Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 2/14/2006 4:56:26 PM EDT
Anyone make a vertical forearm grip that fits an accessory rail on handgun, like a G21? A forearm grip designed for a picantinny rail seems to be too narrow for a handguns accessory rail.

Thanks!
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 4:57:50 PM EDT
you realize that would make it an AOW and you'd have to pay the $200 NFA tax.....right?
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 4:58:01 PM EDT
Its illegal to attach one unless you have applied for a AOW tax stamp .... Be carefull!!!!! The rail on a handgun isnt made for a VFG, its made for light attachment.
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:03:35 PM EDT
Good enough answer for me. Thanks for the info!

Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:05:13 PM EDT
UH OHHHH! Here we go again.

Be carefull about that stuff man.
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:07:14 PM EDT
wait 1 minute - is it not just an ATF opinion?, and not stated in the law...so it is legal.
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:08:23 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mikejohnson:
wait 1 minute - is it not just an ATF opinion?, and not stated in the law...so it is legal.




Ignore the guys post above unless you have lots of money for legal fee's.... Just a warning....
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:09:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By viper5194:

Originally Posted By mikejohnson:
wait 1 minute - is it not just an ATF opinion?, and not stated in the law...so it is legal.




Ignore the guys post above unless you have lots of money for legal fee's.... Just a warning....



quote your souce, answer my question - don't be a lemming and believe the mass opinion out there...
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:14:32 PM EDT
I think the BATFE sells them on their website.
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:15:52 PM EDT

Originally Posted By triburst1:
I think the BATFE sells them on their website.



Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:16:49 PM EDT

Originally Posted By triburst1:
I think the BATFE sells them on their website.



They have a package deal on those. $40 for the vertical grip and a bonus Pre-86 lightning link
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:17:21 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/14/2006 5:18:17 PM EDT by mikejohnson]
Maybe there is confusion with the AWB? well, it already sunset
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:18:18 PM EDT
I dont see what the purpose would be, Unless say it was on a G18
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:18:58 PM EDT
Every instance I've ever seen of someone being charged with an illegal AOW for having a forward grip on a handgun has been dismissed in court.

This doesn't mean that ATF won't charge you for it, just that you'll walk after $20K in legal fees.
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:22:10 PM EDT
I've been looking around abit, and I have to admit, none of the UZI, AK, AR or MP5K "pistols" seem to have a vertical foregrip as an "off the shelf" option. So, I have to agree with the consensus.

Oh well, on to another project!

Thanks for the info.
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:23:25 PM EDT

Originally Posted By USGI_45:
I dont see what the purpose would be, Unless say it was on a G18



It'd be gangsta.
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:24:09 PM EDT
technically it's legal. But the ATF has stated that they will prosecute.

Do what you wish, but i choose to not risk it.
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:28:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/14/2006 5:28:56 PM EDT by viper5194]
There was a ruleing by a federal judge years ago stateing it didnt make a pistol a AOW by installing the grip, since the pistol was still a pistol BUT the ATF still views it differently. If you have the funds to fight the charge be my guest but it would be costly.....

www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/us_v_davis2.txt

Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:28:25 PM EDT

Originally Posted By NAM:
technically it's legal. But the ATF has stated that they will prosecute.

Do what you wish, but i choose to not risk it.



false arrest = windfall
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:29:36 PM EDT
cheaper than dirt pictured one on a glock in their catalog a few months back and got nasty notice from the ATF
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:30:48 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mikejohnson:
Maybe there is confusion with the AWB? well, it already sunset



NFA deals w/ AOWs - AWB did not affect this.
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:31:32 PM EDT
refresher:
ATF is part of the executive branch which enforces laws (in this case taxes)
the legislative branch makes laws
the judicial branch interprets laws

BUT:
the ATF seems to have acquired the power of all three branches....


And if a white collar criminal evades millions in taxes he gets a slap on the wrist, but after 1968 if you violate the measley $5-200 NFA tax you get a swat team up your ass with a 10yr/$10k fine.
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:31:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mikejohnson:
Maybe there is confusion with the AWB? well, it already sunset



The AWB had NOTHING to do with vertical foregrips on pistols. More along the lines of the National Firearms Act.
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:31:52 PM EDT


I ain't saying nuthin' to nobody 'bout nuthin'.

Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:32:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mikejohnson:
refresher:
ATF is part of the executive branch which enforces laws (in this case taxes)
the legislative branch makes laws
the judicial branch interprets laws

BUT:
the ATF seems to have acquired the power of all three branches....


And if a white collar criminal evades millions in taxes he gets a slap on the wrist, but after 1968 if you violate the measley $5-200 NFA tax you get a swat team up your ass with a 10yr/$10k fine.



If you're so confident in the mercy of the ATF when it comes to arms violation penalties, why not try it out yourself?
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:34:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By roboman:

Originally Posted By mikejohnson:
refresher:
ATF is part of the executive branch which enforces laws (in this case taxes)
the legislative branch makes laws
the judicial branch interprets laws

BUT:
the ATF seems to have acquired the power of all three branches....


