Not quite correct. If the pistol equals or exceeds 26" as measured from the rear of the buffer tube to the muzzle of the barrel, it is still classified as a pistol. Adding a VFG to this pistol would change it's classification to a firearm. Remove the VFG and it reverts back to pistol classification.

Not correct, a pistol by definition must be "concealable" and according to the "interpretation" of the law by the ATF if a firearm is over 26" it is not considered "concealable" UNLESS its actually being concealed on a person (think trench coat). SO, even though most people would call an AR-15 with a rifle buffer (no stock) and any given under 16" barrel (totaling over 26") a "pistol" and may even have such weapon registered with local law enforcement as a pistol, in the eyes of the feds it is simply a "firearm" and therefore cannot be an AOW by the addition of a vertical pistol grip UNLESS it is concealed on a person. Then it magically becomes an AOW and you get your butt stretched in "Club FED" for 10 years...

This is not the right thread for this discussion, but neither the federal definition of "handgun" nor "pistol" say anything about concealability.  An AR pistol over 26" is still a pistol so long as it has "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 VFG alone is what toggles such a weapon between "pistol" and "firearm" based on the AOW definition.  
18 USC 921(a)(29)
27 CFR 479.11

I was just thinking about the BCM Gunfighter Vertical Grip and it being angled may not designate a Pistol as a AOW.  I've sent a letter to the ATF FTB for ruling.  I will post their response once I have it.

Stark Industries SE-5 AFG

You may have some other State regulations where you are but I can assure you that by Federal law, US Code or ATF interpretation there is absolutely no consideration or requirement to be concealable in defining a weapon as a handgun or pistol.





Title 27: Alcohol, Tobacco Products, and Firearms





CHAPTER II: BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS, AND EXPLOSIVES, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


SUBCHAPTER B: FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION


PART 478: COMMERCE IN FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION


Subpart B: Definitions 478.11 - Meaning of terms.
Handgun. (a) Any firearm which has a short stock and is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand; and (b) Any combination of parts from which a firearm described in paragraph (a) can be assembled.





Pistol. 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).





Firearm. Any weapon, including a starter gun, which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; the frame or receiver of any such weapon; any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; or any destructive device; but the term shall not include an antique firearm. In the case of a licensed collector, the term shall mean only curios and relics.





The Firearm definition you are referencing, which  the ATF refers to in  their letter to Franklin Armory, is the definition of title 2 (NFA) firearms. This definition is further broken down by specific weapons also. The one cited the ATF letter is the definition of AOW (any other weapon) which does state the requirement to be concealable.





If you read the 2nd page of that letter you will note that it states:


"In your letter you state that company's Model SE-SSP pistol has an overall length of 26.3 inches and a barrel og 10-1/2 inches. The addition of a vertical forward grip to the Model SE-SSP would result in this firearm no longer qualifying as a "handgun" or "pistol" as explained above; however, it would not be subject to the NFA/AOW classification provided it's overall length is at least 26 inches and it is not actually concealed on the person."





Please note the it is "the addition of a vertical forward grip" which results in the firearm "no longer qualifying as a "handgun" or "pistol"".


From this it is clearly inferred that without the addition of the VFG to to the Model SE-SSP the firearm retains the status of pistol or handgun regardless of the overall length being in excess of 26 inches.





Hope this help clear things up.










 

Excellent information...Thanks, John

I know this is an old post but can I possibly get a build list? That thing is tits and I want to build one similar to it to match my AR15 rifle and my FNH Five-seveN MkII FDE.

Here's possible a new one.

??

Was new 8 months ago. ;)

- OS

I am completely clear, however, when I typed that it was late and I should have worded it differently. What I was trying to say was, an AOW can be created, by the ATF DEFINITION, by simply concealing what would otherwise not be considered an AOW. This is in regards to the 26" ruling which isn't LAW, but simply an arbitrary "ruling" as the ATF likes to call it.

SO, "in other words", a 26.1" or longer AR-15 "firearm" with a vertical fore grip is legal until you conceal it. Then it magically transforms into an AOW and you go to "Club Fed" for 10 years of butt stretching.

 Make sense?

 Agreed?

Good luck hiding a 26" AR in your pants

 Some people have more room in their pants than others, just sayin...

 In all seriousness though, I have actually read somewhere 1st hand, the ATF referred specifically about the use of a trench coat, just cant remember where I read it (might actually be on their new FAQ area on their site)...

Yes, except it's 26.0" or longer. :)

And of course you can conceal most anything in one of these:



- OS

Actually its "under 26", but whos keeping track?

 There are also no 16" Carbines, but there are plenty of 16.1" and TONS of 16.5".  Just sayin...

So they are now saying, what people were worried about with the Sig brace, IF you shoulder it, NOW its an SBR...not good...

