ATF Measuring Overall Length With Brace Folded?

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • DC-W

    Ultimate Member
    Patriot Picket
    Jan 23, 2013
    25,290
    ️‍
    Case in CT where a shop (shoppe) is facing NFA possible violations due to the ATF measuring the overall length (OAL) of firearms with braces folded instead of out.


    IMG_8080.jpg


    Long story here. The Firearm Blog points out that this may have more to do with the intricacies of CT law, but I suppose we'll see if this is the beginning of a broader change with how the ATF measures firearms. This would of course be a huge problem for braced-pistol owners as there are numerous around the country.

    http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2018/05/24/oal-brace-folded/
     

    erwos

    The Hebrew Hammer
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 25, 2009
    13,866
    Rockville, MD
    Why would the ATF be ruling something as an AOW based on CT law? Why would they even care? They're a federal agency, enforcing state law is not their jurisdiction. TFB got that one totally wrong.

    We really need to see the ATF determination letter to understand what's going on here. Right now, all we know is what the gun shop in question is telling us. It would not surprise me if this was the start of the BATFE pushing back on braces being used to create de facto SBRs, but it would also not surprise me if we were not being informed of a few key facts, too.
     

    DC-W

    Ultimate Member
    Patriot Picket
    Jan 23, 2013
    25,290
    ️‍
    Why would the ATF be ruling something as an AOW based on CT law? Why would they even care? They're a federal agency, enforcing state law is not their jurisdiction. TFB got that one totally wrong.

    We really need to see the ATF determination letter to understand what's going on here. Right now, all we know is what the gun shop in question is telling us. It would not surprise me if this was the start of the BATFE pushing back on braces being used to create de facto SBRs, but it would also not surprise me if we were not being informed of a few key facts, too.


    Agree with all of that.
     

    danb

    dont be a dumbass
    Feb 24, 2013
    22,704
    google is your friend, I am not.
    :tinfoil:

    This seems to directly contradict their earlier guidance for example:https://johnpierceesq.com/can-you-add-a-vertical-fore-grip-to-an-ar-pistol/). However it seems like all these weapons also have a vertical foregrip.

    Maybe they are rethinking the whole vertical foregrip on a pistol with a brace idea.

    but honestly, cmon, they should just push for fixing NFA and legalizing SBRs. After all, this is a 100% legal non-NFA firearm.

     

    erwos

    The Hebrew Hammer
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 25, 2009
    13,866
    Rockville, MD
    Without the foregrip, you shoudn't have an AOW problem... you either have a pistol or an SBR. It could be that they don't feel compelled to measure from the end of the stock if in fact there is no stock and it's just a brace, but that is pure conjecture.
     

    danb

    dont be a dumbass
    Feb 24, 2013
    22,704
    google is your friend, I am not.
    One of the letters on the facebook page which is hard to read, and maybe a year old, says something to the effect that if a pistol has a vertical foregrip and needs a brace to achieve the 26" the vertical foregrip should be removed. Or, brace should be removed to measure length.

    I am not really sure the source, and I cannot find an ATF letter.

    I will say that an AR pistol is different in that the buffer tube cannot be folded or removed.

    I am mostly in the camp, vertical foregrips on pistols (brace or no), I dont touch em. It may or may not be an NFA item, and it may depend which way the wind blows.
     

    J.T

    Ultimate Member
    Jul 23, 2012
    1,081
    MD
    One of the letters on the facebook page which is hard to read, and maybe a year old, says something to the effect that if a pistol has a vertical foregrip and needs a brace to achieve the 26" the vertical foregrip should be removed. Or, brace should be removed to measure length.

    I am mostly in the camp, vertical foregrips on pistols (brace or no), I dont touch em. It may or may not be an NFA item, and it may depend which way the wind blows.

    Agreed and I saw the same info
     

    Biggfoot44

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 2, 2009
    32,876
    It's not the $5 per se , it's the lack of NFA process .

    Different opinions on subsequent ATF letters are common, and defy crystal balls .

    To the extent that such things follow logic , if a distinction were made on basis of ( thing that goes bang ) being functional with/ without a non- shoulder stock brace being extended , that wouldn't be their craziest ruling .

    ( And I don't even like vert fregrips , but it's the principles of the thing .)
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,915
    Messages
    7,258,418
    Members
    33,348
    Latest member
    Eric_Hehl

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom