ATF Response re: AR Pistol

[zero7one]

Follow this link (click here) for a .pdf file that I came across today. It gives a response from the ATF about AR Pistols and some legalities surrounding the manufacturing of one. Of interesting note, according to this letter from the ATF, says that it is lawful for a person to install a Magpul Angled Foregrip (AFG) onto the bottom accessory rail and it not become a SBR.

[landshark]

Very interesting. I know that for a lot of people, building a AR pistol is a great way to get all the parts while waiting on a SBR stamp. It would seem though that at the end of the day you would wind up with a lower that you could only, from then on out, use as a pistol lower. Unless you wanted to pay another $200 to convert said pistol to a rifle....I think that I would just sell that lower as a "pistol" lower and just get a new "rifle" lower. Was thinking about going this route when I start building my 300blk SBR, once again, that is until I get my SBR tax stamp.

Thanks for sharing.

[todd.k]

It would seem though that at the end of the day you would wind up with a lower that you could only, from then on out, use as a pistol lower. Unless you wanted to pay another $200 to convert said pistol to a rifle...

You can make a rifle from a pistol. Install a 16"+ barrel FIRST, then a stock, now you have a rifle. If you wanted the barrel to be less than 16" you would need to pay the tax to make an SBR out of your pistol.

[TangoSauce]

Keep in mind too, to my knowledge, once you convert a pistol to a rifle lower it will ALWAYS be a rifle lower.

[TangoSauce]

So does overall length on AR pistol apply? It mentions no restrictions on bbl length in that response. I'm getting fuzzy over a difference between 'handgun' and 'pistol'.


IC 35-47-1-6
"Handgun"
Sec. 6. "Handgun" means any firearm:
(1) designed or adapted so as to be aimed and fired from one (1) hand, regardless of barrel length; or
(2) any firearm with:
(A) a barrel less than sixteen (16) inches in length; or
(B) an overall length of less than twenty-six (26) inches.

[Spart]

Keep in mind too, to my knowledge, once you convert a pistol to a rifle lower it will ALWAYS be a rifle lower.

This is no longer true.

Open letter to the public from the ATF:

http://www.atf.gov/regulations-rulin...ing-2011-4.pdf

This also affects those of us who have carbine kits for pistols, such as the one I have for my Beretta .22 pistol.

I've switched my AR pistol to rifle config and back a few times. No black helicopters yet.

[fmkenner]

Also if your OAL is over 26" on your pistol it is just considered a firearm, which you can then attach a VFG. Simular to this.
http://www.franklinarmory.com/PRODUCTS_XO-26.html

Letter from the ATF.
http://www.franklinarmory.com/XO-26_Letter__c_.pdf

If you have an OAL less that 26" on your pistol lower with a VFG its considered an AOW which requires a stamp.
In Michigan we cant have SBR and have to register our pistols. I've decided to register an AR lower and build a pistol because of this.

[UWone77]

I wish we in Washington State could just have SBR's so we wouldn't have to deal with the AR pistol silliness.

[AR-10]

This is no longer true.

Open letter to the public from the ATF:

http://www.atf.gov/regulations-rulin...ing-2011-4.pdf

This also affects those of us who have carbine kits for pistols, such as the one I have for my Beretta .22 pistol.

I've switched my AR pistol to rifle config and back a few times. No black helicopters yet.

So does that mean you can keep a standard carbine receiver extension when you go back to a pistol or are you putting a pistol tube back on?

In the past I was told a pistol should never have a tube that will readily accept a stock, but your post makes me wonder if this is ok to do now.

[fmkenner]

So does that mean you can keep a standard carbine receiver extension when you go back to a pistol or are you putting a pistol tube back on?

In the past I was told a pistol should never have a tube that will readily accept a stock, but your post makes me wonder if this is ok to do now.

In my opinion your better off putting pistol tube back so as it cant have a stock put on it easily. You wont have anything to explain.

[Stickman]

So does that mean you can keep a standard carbine receiver extension when you go back to a pistol or are you putting a pistol tube back on?

In the past I was told a pistol should never have a tube that will readily accept a stock, but your post makes me wonder if this is ok to do now.

No, it does not mean that at all. The above was written out for a very narrow purpose. Having a rifle or carbine receiver extension is having a SBR regardless of whether you have the rest of the stock on it or not.

ETA- ATF opinions are somewhat different than what I have posted above. The general gist is that you can not have in readily available to accept a stock. There are a lot of people who feel this means they can use the carbine extension as long as they have no extra stocks around. This is not true, and is not what the law says.

[TangoSauce]

This is no longer true.

Open letter to the public from the ATF:

http://www.atf.gov/regulations-rulin...ing-2011-4.pdf

This also affects those of us who have carbine kits for pistols, such as the one I have for my Beretta .22 pistol.

I've switched my AR pistol to rifle config and back a few times. No black helicopters yet.

Thanks for that link, I've been going back and forth with some friends on this and received mixed responses.

[Gunfixr]

You can install the Magpul AFG on a pistol regardless of its' length. If I had to guess, I'd say that this is because it is not actually a grip, like a VFG is. You cannot wrap your hand around it like you can around any grip, you can only cup it like a forearm.
However, like mentioned, once it is over 26" in length, it is now classified as a "firearm". This is the same category that the Mossberg and Remington pistol gripped "Cruiser" shotguns fall into.

As for building a pistol, and then converting it into a rifle, and then going back to a pistol, that is legal, so long as you always stop switching parts when you have a legal version. A lot of this changed with the landmark Thompson Contender case. This case also drastically changed what construed "constructive possession".

You can use a carbine length tube on a pistol, but it cannot be a carbine tube, as that would readily accept a stock. Even if it doesn't actually have a stock on it at the time, such a tube on a pistol would make an SBR.

[djthemac]

Does this have any impact on people with one registered sbr lower, 2 short uppers and a complete 16" ar15?

[eodinert]

Having a rifle or carbine receiver extension is having a SBR regardless of whether you have the rest of the stock on it or not.

The ATF has written several letters about this, and all of them that I have seen say it's OK to put a carbine receiver extension on a pistol.

I googled one up. This is just one of many, by the way, and they are all worded a little different: http://www.jcweaponry.com/images/ar15/BB.JPG

Notice how they say it's permissible to use a carbine receiver extension, then turn around and say 'you may be in possession of an SBR if you have a stock'. Is it permissible, or not? In Thompson Center vs. USA, (required reading, IMO) the court ruled that since the parts COULD be assembled in a lawful manner the law could not assume your were going to do something illegal (they call this the rule of lenity).

Based on the afore mentioned letters, Thompson Center vs. US, and the CFR, I think it would be legal (I'm not a lawyer). You'll have to find your own comfort zone on this one, though.