zip .22


PDA






svytlana
January 12, 2013, 08:38 PM
so there web site says that to connect the .22 pistol to an ar rail you need a tax stamp for a sbr. could some one explain this. and what happens if I put one on an ar pistol? looks like a hoot on the .22 pistol. two a.22s at the same time. hehe

If you enjoyed reading about "zip .22" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
medalguy
January 12, 2013, 09:10 PM
??:confused:

Swing
January 12, 2013, 09:14 PM
This thing (http://www.usfirearms.com/)?

T Bran
January 12, 2013, 09:17 PM
As soon as a stock is connected to the zip it either needs to be SBR'ed or have a 16'' barrel installed.
Since the 16'' bbl is not an option you must go with an SBR and give the devil his due.
If I'm misinformed please fill me in.
T

hatchetbearer
January 12, 2013, 09:18 PM
attaching a pistol, zipgun or the like to a rifle is now adding a stock to the pistol, making it an SBR. I'm not sure how the masterkey gets around this, something to do with the barrel length, and the OAL of it assembled.

Conversely, if you did somehow find a civilian legal M203, you would also need to add a tax stamp to it.

mgmorden
January 12, 2013, 09:28 PM
You can't have a weapon with a stock and a barrel shorter than 16".

You probably could technically get away with attaching this to the rail of an AR15 that was built as a pistol though, since it has no buttstock and is a pistol already. Mounting to a normal gun though, you need the SBR permit.

As to the Zip itself, I find it mildly interesting. Its unique for sure, but the construction worries me. You're supposed to buy a parts kit (including the bolt) that is to be replaced every 5000 rounds. Also the fact that you have to reach in front of the gun darned close to the muzzle to operate the charging handle is just a safety issue IMHO.

Still, from the sounds of it these things will be cheap. Might be worth tossing one in a survival bag.

svytlana
January 12, 2013, 09:33 PM
ya. my thought was along the lines of the master key. less than 18 inch barrel on a shotgun. also its a stand alone pistol. was thinking it would be fun on my hk416 .22 pistol.

Gordon
January 12, 2013, 10:16 PM
Just the asscessory :neener: I need on my Noveske Diplomat !:rolleyes:

Captains1911
January 13, 2013, 11:14 PM
I've never heard of that, weird. Help me understand the value of mounting a 22 pistol to an M4 or SCAR.....?

crazy-mp
January 13, 2013, 11:42 PM
http://rcsguns.com/images/geared_out_AR15.jpg

Always need another accessory!

MasterSergeantA
January 14, 2013, 12:36 AM
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=686233&highlight=aow+sbs

There is a letter a ways down the page.

svytlana
January 14, 2013, 02:35 AM
the letter only addrsses aow's. which is good to know but still doesn't quite answer my q's about title 1 pistol connected to title 1 pistol.

Prince Yamato
January 14, 2013, 04:12 PM
If you attach a pistol to the forward rail of an AR-15 pistol, you are adding a forward vertical grip and making an aow.

klyph
January 14, 2013, 04:44 PM
The atf have determined that a vertical grip added to a pistol places it under the aow category. A couple problems with this: AOW definition specifically excludes rifled bore firearms. The logic used is that adding a foregrip makes the firearm no longer a pistol since a pistol is designed to be fired with one hand. The error is that adding accessories does not alter the original design. A pistol with a foregrip was still designed to be fired with one hand. Updated state legislation banning such firearms use the wording "designed or redesigned" to cover the fact that the NFA is worded only "designed". A pistol designed to be fired with one hand cannot be considered an AOW if redesigned. The original design is what defines it's NFA categorization under the law. The ATF has never successfully prosecuted anyone for placing a VFG on a pistol. Most people are of the opinion that we should accept the ATFs opinions as law based upon our fear of being prosecuted and the fact that even a victory in court will likely bankrupt you financially. If there is a more clear example of government terrorism, it probably also relates to this agency or another agency of the "justice" department.

MasterSergeantA
January 14, 2013, 07:30 PM
the letter only addrsses aow's. which is good to know but still doesn't quite answer my q's about title 1 pistol connected to title 1 pistol.
The reason I offered the letter is that it relates to the mounting of an AOW shotgun (which, under the law CANNOT have a stock) to an AR rifle. Mounting it does not create a SBS out of the AOW. Ergo, the stock of the rifle is not considered a stock on the AOW. Expanding that, the pistol should be treated no differently.

I would recommend that if someone is thinking about doing this with a "zip .22", a letter to the ATF would not be a bad idea. As klyph has already pointed out, ATF "opinions" have no basis in law until prosecuted and adjudicated in a court of law. Doing so can be a costly process and THAT is the weight that ATF dangles over all of our heads. Even getting a letter with the ATF opinion that it is okay can be negated later by another ATF opinion to the contrary. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

If you enjoyed reading about "zip .22" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!