough, you’re exploiting a weakness in the law and we are going to fix that.’ I wouldn’t have had a problem if they said no to allowing this gun to be manufactured marketed and sold as a non-NFA item from jump street, but now there are thousands of legal gun owners who don’t want to own an AOW or any other NFA item who own a Black ACE Tactical, which is now an AOW.

    From an unbiased point of view the ATF is tasked with making sure the GCA and the NFA acts are enforced and if you look at a shot shell firearm with a folding brace that is ‘concealable’ you can’t objectively say either bill intended for that to be allowed. Please let’s ignore the ‘shall not be infringed’ section of the 2A, because I’m normally that guy. Personally I think if we are willing to let the GCA and NFA stand then we have to accept this was a logical change in regulation, just a day late and a dollar short.
     
    Last edited:

    whbonney26

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    37   0   0
    Nov 2, 2008
    4,795
    63
    Pearl River, LA
    Basically, if it’s shorter than 26 inches to include any parts needed to make the firearm function, you can’t legally have a vertical grip without clearance and paying more taxes... what I mean to say is, it’s the same old over reach and part of the whole attack on the second amendment... they’ve been doing little grabs here and there a lot.
    So, what down and does not constitute a vertical grip? What about hand stops? And are they simply trying to stop me from holding a pistol with 2 hands? Because that would be retarded...whoever can tell what they’re thinking.

    I read that handstops and angled grips are okay.
     

    MOTOR51

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    72   0   0
    Dec 23, 2008
    6,342
    113
    here
    I guess you could make the point that Black ACE Tactical pushed limits (others as well I’m sure) and the ATF finally said ‘enough is enough, you’re exploiting a weakness in the law and we are going to fix that.’ I wouldn’t have had a problem if they said no to allowing this gun to be manufactured marketed and sold as a non-NFA item from jump street, but now there are thousands of legal gun owners who don’t want to own an AOW or any other NFA item who own a Black ACE Tactical, which is now an AOW.

    From an unbiased point of view the ATF is tasked with making sure the GCA and the NFA acts are enforced and if you look at a shot shell firearm with a folding brace that is ‘concealable’ you can’t objectively say either bill intended for that to be allowed. Please let’s ignore the ‘shall not be infringed’ section of the 2A, because I’m normally that guy. Personally I think if we are willing to let the GCA and NFA stand then we have to accept this was a logical change in regulation, just a day late and a dollar short.

    I’ve owned the shockwave and a few AR pistols. It’s hard to argue that the intention of all of these was not to circumvent the NFA regulations. I got rid of all of them because I figured it was only a matter of time before I’m stuck with equipment that I’m unable to sell or possess.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
     

    Bangswitch

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jan 10, 2019
    2,221
    38
    a location near you
    I’ve owned the shockwave and a few AR pistols. It’s hard to argue that the intention of all of these was not to circumvent the NFA regulations. I got rid of all of them because I figured it was only a matter of time before I’m stuck with equipment that I’m unable to sell or possess.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

    I have to agree. Of the two I think the AR pistol has the highest chance of survival, but it’s all a matter of time. The good thing about the ar pistol is you could just convert it to a rifle and if you built it from a stripped lower it’s never been identified as a ‘pistol’ or a ‘firearm’ its listed as other. Other could have been built into whatever your heart desired as far as the ATF knows. A shockwave or something like that is identity as exactly what it is when they are ready to say those are a ‘no no’ it’s easier to follow up on. Stripped lowers are passed out like lollipops.

    Edit:
    I think that was about as clear as mud. I’m just pointing out at least you have options and a less clear path for follow up if the ATF decided to ban them, with the AR pistol.
     
    Last edited:

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,712
    113
    Baton Rouge, LA
    I have to agree. Of the two I think the AR pistol has the highest chance of survival, but it’s all a matter of time. The good thing about the ar pistol is you could just convert it to a rifle and if you built it from a stripped lower it’s never been identified as a ‘pistol’ or a ‘firearm’ its listed as other. Other could have been built into whatever your heart desired as far as the ATF knows. A shockwave or something like that is identity as exactly what it is when they are ready to say those are a ‘no no’ it’s easier to follow up on. Stripped lowers are passed out like lollipops.

    Edit:
    I think that was about as clear as mud. I’m just pointing out at least you have options and a less clear path for follow up if the ATF decided to ban them, with the AR pistol.

    With respect to the "brace not part of length" issue, the AR won't be affected very much because the buffer tube is essential to the correct function of the weapon. Even if you put a folder on there, I believe the buffer tube would count as the weapon does not function properly with the buffer tube folded. So an AR with a 10.5-11.5* barrel should bring it out to "firearm" OAL, even without a brace.
     

    Bangswitch

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jan 10, 2019
    2,221
    38
    a location near you
    With respect to the "brace not part of length" issue, the AR won't be affected very much because the buffer tube is essential to the correct function of the weapon. Even if you put a folder on there, I believe the buffer tube would count as the weapon does not function properly with the buffer tube folded. So an AR with a 10.5-11.5* barrel should bring it out to "firearm" OAL, even without a brace.

    Agreed this change in regulation won’t have much effect on AR pistols or ‘firearms’, but I think Motor51 was saying it’s a matter of time before they regulate them into NFA status or worse. I can’t disagree with him.
     

    Magdump

    Don’t troll me bro!
    Rating - 100%
    163   0   0
    Dec 31, 2013
    9,396
    113
    Hammond, Louisiana
    I don't think the ATF is changing what they consider a VFG. The letter reference in the video with the ATF interpretation is from 2013.
    Didn’t say they were, but give us an honest estimate of when you think that could also happen.

    It’s all like a big **** snowball if you ask me. The more they infringe on that which was ordered by our Constitution not to be infringed upon, the more they have to create new stupid laws in attempts to justify and cover the bases, eventually infringing on our other rights. They are winning too. It’s pretty clear that another generation or two of pro gun people willing to bend over and take a little infringement is about all it will take and then we can join Australia. And did anyone notice how fast that stuff in New Zealand happened? Can anyone tell us what actually did happen there? And how many cities and states have already passed radical anti gun laws?

    As for the comments that I hear nowadays about Trump being so anti gun, I wonder why it is that we aren’t under some crazy buying frenzy while he’s in office and looking at another term (Yes, you can quote me next election) ?
    I’ve even heard that Trump has done more damage to the gun community than Obama ever thought about. Yet under Obama’s administration the frenzy saw epic proportions...right up until the time that Trump took office...right..
    Ever think that maybe it’s not about who’s POTUS?
     
    Last edited:

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,712
    113
    Baton Rouge, LA
    Didn’t say they were, but give us an honest estimate of when you think that could also happen.

    It’s all like a big **** snowball if you ask me. The more they infringe on that which was ordered by our Constitution not to be infringed upon, the more they have to create new stupid laws in attempts to justify and cover the bases, eventually infringing on our other rights. They are winning too. It’s pretty clear that another generation or two of pro gun people willing to bend over and take a little infringement is about all it will take and then we can join Australia. And did anyone notice how fast that stuff in New Zealand happened? Can anyone tell us what actually did happen there? And how many cities and states have already passed radical anti gun laws?

    No idea. 90 degrees means 90 degrees. Until it doesn't. Those 89 degree grips are close enough. 60 degrees? We'll round up so that'll count as well.
     

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    195,221
    Messages
    1,546,083
    Members
    29,168
    Latest member
    Lyle.lejeune2017
    Top Bottom