User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 4:22:42 PM EDT
[#1]
Won't that grip make the gun an SBR? But honestly its not like the ATF is cnstantly staring down our throats. Well, I take that back. With as many guns as some of you buy, you might be on their list.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 4:32:18 PM EDT
[#2]
Should be perfectly legal so far as I can see...no problem.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 4:38:02 PM EDT
[#3]
I would wait for the experts to chime in before anybody goes ahead and installs one on their glock. I think it would make your pistol an AOW under the NFA rules. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 4:38:32 PM EDT
[#4]
I think the ATF would see the gun and look thru the 10,000 page law book and find nothing pertaining to the gun and grip, scratch their heads, pass some new laws and make the book 10,001 pages long. I really can't say but to me it's a pistol with a attachable folding forward grip. What's the law pertaining to that?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 4:52:26 PM EDT
[#5]
Yeah AOW thats what I was thinking but just couldnt get it out in time
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 5:06:14 PM EDT
[#6]
Well they dont have any in stock, or that is what they are saying because they found out it is a NO-NO to us regular folks.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 5:37:09 PM EDT
[#7]
No flame, but wouldn't it be an AOW? If it were installed on a registered Glock 18 then it wouldn't matter if it were added because you can have a MG in any configuration ie. SBR, AOW, pistol, etc. ).Why ask why. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 5:42:41 PM EDT
[#8]
Who ever said AOW gets a nice chocolate chip cookie!
Any Other Weapon. Still requires a tax stamp like SBR or silencers. C-4 Youre correct. Let's say you buy a UZI you only have to fill out the forms for a MG, not for a SBR. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 5:45:03 PM EDT
[#9]
 Stupid looking and pointless all in one package!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 5:45:40 PM EDT
[#10]
Legal or not, its retarded.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 7:54:10 PM EDT
[#11]
+1
+1 |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 8:01:18 PM EDT
[#12]
definitly gettin one of them!
AOW |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 8:03:43 PM EDT
[#13]
Dont beat me up, but I asked this question a year ago. The answer that I got was that the since the front grip did not effect the way the pistol was originally designed to be fired it was legal.
Again, I'm looking for the quote, but I think I deleted it. Don't hate me because I'm beautiful |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 8:11:03 PM EDT
[#14]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 12:21:59 AM EDT
[#15]
+1 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 12:49:54 AM EDT
[#16]
thats like sleeping with your sister ...it's jsut wrong
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 12:52:07 AM EDT
[#17]
but it feels so good
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 1:28:21 AM EDT
[#18]
Don't be a hater, dog.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 3:14:46 AM EDT
[#19]
I remember wanting to put one on an HK SP-89. Guess what.....I would've had to pay the $200 tax. What's even more ignorant is my local Sheriff wouldn't sign the damn ATF form. Geesh.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 6:32:05 AM EDT
[#20]
good, you would have looked like a dork
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 8:56:48 AM EDT
[#21]
When Bushmaster came out with their no-ban AR pistols with the picatinny rail along the bottom of the handguard I thought it would be fun to get one and stick a vertical grip on it. Then I was told by the guy who runs the Class III shop in my town where I was looking into costs for a silencer for the whole set-up that sticking a vertical grip on it would qualify it as a Short Barreled Rifle and make it subject to a $200 making tax and the required three month+ wait. That meant I'd be paying a total of $400 in taxes for the whole set up. That cooled off the whole idea.
But it did seem stupid that by sticking a vertical grip on it suddenly it's Class III, but if I take it off then it isn't anymore. Also, Lumpy presents a pretty solid argument. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 1:24:56 PM EDT
[#22]
SO, I'm assuming you think the HK MP5-K makes you look like a dork too? Whatever. 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 3:40:37 PM EDT
[#23]
gllgll stick this into your address bar. The SP89 foregrip wouldn't be fruity like the one for the Glock, it actually would be pretty cool(foregrip not pictured- this will, however, give you an idea of what the SP89 is) http://www.securityarms.com/20010315/galleryfiles/orig/sp89.htm |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2005 2:25:53 AM EDT
[#24]
A forward hand grip on the Bushmaster pistols would be cool if you did not have to do the $200 tax deal. It looks stupid on the Glock though. Now if they ever realy make a carbine that might be different.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2005 3:29:57 AM EDT
[#25]
My first question would be why?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2005 4:26:45 AM EDT
[#26]
It would make it an AOW not because of the way you actually hold the gun, but because of the ATF definition of a Pistol. A Pistol can have only one "pistol grip" or it is classified as an "any other weapon".
People also get confused on the issue of the $200 or $5 Tax Stamps. If "YOU" put that folding grip on your pistol then "YOU" are the "MAKER" of the AOW and the Tax Stamp will cost you $200. If Glock sends the pistol from their factory with that folding grip already on it, then "THEY" are the maker and you only pay a $5 "transfer" Tax Stamp. Hope this helps, MadDog  P.S. That particular folding grip looks stupid IMHO. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2005 6:55:55 PM EDT
[#27]
On a glock 18...perhaps, if those currently made for law enforcement have a rail on the front like the rest of glock's products, but on a regular semi auto glock, it doesn't seem like a smart accessory. I don't know about the legal aspects of it, though if you can't legally put a grip like that on an HK SP89, then I don't know how you could on a glock.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2005 1:22:32 AM EDT
[#28]
Well, If I had it on the Bushmaster model that I am thinking of and I used it with a shoulder rig sling and a red dot it would be esier to control I think. To each his own. Personaly I would still rather have a carbine or a 12ga shot gun. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2005 6:41:44 AM EDT
[#29]
might as well get one of those stocks that plugs into the hole in the back strap and get charged with an illegal SBR while you're at it
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2005 8:16:40 AM EDT
[#30]
Anyway it is a NO-NO unless the Goverment has your money. Funny how Chaeperthendirt does not say that in the website or catalog. All NFA rules apply.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2005 12:56:44 PM EDT
[#31]
I suppose it would come in handy if you had a stock on it like so:
http://nas4.atlanta.gbhinc.com/GB/036100000/36100709/pix473884343.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2005 11:38:27 AM EDT
[#32]
OMG THAT IS RETARDED!
I bet anyone who sees this and thinks it is cool would love to have a foward grip and a stock on their toothbrush. www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=5&f=4&t=20085&page=1 |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
