Buddy has a 300 blackout pistol

He asked me if it was legal to attach his issued M320 GL to it.

I assumed it was because of 2 reasons:

He was issued the M320, it is government property, and he is somehow using it in the course of his duties. It's not registered on the NFA, thus not under the authority of the NFA

Despite having a pistol grip, the pistol GL is attached to the GL and not directly to the AR Pistol


So anyone have any ideas? I assume a standard registered M203 is fine, the M320 with it's pistol grip is kinda an interesting twist.

edit: also I realize that typically, if you are issued a weapon it is for a specific purpose, and then returned to the arms room before you are let loose. He has show pics of IR Lasers, suppressors, and all kinds of issued shit attached to his personal weapons. I don't ask questions

I'm kinda thinking that him using gov property on his personal firearms is somehow an issue of its own, but also subjects him to standard NFA stuff.  That said, if he was at my house, we'd have a blast playing with them toys and the gov would never be the wiser.

What is he?

cop, sheriff, NG, active army????

I would not attach a 320 to an AR pistol

Yup. This is something that someone does on their land or a GOOD friends property out in the middle of nowhere and never talks about.  Regardless of any NFA implications, I find it hard to believe that it's legit to attach a government issued...anything...to a privately owned firearm.  That's just my two cents though.

Oh...and I doubt that your buddy wanted you to go online and post about his "show" pictures of issued lasers, suppressors, etc. attached to his personal weapons. Do you know the first rule of Fight Club?

Forget the NFA violations, I would be terrified of what the Mil will do when they find out what your buddy has and what he's doing with it.

I've attached government owned NFA to personally owned NFA/GCA firearms (and vice versa), but I'm not military. I think it's up to his chain of command as far as what is authorized use. As far as federal NFA/GCA is concerned, if he's authorized by the owning government entity to be in possession of NFA items for duty related use then he may possess them anywhere (above CoC issues notwithstanding).

It's correct that military weapons are not registered with BATFE, and never have to be.

I know SEALs and other high-speed types draw (sign out) their issued weapons all the time, and take them to civilian training classes, on authority of their CoC.

It is my opinion that the pistol grip (even though it's part of the launcher) would render the host pistol an AOW, but my opinion doesn't matter. I'd ask BATFE if the M320 may be mounted to a pistol. That's all I'd ask them. There are civilian-owned M320's, so that's a logical question.

Really, I'd just find a rifle to mount it on (assuming he's allowed to have the thing in the first place).

If he's authorized to be "training" with it off-post, and he slaps a host SBR together temporarily to use in said training, it probably wouldn't be a NFA violation because the firearm would technically be possessed under the authority of the DoD (and therefore not required to be registered) but I haven't seen any case law on that situation. If that's legal, then a temporary AOW during training would be legal as well.

I guess the "dumb question" to ask here would be... If your buddy can draw the M320 for use off-post, why can't he draw an M4A1 as well?

This.


Did he take it off base without permission?

Is the M320 being attached to the 300BO pistol or the other way around?

No. He claims his CoC is fast and loose. He's active.

Well there is an interesting View. The M320 can be used alone

This is in line with what I was thinking. However, his unit certainly isn't high speed. Whole thing is off to me. Regular Joes dont have the 'flexibility' he is claiming to have with DoD arms.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck I’d stay way the hell away. You’ve already implicated yourself though.

If I were you I’d scrub this thread. People might say I’m paranoid but look at who we are talking about here.

I havent personally seen or touched any DoD property. buddy is out of state. I simply asked a question.

Nevermind...

Not my problem..

If the overall length is over 26" it's a moot point as it's not a "pistol".

I would not walk away from him, I would run.

I don't think a QD launcher would count towards OAL.

Pistols have no maximum OAL or maximum bbl length in Federal law.

He's full of shit.  He made it up so people would think he was cool.  It never happened.

If it's over 26" OAL and has a VFG it's not a handgun.

No shit.

Non-mil .gov Title II stuff still needs paper, just not $200 paper.

Every day I attach my .gov issued pistol to my personally owned holster.

Which has nothing to do with attaching government owned accessories to HIS PERSONAL WEAPONS.
If your agency issues you a red dot for attachment to your agency issued AR.....do you think they would be delighted to know that you attached it to your personal firearm instead?
I could understand their approval if you are permitted to carry personal firearms on duty.....but that's not whats being discussed here.