National ATF coming for pistol braces

[Kruel J]

An AR pistol could never be an AOW, based on their definition.

"The term does not include a pistol or revolver with a rifled bore…."

 

[CamoDeafie]

An AR pistol could never be an AOW, based on their definition.

"The term does not include a pistol or revolver with a rifles bore…."

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/what-does-"any-other-weapon-mean

Tell that to the ATF's proposed checklist which also says "may be AOW" also, they have said handguns with second vertical grips are AOWs even if the handgun has a rifled bore

 

[Kruel J]

Tell that to the ATF's proposed checklist which also says "may be AOW" also, they have said handguns with second vertical grips are AOWs even if the handgun has a rifled bore

Yeah, I get it. But these ideas to try and skirt around the rules could get someone heat they don't want…..and misinformation here at NWFA puts the whole site at risk.

Until they update their definition or release the checklist to the masses, the current definition should be followed. And that would negate any AR pistols as AOWs.

 

[Diamondback]

There is no limit on handgun barrel length.

WA does impose a 16" upper limit for CPL purposes.

 

[CamoDeafie]

Yeah, I get it. But these ideas to try and skirt around the rules could get someone heat they don't want…..and misinformation here at NWFA puts the whole site at risk.

Until they update their definition or release the checklist to the masses, the current definition should be followed. And that would negate any AR pistols as AOWs.

Should negate but.... that still leaves ATF saying unilaterally that AR pistols "could be AOWs" for whatever capricous reasons they come up.

 

[The Heretic]

WA does impose a 16" upper limit for CPL purposes.

RCW cite?

 

[Diamondback]

RCW cite?

https://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.010
9A.41.010 (23): (23) "Pistol" means any firearm with a barrel less than sixteen inches in length, or is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand.

So a 10.3" Mk 18 with a brace and no VFG is a CCW-legal pistol, a 12.5" Troy A4 (ATF "Other Title 1 Firearm") with VFG is not.

 

[Kruel J]

Should negate but.... that still leaves ATF saying unilaterally that AR pistols "could be AOWs" for whatever capricous reasons they come up.

Understood. I'll take a real definition over a "could be" any day. Especially if we're talking about potential legal issues.

 

[kmk1012]

ATF won't give an hard definition, they purposely leave it vague for future interpretation.

 

[Kruel J]

ATF won't give an hard definition, they purposely leave it vague for future interpretation.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/what-does-"any-other-weapon-mean

It seems fairly straightforward to me. Typical .gov but the basics are there.

 

[Diamondback]

ATF won't give an hard definition, they purposely leave it vague for future interpretation.

Also why they like to say Determination Letters are only good for one case, so they can stomp on someone with an identical build later at will.

 

[Member 53328]

So much time and money wasted. Just to try and find a loophole for a limited amount of time. Why do you think braces are going away….

In no way am I regretting the form 1s I have done in fact I am pretty happy they have been completed and approved. I don't have to stress any of the legalities of "braces" or "AOWs" ect.

Call me a "boot licker" I could care less.

 

[CamoDeafie]

So much time and money wasted. Just to try and find a loophole for a limited amount of time. Why do you think braces are going away….

In no way am I regretting the form 1s I have done in fact I am pretty happy they have been completed and approved. I don't have to stress any of the legalities of "braces" or "AOWs" ect.

Call me a "boot licker" I could care less.

Indeed. One question that I have never seen answered satisfactorily...

In the decades, years since the establishment of NFA 1934, and subsequent GC laws...

Has there ever been any attempts by the Federal Govt to confiscate lawfully registered NFA firearms/items from lawful/law-abiding owners? (Edit, other than the MG registry and post 1986 MG thing)

I mean, we keep hearing about unregistered this and that and so forth.. and yes there have been several cases related to unregistered NFA items or unlicensed individuals.

 

[Member 53328]

Indeed. One question that I have never seen answered satisfactorily...

In the decades, years since the establishment of NFA 1934, and subsequent GC laws...

Has there ever been any attempts by the Federal Govt to confiscate lawfully registered NFA firearms/items from lawful/law-abiding owners? (Edit, other than the MG registry and post 1986 MG thing)

I mean, we keep hearing about unregistered this and that and so forth.. and yes there have been several cases related to unregistered NFA items or unlicensed individuals.

Not that I know of….. I'm not worried about getting my stuff confiscated. And there are people with way more stuff then me out there. I am a guppy in a huge ocean. I'm not even worth the time, attention, oxygen or paperwork. It's the people that try to skirt the law, find loopholes, create "new" firearms etc. that the ATF is really focused on. It ain't me.

 

[Kruel J]

There's no loophole big enough to fit an AR pistol as an AOW in. Not by the current definition anyway.

 

[CamoDeafie]

To answer your question, no. I've never heard of any legal NFA item being confiscated just because. But I'd bet if someone tries to justify a 16" barreled AR pistol as an AOW they would. Hell if they tried to justify ANY AR pistol as an AOW they would. The ddefinition is crystal clear on that. I don't even know why it's being discussed.

Indeed. Its only being discussed because of the proposed worksheet/scorecard containing the term AOW in addition to SBR.

 

[The Heretic]

https://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.010
9A.41.010 (23): (23) "Pistol" means any firearm with a barrel less than sixteen inches in length, or is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand.

So a 10.3" Mk 18 with a brace and no VFG is a CCW-legal pistol, a 12.5" Troy A4 (ATF "Other Title 1 Firearm") with VFG is not.

I think I disagree; when statutes have an "or" clause, it means either/or. So a firearm with a 20" barrel would still be a pistol if it is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand.

(24) "Rifle" means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed metallic cartridge to fire only a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of the trigger.

 

[Kruel J]

Indeed. Its only being discussed because of the proposed worksheet/scorecard containing the term AOW in addition to SBR.

I edited my post, discussions are good when facts and logic are recognized.

 

[Kruel J]

I think I disagree; when statutes have an "or" clause, it means either/or. So a firearm with a 20" barrel would still be a pistol if it is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand.

(24) "Rifle" means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed metallic cartridge to fire only a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of the trigger.

I think trying to fire a 20" AR with one hand would be dangerous at a minimum. And a tough sell to anyone wearing .gov gear.

 

[The Heretic]

ATF won't give an hard definition, they purposely leave it vague for future interpretation.

Most laws are written this way so as to allow for courts and agencies to interpret them to apply to different scenarios and circumstances.