AK pistol with an Angled fore grip

[macadore]

Would a Draco (an AK pistol) with the Magpul AFG2 Angled fore grip be an AOW and require a tax stamp? http://store.magpul.com/product/MAG414/88

 

[Gord]

Yup.

Anything classified as a handgun with an add-on VFG is an AOW.

 

[jojo200517]

I'll say I wouldn't want to be the one to test it out. Gord is correct in saying that anything classified as a handgun with an addon VFG is an AOW.

However the grip you are proposing isn't vertical. The ATF website reads vertical fore grip everywhere I look, but who knows what they actually mean. You could write and ask, but of course they could change there mind tomorrow on it.

 

[hirundo82]

There's an ATF letter out there saying that an AFG is OK to add to an AR pistol. I still wouldn't do it, since the letter doesn't elaborate on why the AFG is different from a VFG for this purpose.

I'd expect the ATF to change their mind on this in the future, and I don't think a letter posted on the internet is sufficient for an entrapment by estoppel defense.

 

[Hanzo581]

I wouldn't chance it unless you contact the BATF and get a "get out of jail free" letter saying you are allowed to use it.

 

[macadore]

Thanks for the responses. Sounds like a bad idea.

 

[hirundo82]

The ATF website reads vertical fore grip everywhere I look, but who knows what they actually mean. You could write and ask, but of course they could change there mind tomorrow on it.

The issue with the ATF's handgun vs. AOW definition is they can bend it to mean most anything.

This comes from the NFA definition of handgun being "a firearm which has a short stock and is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand." The ATF says that since adding a foregrip makes it into a firearm that is not designed to be fired with one hand it is no longer a handgun, and since it is a concealable firearm it must be an AOW.

There is case law contradicting the ATF's assertion that a handgun plus VFG is an AOW but since the ATF won't appeal these types of cases for fear of getting an adverse ruling, there is no binding precedent.

Since that logic applies to the AFG as well, I'm not sure how the letter I posted got by them. The explanation that makes the most sense to me is that the ATF doesn't understand what the AFG is and is just making it up as they go along

 

[WardenWolf]

My advice is to write a letter to the ATF. I have heard from a few people that the ATF has a separate classification for "pistol" and "handgun", and that the Draco, PLR-16, and the like are considered a pistol but not a handgun, and thus are legal with a vertical foregrip. If you have a letter certifying it as so, you, personally, are good to go.

 

[Aaron Baker]

The reason there's case law that adding a vertical foregrip doesn't turn a pistol into an AOW is because, in my legal opinion, it doesn't.

If you read the definition of a handgun, it specifies "originally designed" to be shot with one hand. If you're LATER adding the grip, then the firearm in question was still "originally designed" to be shot with one hand.

The ATF just doesn't like it. So they make up their own rules because they know that people are generally too scared to stand up to them for fear of going to jail. But when someone does get charged with a crime for adding a vertical foregrip to a pistol, the above language from the statute makes it an easy defense and the ATF loses. Then they don't appeal because they don't want binding case law that goes against their interpretation.

There is a way to do an end run that doesn't involve a risk of jail, though. Pay for a tax stamp on your favorite pistol so that you can make it into an AOW and put on the vertical foregrip. Then ask for a refund because you shouldn't have had to get a tax stamp. ATF refuses, and you file a lawsuit in the US Court of Claims. No risk of jail, but you should easily win because the statute is on your side.

Of course, that'll cost money if you're not an attorney yourself, because you'd have to hire one. Maybe one day I'll do it for myself.

Aaron (standard disclaimer: a lawyer, but not your lawyer)

 

[nalioth]

The AFG is not a "vertical foregrip", but a "hand stop".

It is not designed to be gripped, but to aid in placement of your hand on the forearm.

 

[kogashuko]

No one needs to write anything... just read the USC the AOW can not have a rifled barrel. Just because the ATF doesnt like it, they dont have a NFA catagory for it, or because it looks evil does not make it an AOW. NOWHERE in the AOW code does it say "any weapon we can not find another catagory for and dont like belongs here." No, a pistol / handgun / rifle with a pistol grip, angled stop, or <removed> strapped to the underside of the barrel is NOT an AOW it simply a pistol / handgun / rifle with a pistol grip, angled stop.

 

[Quiet]

BATFE 05-04-2006.

Q: Is it legal to attach a vertical fore grip to a handgun?

“Handgun” is defined under Federal law to mean, in part, “a firearm which has a short stock and is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand…” Gun Control Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(29).

Under an implementing regulation of the National Firearms Act (NFA), 27 C.F.R. § 479.11, “pistol” is defined as:

… a weapon originally designed, made, and intended to fire a projectile (bullet) from one or more barrels when held in one hand, and having (a) a chamber(s) as an integral part(s) of, or permanently aligned with, the bore(s); and (b) a short stock designed to be gripped by one hand and at an angle to and extending below the line of the bore(s).
The NFA further defines the term “any other weapon” (AOW) in 26 U.S.C. § 5845(e) as:

… any weapon or device capable of being concealed on the person from which a shot can be discharged through the energy of an explosive, a pistol or revolver having a barrel with a smooth bore designed or redesigned to fire a fixed shotgun shell, weapons with combination shotgun and rifle barrels 12 inches or more, less than 18 inches in length, from which only a single discharge can be made from either barrel without manual reloading, and shall include any such weapon which may be readily restored to fire. Such term shall not include a pistol or revolver having a rifled bore, or rifled bores, or weapons designed, made, or intended to be fired from the shoulder and not capable of firing fixed ammunition.

