ATF Rescinds Prior Method To Measure A Firearm’s Overall Length When Equipped With A Stabilizing Brace
BY Herschel Smith
5 years, 5 months ago
Late yesterday, I received an email from an individual containing a letter from ATF which was a response to a correspondence requesting the correct method to “measure a firearm with a ‘stabilizing brace’ and folding adaptor.” It was explained that the correspondence was sent in the form of an email over a year ago and that the person had received a response via email shortly after it was sent. This letter was unsolicited and came over a year after the original request and response.
[ … ]
Based on the letter, ATF is taking the position that because a stabilizing brace is not an integral part of the firearm, it is not relevant to the overall length measurement. Why does this matter? A number of individuals have been building AR pistols or other similar pistols that have utilized a stabilizing brace. Some have opted to add a vertical foregrip. However, based on this interpretation, those people may find that they have manufactured an “AOW”, which is subject to the restrictions of the National Firearms Act (“NFA”).
[ … ]
ATF has taken the position that once a vertical foregrip has been added to a firearm, it is no longer designed to be fired when held in one hand, removing it from the definition of a pistol, even though ATF previously lost this argument before the Ninth Circuit in U.S. v. Fix, 4 Fed. Appx. 324 (9th Cir. 2001).
Further, ATF has consistently held that the overall length of 26 inches is the breaking point for concealability. Put another way, if the firearm has an overall length of less than 26 inches, it places it into a category of arms that could be considered to be regulated by the NFA depending on their other characteristics. If it has an overall length greater than 26 inches, it could remove it from those class of firearms, again, depending on their characteristics.
Law-making by memorandum. Any time you change your mind, just write a new note.
Related.
On July 7, 2019 at 11:38 pm, Longbow said:
“Law-making by memorandum. Any time you change your mind, just write a new note.”
Indeed.
Thats way way it is, because that’s the way we want it!
On July 8, 2019 at 7:29 am, BRVTVS said:
This is an executive decision. If Trump were truly pro-gun, this decision would be toast.
On July 8, 2019 at 8:25 am, Thomas Madere said:
Never write to the ATF and give them something to think about that they haven’t previously though about.
On July 8, 2019 at 9:31 pm, MTHead said:
The ATF lost in the 9TH? Holy hell! How screwed up an argument do you have to have in order to lose in the 9TH?
And then go back for seconds? Just because I put something on my gun that helps me shoot the gun with a second hand, doesn’t change that I can shoot it one handed. just like putting a brace to your shoulder doesn’t change that you can shoot it one handed.
Besides its not a pistol grip, its a bi-pod mount! (which is legal). for now?
On July 14, 2019 at 3:38 pm, Len Savage said:
To Thomas Madere:
Bad advice. There is no causation to correlation.
That one can not discern what compliant behavior consists of, and one needs to ask in the first place, is what you should have an issue with.
Not the poor guy getting “his” paper so the govt. wood chipper doesn’t try and snatch him by the shirt tails….You should have no quarrel with him.
————–
“Law-making by memorandum. Any time you change your mind, just write a new note.”
I wonder if the Department of Just-US has the foresight to see the un-intended consequences?
Delete the rule of law and the rule of the jungle is what fills the void.
The Department of Just-Us keep reinforcing that compliance is designed to be impossible. They think they are being cute… After all, nothing has stopped them so far.
Just-Us became self aware during the soft “stump Trump” that they are indeed in control and can smite anyone or anything at will with impunity…No accountability. Ever.
Hubris.