nomenclature

[jamesjames]

It’s as much of a pistol as a broom handle Mauser. Another of the most awkward, impractical pistols in history.... except that the AR is chambered (mostly) in a rifle cartridge. The both work better in a braced configuration.

Just because it was called a pistol in a book or by somebody else doesn’t mean it was right. Think for yourself. Think outside the box.

 

[bluejeans]

well, handguns include revolvers which are not pistols. )

uh oh peeve alert!
Pistols and handguns are synonymous. Revolvers are pistols too... pistol is any gun designed to be fired with one hand.

the dictionary agrees with you but BATFE / statutes do not.

. Aside from the fact that the BATF has no authority over the English language, that statute does not draw the distinction. Read it again: see that word “or” close to the end

18 U.S.C., § 921(A)(29) and 27 CFR § 478.11. The term “Pistol” means 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 chamber(s) as an integral part(s) of, or permanently aligned with, the bore(s)

.
That “or” allows for a pistol to have chambers as an integral part of the pistol yet not necessarily permanently aligned with the barrel.

Back to the OP’s train of thought though....
I don’t see any issue with calling them pistols... I DO wonder if calling them AR pistols is incriminating. Doesn’t AR stand for “Armalite rifle”? Calling it an Armalite Rifle pistol sounds like an admission

 

[taliv]

That “or” allows for a pistol to have chambers as an integral part of the pistol yet not necessarily permanently aligned with the barrel.

it doesn't say chambers as an integral part of the pistol. it says it can have chambers as an integral part of the bore. or it can have chambers permanently aligned with the bore. neither of which would include revolvers.

 

[bluejeans]

it doesn't say chambers as an integral part of the pistol. it says it can have chambers as an integral part of the bore. or it can have chambers permanently aligned with the bore. neither of which would include revolvers.

So it does. You’re right. I’d missed the “of”. So much for the ATF... they missed it.

 

[taliv]

I don’t see any issue with calling them pistols... I DO wonder if calling them AR pistols is incriminating. Doesn’t AR stand for “Armalite rifle”? Calling it an Armalite Rifle pistol sounds like an admission

but would you, in common conversation, describe your "pistol" AR as an "AR handgun"?

 

[ATLDave]

I think of them, conceptually, as un-rifles. The whole point is that they are not "short barreled rifles." They are un-rifles. Just enough un- to keep from being rifles. SBU's: Short Barreled Unrifles.

 

[Dibbs]

OTOH, I know of no one who has an AR handgun or pistol, who calls it, or thinks of it, as a "PDW".

 

[jamesjames]

I like the “un-rifle” concept. It’s always seemed like a sub-rifle. As sub-machine gun is to a machine gun.

With all due respect to the ATF, the AR pistol designation seems like a lot of gymnastics to avoid the SBR restriction of the 1934 NFA. After a couple of high profile uses of sawed off shotguns and Thompson sub-machine guns, the NFA made the legal distinction between long guns, short guns, and Title II guns restricted by the tax stamp.

 

[MistWolf]

The original intent of the NFA was an outright ban on handguns. The language limiting all long guns to a minimum barrel length of 18 inches and an over all length of 26 inches was to keep someone from cutting down a rifle or shotgun to create a concealable substitute. In the end, they dropped the handgun ban, but left the short barrel rifle/shotgun language in place.

Back in the 80s & 90s, pistols made to fire rifle calibers gained in popularity, particularly silhouette shooting. J.D. Jones created a lot of wildcat calibers that were optimized for barrels of about 14 inches. 14 inches became a popular length because it was shooters found out to be inherently more accurate than longer barrels while still offering good velocities. Several gun writers of the period started calling this class of firearms "hand rifles".

 

[94045]

Pistol - Chamber must be integral or permanently aligned with the bore.

Handgun and Pistol are not synonymous.
Some handguns are not pistols.
Revolvers are the most obvious example.

 

[bluejeans]

So I’ve been doing a lot of reading trying to get to the bottom of this pistol/ handgun/ revolver thing...
my findings:

• The drawing of the line between pistols and revolvers is a legal definition particular to the USA (atf) and France. Elsewhere, the is no distinction. ( in England revolvers are specifically defined as pistols.). Thus the differentiation is a localized, legal term; not universal nor implicit to the English language.
• The term “revolver” is abbreviated from the original “revolving pistol”.
• I have yet to find a source making the distinction that predates the batf statue. Everyone I’ve read who differentiates between the terms seems to rely on the ATF definition.

Here’s an excerpt for Wikipedia that summarizes pretty well

Sometimes in usage, the term "pistol" refers to a handgun having a single fixed chamber integral with its barrel,[1][2] making pistols distinct from the other main type of handgun, the revolver, which has multiple chambers within a rotating cylinder that is separately aligned with a single barrel.[3][4] Most handgun experts and dictionaries[who?] make a technical distinction that views pistols as a subset of handguns; others use the terms interchangeably.

UK/Commonwealth usage does not always make this distinction, particularly when the terms are used by the military. For example, the official designation of the Webley Mk VIrevolver was "Pistol, Revolver, Webley, No. 1 Mk VI".[5] In contrast to Merriam-Webster[3][4], the Oxford English Dictionary (a descriptive dictionary) describes "pistol" as a small firearm to be used in one hand[6] and the usage of "revolver" as being a type of handgun[7] and gives its original form as "revolving pistol"[7][/quote]

Ok pretty much a repeat of what I just said..^
So both sides have a good reason for thinking the way they do; it’s just a matter of whether you prefer the legal definition or the dictionary/historical definition.

 

[jamesjames]

I am currently building an AR “pistol” in 300 BLK with 12 inch bbl, OSS front-vented suppressor, and brace. It’s intended as a defensive weapon. Since I had to get approved and pay a tax stamp for the suppressor, I didn’t want to have to get approved and pay another tax stamp for an SBR. So I will have a suppressed, braced pistol. What a bunch of rigamarole.