ATF has long held that by installing a vertical fore grip on a handgun, the handgun is no longer designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand. Therefore, if individuals install a vertical fore grip on a handgun, they are “making” a firearm requiring registration with ATF’s NFA Branch. Making an unregistered “AOW” is punishable by a fine and 10 years’ imprisonment. Additionally, possession of an unregistered “AOW” is also punishable by fine and 10 years’ imprisonment.

To lawfully add a vertical fore grip to a handgun, a person must make an appropriate application on ATF Form 1 (5320.1), “Application to Make and Register a Firearm.” The applicant must submit the completed form, along with a fingerprint card bearing the applicant’s fingerprints; a photograph; and $200.00. The application will be reviewed by the NFA Branch. If the applicant is not prohibited from possessing a firearm under Federal, State, or local law, and possession of an “AOW” is not prohibited in the applicant’s State of residence, the form will be approved. Only then may the person add a vertical fore grip to the designated handgun.

A person may also send the handgun to a person licensed to manufacture NFA weapons. The manufacturer will install the fore grip on the firearm and register the firearm on an ATF Form 2 (5320.2). The manufacturer can then transfer the firearm back to the individual on an ATF Form 4 (5320.4), which results in a $5.00 transfer tax. If the manufacturer is out of State, the NFA Branch will need a clarification letter submitted with the ATF Form 4 so that the NFA Branch Examiner will know the circumstances of the transfer. Questions can be directed to the NFA Branch or the Firearms Technology Branch.

 

[AmEngRifles]

Seems to me there are a few ambiguities' in ATF's interpretation.

Most of these rifle-come-pistol designs like the carbine "Enforcer" (no longer made), the AR-15 pistol and the AK pistol were ALL originally designed as a rifle, therefore should be exempt from their classification.

A 1911 was designed as a pistol to be fired by one hand. A Smith & Wesson revolver is designed to fire with one hand.

The aforementioned AR & AK firearms never were designed as such. I mean, I get that they have been REDESIGNED to have the ability to be fired one handed, but does anyone really use them that way? And at what stage does the design process and intention take precedent? These guns still have fore-ends, don't they? Fore-ends are intended for gripping with a second hand.

If you REALLY read the firearms descriptions, they leave some very interesting openings. Seems like they have adjusted the law administratively as much as really written new laws to cover weapons that didn't exist 50 years ago. And much of the law regulating NFA were written back in the 30's when prohibition and gangsters were the main problem with full auto and chopped guns, weren't they?

Seems like all these conversions should have required the $5.00 tax stamp as an AOW? Since they have forward handguards, there was every intention they would be fired with two hands.

 

[lead slinger]

what if you had the ak pistol with a afg and a side folding stock what would that be ???

 

[Zundfolge]

This comes from the NFA definition of handgun being "a firearm which has a short stock and is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand." The ATF says that since adding a foregrip makes it into a firearm that is not designed to be fired with one hand it is no longer a handgun, and since it is a concealable firearm it must be an AOW.

This is why I've always been surprised that AR and AK pistols are not already classified as an AOW (or worse an SBR in the case of ARs because of the buffer tube). Because clearly with ANY sort of foregrip (vertical, angled or the stock horizontal) would be there for a second hand and thus the gun is designed to be fired with two hands.

Its frankly kept me from buying one until I'm in the position to register it as an SBR and put a stock on it.

 

[hirundo82]

what if you had the ak pistol with a afg and a side folding stock what would that be ???

It would be a short-barreled rifle (SBR) assuming barrel length was still under 16" and OAL was <26".

It wouldn't require a stamp if you put a 16" or greater barrel on at the same time (along with OAL >26"), but it could also never be a pistol again.

 

[hirundo82]

This comes from the NFA definition of handgun being "a firearm which has a short stock and is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand." The ATF says that since adding a foregrip makes it into a firearm that is not designed to be fired with one hand it is no longer a handgun, and since it is a concealable firearm it must be an AOW.

This is why I've always been surprised that AR and AK pistols are not already classified as an AOW (or worse an SBR in the case of ARs because of the buffer tube). Because clearly with ANY sort of foregrip (vertical, angled or the stock horizontal) would be there for a second hand and thus the gun is designed to be fired with two hands.

Its frankly kept me from buying one until I'm in the position to register it as an SBR and put a stock on it.

AR pistols are pretty obviously not SBRs because they aren't designed or redesigned to be fired from the shoulder; the buffer tube is there as part of the mechanism and isn't "designed" to be used as a stock. If some people try to use it as a stock, the manufacturer can say "But that's not how it is supposed to be used."

ATF could try to designate AR and AK pistols as AOWs because of the forward handguard, but history says they'd lose that fight in court and they try hard to not create precedent contradicting their stated position.

 

[Zundfolge]

AR pistols are pretty obviously not SBRs because they aren't designed or redesigned to be fired from the shoulder; the buffer tube is there as part of the mechanism and isn't "designed" to be used as a stock. If some people try to use it as a stock, the manufacturer can say "But that's not how it is supposed to be used."

I agree with that, but the ATF isn't interested in logic or reason (if they were then the whole "sporting purpose" nonsense would go away).

Seems to me that the buffer tubes with foam padding could be construed to be shoulder stocks by some anti gun bureaucrat at the BATFE.



Note that I'm not arguing that I think F-Troop SHOULD reclassify AR and AK pistols as NFA items, I'm just saying I'm surprised they haven't (and frankly if they get real popular they might ... and if I ever buy one then I'm sure that would end up causing them to be reclassified knowing my luck).

 

[Quiet]

Seems to me that the buffer tubes with foam padding could be construed to be shoulder stocks by some anti gun bureaucrat at the BATFE.

AFAIK...
BATFE NFA Branch said the foam on a pistol length buffer tube was good to go.

The foam is used as a cheek rest and the pistol length buffer tube is too short to reach the shoulder.