AR Pistol Buffer Tube Question

[Classic]

I decided to go with the Exo Defense Black PISTOL tube and I will cover it with the foam protective cover that is currently on my Phase 5. The lower was listed as "Other" on the 4473 form so I could build whatever I felt like without hassle.
Thanks for the info & many thanks to IronMoster for showing me 3 variations of pistol tubes that add length. The Exo should do the trick keeping the charging handle from hitting my nose on recoil

 

[IronMonster]

go for it man, Yes I am scared and careful. If you witnessed a friend get railroaded by the Feds like I did you would be an idiot not to be.

And the entire AR pistol is not made from rifle parts, the difference being a shoulder stock or a pistol tube. So the one part that differentiates between the two is the one part I would not screw around with.


It's your neck, one in a million odds is till not worth risking federal time over a $40 part.

 

[Member 3687]

First I understand where you're coming from and I do not want to go to prison and have a boyfriend named BUBA or Sam or whoever.

I agree you need to do your home work and do only what you're comfortable with. I have spent many hours looking at the law and ATFEs interpretation and still could be arrested for something I missed or they changed and I did not catch. The key word with them is intent if my intent is to make a rifle and not a pistol and try to skirt the law by doing so, by their definition I all ready broke the law.

I agree that the ATFE is not always know for being rational but I hate to tell you just because your receivers are stamped pistol is not an automatic approval.

If the FFL that transferred them to you marked rifle on your paperwork (even by accident)rather than other or pistol and/or in the serial number information column put rifle instead of receiver or pistol it is a rifle no matter what it says on the receiver. Once documented as a rifle it is always a rifle per ATFE and cannot be converted into a pistol ever.

Can you show me any pistol like Glock, Ruger or Smith and Wesson that have pistol on the serialized portion of the firearm? By your thought process they could be SBRs as they do make stock for most of them. Just do a Google search of Glock stocks or Beretta stocks.

My PAP92 AK pistol has no mention of pistol anywhere on it and per ATFE does not require it. If they fallow the serial number and paper work it shows it is a pistol.

You talked about the KAK extended pistol tube in an earlier post but can you show me the ATFE cover letter saying that by being made longer it is still a pistol tube. I have 3 of them and did not get an ATFE approval letter and they do not list one on the web site. In fact it was made to extend the sig brace out farther and is this really for longer arms as they say or to be better shouldered? What is the intent?

It all comes down to intent as it is much easier to shoulder the KAK extended tube than a standard carbine or pistol tube, so what is your intent, was it to skirt the law.

The AR pistol has been around for over 30 years and probably longer in one form or another and use both modified carbine (rifle) and A1 (rifle) buffer tubes in their production.

The ATFE has said that the use of either is acceptable as long as a stock cannot be readily installed. With the new redesign rule (from the Sig Brace Letter) and having a pistol tube of any make and a SIG brace could it could be said a stock is readily and easily available to be installed.

So if someone slips a piece of PVC pipe over the buffer tube with a tee on the end with the intent of making a stock does this mean if we all have PVC pipe and a AR pistol it could be considered the makings of an SBR.

It all comes down to intent.

 

[IronMonster]

I don't argue that at all, My feeling is just to try and do everything I can to make that intent apparent.

when the ATF guy holds up my pistol in court and says "you honestly expect us to believe this is a pistol?". I want to have something to say.

 

[lazerblazer]

I don't argue that at all, My feeling is just to try and do everything I can to make that intent apparent.

when the ATF guy holds up my pistol in court and says "you honestly expect us to believe this is a pistol?". I want to have something to say.
View attachment 161485

Honest question, from the post's you have made in this thread how can you even rationalize having an AR pistol? Why not just SBR your receiver, couldn't be but a few dollars more than your sig brace. Then there would be no question of your intent, you would never show up in court, avoid costly lawyer fees....

 

[IronMonster]

Well up until a few weeks ago with the new ATF letter I was completely happy owning a pistol I could shoulder using the SIG brace and if I addmited on a forum that I was considering registering it as a SBR it would show an intent to be used as an SBR which is contrary to my best interest so I would never do that, even if it was a consideration (which it's totally not).

I have three pistol lowers. I have considered leaving those alone and registing a rifle lower as a SBR so if I decided to use one of my pistol uppers with a designated rifle lower I could. I am not particularly happy about it. I currently have no NFA weapons and it sure seems silly to have to change that so I can hold a pistol to my shoulder

 

[John H]

The ATFE has said that the use of either is acceptable as long as a stock cannot be readily installed. With the new redesign rule (from the Sig Brace Letter) and having a pistol tube of any make and a SIG brace could it could be said a stock is readily and easily available to be installed.