And if a white collar criminal evades millions in taxes he gets a slap on the wrist, but after 1968 if you violate the measley $5-200 NFA tax you get a swat team up your ass with a 10yr/$10k fine.




If you're so confident in the mercy of the ATF when it comes to arms violation penalties, why not try it out yourself?





ummm, where does it show that I am confident? I am merely stating what happens - the ATF likes to overstep BIG TIME....again, show me where I state I am confident in the mercy of the ATF?
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:36:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mikejohnson:

Originally Posted By roboman:

Originally Posted By mikejohnson:
refresher:
ATF is part of the executive branch which enforces laws (in this case taxes)
the legislative branch makes laws
the judicial branch interprets laws

BUT:
the ATF seems to have acquired the power of all three branches....


And if a white collar criminal evades millions in taxes he gets a slap on the wrist, but after 1968 if you violate the measley $5-200 NFA tax you get a swat team up your ass with a 10yr/$10k fine.




If you're so confident in the mercy of the ATF when it comes to arms violation penalties, why not try it out yourself?





ummm, where does it show that I am confident? I am merely stating what happens - the ATF likes to overstep BIG TIME....again, show me where I state I am confident in the mercy of the ATF?




Telling someone it is legal, and having the belief that it would be a "windfall" to be charged with an NFA violation in Federal court does give the impression that you are confident in something.
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:36:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/14/2006 5:37:40 PM EDT by viper5194]

Originally Posted By mikejohnson:
refresher:
ATF is part of the executive branch which enforces laws (in this case taxes)
the legislative branch makes laws
the judicial branch interprets laws

BUT:
the ATF seems to have acquired the power of all three branches....


And if a white collar criminal evades millions in taxes he gets a slap on the wrist, but after 1968 if you violate the measley $5-200 NFA tax you get a swat team up your ass with a 10yr/$10k fine.




Precisly why we here on the board say its illegal. It may not be law, it may not be right, but it is the ATF's opinion and not following it can get someone in serious trouble. If a person is ignorant to the facts, and doesnt have enough money to fight the guberment, its wiser to not lead them in the direction of trouble, hence my comment of being illegal. Its not wise to confuse someone who has no knowledge of the facts and is asking a simple question.

DO NOT put a VFG on your pistol unless you want trouble..........
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:38:35 PM EDT
but for the record, there is no law against it....
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:40:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mikejohnson:
but for the record, there is no law against it....



It may not be law, but it is enough to lose you 10k plus attorneys fees, and a nice tear in you pooper from bubba..
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:40:49 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mikejohnson:
but for the record, there is no law against it....




I think that is technically correct.
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:43:46 PM EDT
don't you think that is fucked up? that you can be arrested for not breaking the law just because a branch of government that is not supposed to create laws, creates their own laws and enforces them at will?
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:44:04 PM EDT
The only one i thought was cool was the one that held a magazine as a forward grip.....I have a Glock stock and a 16inch impulse barrel for use with the stock a forgrip would be nice is that legal???? if so where can I get one....
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:46:05 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mikejohnson:
don't you think that is fucked up? that you can be arrested for not breaking the law just because a branch of government that is not supposed to create laws, creates their own laws and enforces them at will?



I do think its BS, but untill we as a people, not individuals -stand up to our authority, we have no choice. And I dont think many here in the US really give 2 shits about gun laws, other than us gun owners. Hence, it will not change, because the people of this country will not change....
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 5:58:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/14/2006 5:59:15 PM EDT by blmff]
If a gun has rifled barrel(s) of less than 16", and it has never had a shoulder stock it would be a pistol, unless it either has no grip at an angle to the bore, or if it has more than one grip. ATF has made the questionable decision that a handgun with more than one grip is an AOW. This is based on the gun a) being concealable on the person, and b) not meeting the definition of a "pistol" in the regulations promulgated under the NFA, since they say a pistol has a single grip at an angle to the bore. However, at least one federal court has decided that if the grip is added later, the gun is not "originally designed" to be fired by holding in more than one grip, and thus putting a second grip on a pistol does not make it an AOW. Whether ATF will regard the decision as binding beyond that case is unknown, I would doubt it. The case is U.S. v. Davis, Crim No. 8:93-106 (S.C. 1993) (Report of Magistrate, June 21, 1993). By the same token in mid 1996, ATF decided that "wallet" holsters for small guns, from which the gun could be fired, somehow are AOW's. This would affect, for example, the North American Arms mini-revolver and the wallet holster NAA sold for the gun, as an accessory. ATF seems to be thinking that the grip has disappeared, and thus it fits into the first category. This strikes me as bizarre and stupid, and I suspect the courts will have their shot at it, given how common the wallet holsters are. What if you put the gun in a purse, from which it can be fired? A folded up newspaper? How are those different than a wallet holster?

Go ahead and give it a try. Let me know how it turns out.
Top Top