"Stock" On An AR Pistol?

[ksenter]

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. The OP discussion was about a pistol, not about adding a CAA cheek weld to a stock. The question was would a stick cut off to be a pistol tube buffer be legal. The correct answer is 'probably not' since the ATF hasn't approved it. However, putting Thorsen Customs buffer tube cover on WITH the CAA cheek weld is perfectly legal. This particular discussion is about an AR pistol design, not about adding a cheek weld to a normal stick. If a stock get's put on an AR pistol it becomes a short barreled rifle that needs a $200 tax stamp from the BATF.

if you followed along

this....

I think CAA makes some abortion that resembles that.

I was responding to the negative comments regarding the CAA cheek weld and was seeking reasons as to why. The CAA cheek weld was involved in the topic of discussion as adding a cheek weld or cut down stock to an AR buffer tube for pistol use.

[tommartins]

No. But looks good and innovative idea!

[BoilerUp]

Anyone ever seen anything about cutting a stock and installing it onto a pistol for a cheek rest?

Something like that? (But much nicer...) Maybe on something like an STR cut and epoxied up to be un-movable?

I'm going to go against the grain here. The ATF doesn't make law, it provides letters that explains how one employee of the ATF currently interprets the law and will therefore guide how the agency may chose to enforce the existing laws. The ATF has clearly put out letters that won't hold up in court.

The law in question is whether or not that modification would make the pistol into a rifle under this definition:

The term “rifle” means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder

It looks to me like you are trying to produce the equivalent of the Thordsen to improve your cheekweld and you'd be taking steps to ensure it is not a shoulder stock. That is legal under the law.

The problem is the ATF has its share of vindictive freedom-hating politically motivated idiots so they actually don't care too much what the law says and could ruin your life even if you ultimately are vindicated in a court of law.

So my response to your question is, "Yes, that is perfectly legal, but the ATF may still choose to go after you anyway if by some small chance you have an encounter with them or some other self proclaimed NFA-know-it-all so be very careful if you go down that path"

Oh, did I mention I'm not a lawyer and you should never take legal advice (even from lawyers) on an internet forum?

Personally, I'm considering designs for a "chest stock" to turn AR pistols into firearms "intended to be fired from the chest" since the NFA doesn't regulate those. That is slightly less offensive and should provide a more stable shooting platform than the "pelvic stock" portrayed in some images currently floating around the internet.

[JHoward]

I decided to just bite the bullet and get the Thordsen, but thank you. I do agree that it would not make it something designed to be fired from the shoulder. It'd be awesome if I could get a letter that said that, because then you could have a decent looking buffer cover, and a decent cheek weld, for less than I paid for the Thordsen/CAA. Also, it would most likely be stronger. I have considered mortaring it just to check to see if the Thordsen/CAA could handle it... But I don't want to take the chance on breaking it quite yet.

[HeavyDuty]

I won't be mortaring my Thordsen - I think the open space behind the RE will immediately collapse and the saddle block will tear loose.

[JHoward]

That's what I was thinking as well.