AR pistol question

[GaryinVirginia]

I was just told that if you hold an AR pistol to your shoulder it is illegal. If you hold it to your cheek only it's not. I'm about to call BS. Is what he told me correct?

 

[Texas10mm]

The BATFE is not in the business of deciding how you hold your pistol.

There are MANY BATFE letters available that cover this very subject.


https://www.sb-tactical.com/resource-category/atf-letter/

You're talking to a FUDD. Quit listening to them.

 

[syntaxerrorsix]

I was just told that if you hold an AR pistol to your shoulder it is illegal. If you hold it to your cheek only it's not. I'm about to call BS. Is what he told me correct?

No, it's not correct.

 

[herrwalther]

Shouldering a brace does not change the intent of a pistol brace. The intent of a pistol brace is to strap it or brace it to/against your arm. The ATF did issue a letter making shouldering a pistol brace illegal, but they have reversed that decision. Whomever told you is operating on old information and legal interpretations. Many companies that make pistol braces often post the ATF letters supporting their products.

 

[Tommygunn]

IIRC, the BATF once did consider holding a AR pistol to the shoulder a crime, then considered how they would enforce it, and decide it was not a violation. I could be wrong on this.

However, the prior three answers are all correct.

I have an AR pistol with a brace, and holding it to my shoulder doesn't bother me at all.

 

[MistWolf]

They did not consider shouldering an AR pistol to be a violation. They briefly considered shouldering a pistol with an arm brace as "redesigning" the arm brace into a shoulder stock. Therefore, shouldering an arm brace equipped pistol turned it into an SBR.

 

[GaryinVirginia]

They did not consider shouldering an AR pistol to be a violation. They briefly considered shouldering a pistol with an arm brace as "redesigning" the arm brace into a shoulder stock. Therefore, shouldering an arm brace equipped pistol turned it into an SBR.

That's what I was told. SBR, it looks more like a stock than a brace.

 

[GaryinVirginia]

Dimensions are 24" total with 8.5" barrel. So it sounds like it is a pistol for sure to me not a short barrel rifle. I think that has to be 26". Is that correct?

 

[230RN]

Nothing like having a solid legal base to guide your behavior.

You know, at this point, a court should figure any proscription by them (B ATF) as prima facie unconstitutionally vague, just because of their muddy and contradictory behaviors in the past.

"Yeronna, ladies and gemmin uh de joory, how can you find my client guilty of ABC when ABC could be legal by the B ATF's own re-interpretation tamorra?" (Flourishes arm in a dramatic gesture of frustration just as Marissa Tomei loudly pops her bubble gum.) ".....I rest.... my case." (Drops arm to side, bows head.)



Terry, 230RN

REF:
https://mytexasinjurylawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/my-cousin-vinny.jpg

Edited to clarify by inserting "(B ATF)"

 

[badkarmamib]

Dimensions are 24" total with 8.5" barrel. So it sounds like it is a pistol for sure to me not a short barrel rifle. I think that has to be 26". Is that correct?

There is no maximum length in the "legal" definition of a pistol. It can be as long as you want, if it doesn't have a stock. HOWEVER, if you are over 26", you can add a vertical foregrip, but this changes the classification from "pistol" to "firearm", which is still not subject to NFA, it just limits your ability to concealed-carry in some states.

 

[Sistema1927]

You have gotten some good advice here, but how would you know that? How would you know that we are not blowing smoke like the person who first told you that shouldering would be illegal?

In other words, it is always dangerous to rely on anonymous strangers for advice when the consequences could be so severe.

 

[Texas10mm]

You have gotten some good advice here, but how would you know that? How would you know that we are not blowing smoke like the person who first told you that shouldering would be illegal?

In other words, it is always dangerous to rely on anonymous strangers for advice when the consequences could be so severe.

Some of us have posted links to actual BATFE letters?

 

[Sistema1927]

Some of us have posted links to actual BATFE letters?

That is what I wanted the OP to think about with my questions. Going to the source, rather than relying on anonymous advice, is much safer, even though it sometimes carries risks if you don't have the ability to decipher what is placed before you.

For example, what if the only BATFE letter that he has access to was the one that started the confusion in the first place?