If you wanna put your opnion in fine, but PLEASE base it on a quoted or linked law, statute or official document.  PLEASE!

here's a thread started not too long ago on the topic.

Quoted: here's a thread started not too long ago on the topic.

not the important part:

that letter is insane and just wrong.  I would not be surprised to see a different response posted very soon from teh ATF.  The part claiming it's not a pistol with a VFG is deliberately kept vague.  The sentences about how it isn't a rifle or SAW are qualified, yet the sentence re: pistol is not.  



the important part:
Still doesn't answer the question of a NON PERMANENT vfg.  What the letter in teh previous thread is INFERRING (the weasels don't explicitly say it cause it would never hold in court) is that with a VFG, such a creation is designed to be fired with two hands.  BUT if the pistol has an OPTIONAL vfg, there is no such vagueness.....

I'm not a huge fan of VFG's in general, but until I see that a non-permanent VFG on a PISTOL creates a AOW, then I don't see a problem....