Maybe they should read both their letters again, then reply for a 3rd time and clear this up?

will rehash this once again.....................so, if you have an AR weapon that with a KAK extended  buffer tube, a Sig brace and a 10.5 inch barrel that is, in overall length, 26 inches long from the end of the buffer to the end of the muzzle (not including a non permanently mounted muzzle device) is this now a "firearm" ? what if you shoulder the Sig Brace?  must you have a vertical foregrip on it to be a "firearm" not a long AR pistol?

anybody want to weigh in on this?

The addition of the VFG to the > 26" OAL is what turns it into a firearm.  Take off the VFG and it is just a pistol.

ok  thanks.  so in this case, the addition of a VFG would render moot the issue whether you can legally shoulder a sig brace. (which i believe, has not changed with this latest BATF letter anyways)

 INCORRECT. You are confusing "overall length" (26" rule) with barrel length (SBR vs. rifle).

 Your AR-15 could be 48 inches overall but if it has a 14.5 barrel its still an SBR...

thanks.   so the sig brace "is not a stock" is still an issue. understood

Just got this in my email today.


ATF Firearms: Open Letter on the Redesign of "Stabilizing Braces"
01/16/2015
OPEN LETTER ON THE REDESIGN OF “STABILIZING BRACES”

The Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division (FATD), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has received inquiries from the public concerning the proper use of devices recently marketed as “stabilizing braces.” These devices are described as “a shooter’s aid that is designed to improve the single-handed shooting performance of buffer tube equipped pistols.” The device claims to enhance accuracy and reduce felt recoil when using an AR-style pistol.

These items are intended to improve accuracy by using the operator’s forearm to provide stable support for the AR-type pistol. ATF has previously determined that attaching the brace to a firearm does not alter the classification of the firearm or subject the firearm to National Firearms Act (NFA) control. However, this classification is based upon the use of the device as designed. When the device is redesigned for use as a shoulder stock on a handgun with a rifled barrel under 16 inches in length, the firearm is properly classified as a firearm under the NFA.

The NFA, 26 USCS § 5845, defines “firearm,” in relevant part, as “a shotgun having a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length” and “a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length.” That section defines both “rifle” and “shotgun” as “a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder….” (Emphasis added).

Pursuant to the plain language of the statute, ATF and its predecessor agency have long held that a pistol with a barrel less than 16 inches in length and an attached shoulder stock is a NFA “firearm.” For example, inRevenue Ruling 61-45, Luger and Mauser pistols “having a barrel of less than 16 inches in length with an attachable shoulder stock affixed” were each classified as a “short barrel rifle…within the purview of the National Firearms Act.”                                                                                                              

In classifying the originally submitted design, ATF considered the objective design of the item as well as the stated purpose of the item. In submitting this device for classification, the designer noted that

The intent of the buffer tube forearm brace is to facilitate one handed firing of the AR15 pistol for those with limited strength or mobility due to a handicap. It also performs the function of sufficiently padding the buffer tube in order to reduce bruising to the forearm while firing with one hand. Sliding and securing the brace onto ones forearm and latching the Velcro straps, distributes the weight of the weapon evenly and assures a snug fit. Therefore, it is no longer necessary to dangerously "muscle" this large pistol during the one handed aiming process, and recoil is dispersed significantly, resulting in more accurate shooting without compromising safety or comfort.

In the classification letter of November 26, 2012, ATF noted that a “shooter would insert his or her forearm into the device while gripping the pistol's handgrip-then tighten the Velcro straps for additional support and retention. Thus configured, the device provides the shooter with additional support of a firearm while it is still held and operated with one hand.” When strapped to the wrist and used as designed, it is clear the device does not allow the firearm to be fired from the shoulder. Therefore, ATF concluded that, pursuant to the information provided, “the device is not designed or intended to fire a weapon from the shoulder.” In making the classification ATF determined that the objective design characteristics of the stabilizing brace supported the stated intent.

ATF hereby confirms that if used as designed—to assist shooters in stabilizing a handgun while shooting with a single hand—the device is not considered a shoulder stock and therefore may be attached to a handgun without making a NFA firearm. However, ATF has received numerous inquiries regarding alternate uses for this device, including use as a shoulder stock. Because the NFA defines both rifle and shotgun to include any “weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder,” any person who redesigns a stabilizing brace for use as a shoulder stock makes a NFA firearm when attached to a pistol with a rifled barrel under 16 inches in length or a handgun with a smooth bore under 18 inches in length.

The GCA does not define the term “redesign” and therefore ATF applies the common meaning. “Redesign” is defined as “to alter the appearance or function of.” See e.g. Webster’s II New College Dictionary, Third Ed. (2005). This is not a novel interpretation. For example ATF has previously advised that an individual possesses a destructive device when possessing anti-personnel ammunition with an otherwise unregulated 37/38mm flare launcher. See ATF Ruling 95-3. Further, ATF has advised that even use of an unregulated flare and flare launcher as a weapon results in the making of a NFA weapon. Similarly, ATF has advised that, although otherwise unregulated, the use of certain nail guns as weapons may result in classification as an “any other weapon.”