No, it can not.

 

[John H]

I currently have no NFA weapons and it sure seems silly to have to change that so I can hold a pistol to my shoulder

Simple , don't shoot in front of a ATF agent.

Other wise who cares what they say.

 

[IronMonster]

Which translates where I live to don't shoot it at the range because you don't know who the 100 people standing around are.

In Seattle there are not a lot of options for private shooting spots.

I wish it was that simple

 

[John H]

Well hopefully someone will get charged soon. Don't see how this will hold water in court.

You can't redesign something, simply by changing the way it is used.

 

[Classic]

I have to chuckle.... Using a sig brace the way sig advertises it's use is awkward at best. I know of no one that bought the sig brace to use it as advertised. Maybe if the pistol has a green laser shooting it from the hip might be an option but I'm not really a fan of lasers either... They are pretty much a statement of "Here I am"

 

[IronMonster]

Agreed, I just don't want to be the guy charged.

 

[Member 3687]

John H

Even though I agree that the sig brace should never be considered a stock it could be under the intent rule. if someone were to keep posting my intention is to use it as a stock or tell other friends their intention is to by pass the law and use it as a stock then according to the ATFE that intention is to make a short barreled rifle there for having that gun and having that Sig brace could be interpreted as building a stock or a short barreled rifle.
WE all agree that the ATFE will do what it wants an we have to prove different.

That is why all my pistols are made in to pistols intended to use as pistols and if I want to shoot a rifle I grab a rifle I have both AK and AR rifles to shoot. I just like building pistols I've also hunted with my AR pistol and enjoy it very much and no I do not shoulder it.
I do not want or need a SBR and there for I don't have one.

I have buddies who are class 3 dealers that have been trying to talk me into getting a lot of different toys for years, they just don't interest me I don't care to do the paperwork or any of fun stuff that goes with it because I do not agree with it.

Just my opinion.

 

[Flopsweat]

I have to chuckle.... Using a sig brace the way sig advertises it's use is awkward at best. I know of no one that bought the sig brace to use it as advertised. Maybe if the pistol has a green laser shooting it from the hip might be an option but I'm not really a fan of lasers either... They are pretty much a statement of "Here I am"

Now you do. I did. So did Jerry:

 

[IronMonster]

Jerry went all gangster on us with that stance...

 

[Flopsweat]

Jerry went all gangster on us with that stance...

I don't think I've seen a video of his that I didn't like.

 

[Nutty4Guns]

Any updated recommendations for a plain old pistol buffer tube, or are they pretty much all the same quality? Just want to have one on hand for day 119 if it comes to that. I won't be registering my pistol.

 

[arrowshooter]

Boy, you went a ways back to find this. Below is a link to the current thread which is mostly on the subject. The issue is that the ATF did not lay out exactly what they are going to be using for for guidelines, i.e say "length of pool", only saying it is up to their discretion. Not a bad idea to have one in the box, but you don't want to be the first test case.

National - Pistol Brace rule Dropped!

What good are Federal and SCOTUS court decisions if DOJ agencies and citizens are just gonna ignore them and do what they want to do anyhow? :rolleyes: The ATF hasn't changed their tune on bumpstocks at all. FRT triggers never were illegal yet the ATF calls them machine guns and continue to...

www.northwestfirearms.com

 

[Nutty4Guns]

Boy, you went a ways back to find this. Below is a link to the current thread which is mostly on the subject. The issue is that the ATF did not lay out exactly what they are going to be using for for guidelines, i.e say "length of pool", only saying it is up to their discretion. Not a bad idea to have one in the box, but you don't want to be the first test case.

National - Pistol Brace rule Dropped!

What good are Federal and SCOTUS court decisions if DOJ agencies and citizens are just gonna ignore them and do what they want to do anyhow? :rolleyes: The ATF hasn't changed their tune on bumpstocks at all. FRT triggers never were illegal yet the ATF calls them machine guns and continue to...

www.northwestfirearms.com

Yes, I'm well aware of that thread. I was trying to keep it uncluttered with my specific buffer tube question.

 

[Flopsweat]

Yes, I'm well aware of that thread. I was trying to keep it uncluttered with my specific buffer tube question.

Well I went ahead and cluttered it for you. Didn't know that was your intent.