The pistol stabilizing brace was neither “designed” nor approved to be used as a shoulder stock, and therefore use as a shoulder stock constitutes a “redesign” of the device because a possessor has changed the very function of the item. Any individual letters stating otherwise are contrary to the plain language of the NFA, misapply Federal law, and are hereby revoked.

Any person who intends to use a handgun stabilizing brace as a shoulder stock on a pistol (having a rifled barrel under 16 inches in length or a smooth bore firearm with a barrel under 18 inches in length) must first file an ATF Form 1 and pay the applicable tax because the resulting firearm will be subject to all provisions of the NFA.

If you have any questions about the issues addressed in this letter, you may contact the Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division at [email protected] or by phone at (304) 616-4300.


Max M. Kingery
Acting Chief
Firearms Technology Criminal Branch
Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division


Link to letter on BATF website.


Boot.

Yes sir, the brace being shouldered magically becomes a "stock" now, so a "stock" on the weapon ALWAYS constitutes a rifle as it is "manufactured or remanufactured, designed or redesigned to be fire from the shoulder".

why this thread is here since atf letters are private letter rulings, they only apply to the person addressed ??

Not an "open letter"..........

None of this will matter if the ATF and/or the NFA goes away. Both are in serious jeopardy at this very moment...

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1681489_NFA_cases__Hollis_v__Holder__Watson_v__Holder___TX_DOJ_Reply_p69_.html&page=1

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/234811-republican-bill-would-abolish-atf

I'm aware of them but they have very little chance of changing anything., Hence the "rofl"

I don't know. But the less videos of people shouldering them the better. The further this product remains under the radar the better we will al be.

You from subguns.net eh?

So are they illegal or not?

???

To be honest, they don't even apply to the person addressed, since they can change their mind at any time.

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice...

I keep hearing references to this but it defeats the point of having a law ...

It would be like me prepping to drive from NY to CA so I contact the DOT and ask if I can drive 100mph in my sports car, then the FBI sends me a letter which states I can do it as long as 1) I don't drive my SUV, and 2) no State law prohibits it ... so all the other drivers must adhere to posted speed limit signs but I can drive 100mph? And when a LEO stops me and reads my letter but figures the FBI is Federal LE so he shouldn't contradict them I get to keep going?

Again, the point to a law is that everyone follows it; the mere idea of a 'private letter ruling' (not bashing you, just borrowing your vernacular) is antithetical to the US system of law.

Can anyone provide a link to somewhere (other than the ATF website) which confirms that a letter from the ATF carries the enforceability of law?

Well the letters follow the general logic of case law as far as I am aware. It would be rather foolish for the ATF to issue these letters and then retract them

Anyway, I would think that if Sig's lawyers didn't think the letter pertained to everyone, and not just Sig, they wouldn't include a copy with each brace.

It carries that weight if they enforce it and it's not overturned in the courts. Neither of which has happened.

I suppose you could turn yourself in and see if they'll prosecute you to get the ball rolling.

There is also no conviction for adding a VFG to a sub 26" handgun either, btw. Only time ATF tried it, a pre-trial opinion wasn't favorable, so they dropped that particular charge.

- OS

Funny.

While I trust that is a joke, the concept is not ... meaning, the mere idea that a federal agency (which is certainly not the judicial branch and technically not any branch of government, right?) can claim to justifiably interpret the same law differently for EACH citizen who asks is downright baffling. I've nothing to turn myself in for - yet - meaning I'm not sure it's possible to comply with all laws as 1) they don't seem to be available on the website, and 2) they appear to be different for each citizen :(

Not trying to be disagreeable with those who are helpful - it just ... makes ... no ... sense ???

ATF doesn't really want to test some of these finer calls they make -- its culture is to settle for the thuggish intimidation factor. The last time they tried one was 23 years ago in the Thompson case,  and they lost beau coup prosecutorial power as a result. And since it was a SCOTUS decision, the areas covered can never be altered by ATF whim in the future.

- OS

Ahhhh ... thx.

I don't know if this will help but here is my letter from the ATF concerning the FAB Defense AFG.

All this ATF stuff is bullshit.  



I pray for the day that they go away with their NFA bullshit.



I am not paying much attention to all this stupidity.  If I carry my pistol with me in the car locked and loaded and have to use it to defend myself, I really do not plan to use ONE HAND to deploy the pistol.  I use TWO HANDS to deploy my Glocks so WTF.  



Fuck the ATF.



Have a nice day.

Was thinking about building a AR15 Pistol.
This is a very informative thread .
thanks guys.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ar15/comments/5cfot7/i_asked_the_atf_if_i_could_put_a_tacsac_on_my_ar/