Anyone seeing AR "firearms" (basically AR pistols with >26" OAL + VFG) at NY gun stores?

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Anyone seeing AR "firearms" (basically AR pistols with >26" OAL + VFG) at NY gun stores? (Page 1 of 5)

Posted: 4/17/2019 1:43:09 AM EDT

These seem to be gaining popularity in some other NY specific gun forums I lurk on occasion. People seem to be mostly assembling them themselves, but some are claiming to see them at NY gun stores for sale to anyone, not LE-only or anything. No stock (braces are not stocks) + >26" OAL + VFG = a gun that is technically not prohibited in NY. Which is basically how the Mossberg Shockwave/Tac 14 are legal here; because it doesn't fit any specifically prohibited classification. And it's not a pistol, so no pistol permit needed. And it's not technically bound by the Safe Act, so no need for fixed mag or lack of threaded muzzle. Mag capacity restrictions would still apply, of course.

This is the basic rundown of why people are claiming they are technically legal in NY:

Is it a "firearm"? - Yes, it is designed to expel a projectile from the force of an explosion.

Is it a "rifle"? - No, it is not designed to be fired from the shoulder because it does not have a stock.

Is it a "pistol"? - No, because it has a VFG, and therefore is designed to be held with more than one hand.

Is it an "SBR"? - No. While it does have a barrel under 16", it is not designed to be fired from the shoulder due to lacking a stock, so not a short barrel rifle.

Is it an "AOW"? - No. The definition for an AOW includes verbiage that the weapon be concealable. ATF holds that this means it must be shorter than 26" in overall length, this is greater than that.

And of course it is not a "shotgun", "SBS", "silencer", or "destructive device".

So falling back on all those no's, the only yes was that it fits the very general definition of "firearm", and since it doesn't fit into any of the NFA regulated sub-definitions of a "firearm" (SBR, SBS, AOW, DD, and silencer), then is is just a title I "firearm".

View Quote

All of that being said; I'd imagine most LE would still hook you up if they saw you with this in NY, but with a 10rd mag. As they say; You may beat the rap, but you won't beat the ride.

@BushBoar Do you know of anything in NY law that prohibits such a gun? Or is it technically legal?

Posted: 4/17/2019 6:19:16 AM EDT

[#1]

I would not want to be the test case given the temperament of the New York Courts regarding deadly weapons.

Posted: 4/17/2019 7:23:55 AM EDT

[#2]

A buddy told me about these "firearms", which are sold in a big gun store in Westchester. So yes, they are sold in stores.

Posted: 4/17/2019 7:46:22 AM EDT

[#3]

Quote History

Quoted:
I would not want to be the test case given the temperament of the New York Courts regarding deadly weapons.

View Quote

No doubt. I wouldn't, either. I'm still curious, though, and it's very tempting.

Posted: 4/17/2019 7:46:57 AM EDT

[#4]

Quote History

Quoted:
A buddy told me about these "firearms", which are sold in a big gun store in Westchester. So yes, they are sold in stores.

View Quote

I haven't seen any locally, but I keep hearing about people seeing them in NY gun stores, too.

Posted: 4/17/2019 8:04:43 AM EDT

[#5]

Yes I heard about these...big gun store in Westchester sells them. And they are pretty uptight.

Posted: 4/17/2019 9:20:29 AM EDT

[#6]

So basically if you put any upper on a braced AR lower, with a VFG, and the OAL is 26" or more, it's not a rifle, not a pistol, and therefore not an "assault weapon."

OAL is end of barrel threads to end of buffer tube right?

So what is the minimum barrel length needed with say an SBA3 brace?

Posted: 4/17/2019 9:21:56 AM EDT

[#7]

Well, you don't want it to be a "firearm" under NY law:

"Firearm" means (a) any pistol or revolver; or (b) a shotgun having one or more barrels less than eighteen inches in length; or (c) a rifle
having one or more barrels less than sixteen inches in length; or (d)
any weapon made from a shotgun or rifle whether by alteration,
modification, or otherwise if such weapon as altered, modified, or
otherwise has an overall length of less than twenty-six inches; or (e)
an assault weapon. For the purpose of this subdivision the length of the
barrel on a shotgun or rifle shall be determined by measuring the
distance between the muzzle and the face of the bolt, breech, or
breechlock when closed and when the shotgun or rifle is cocked; the
overall length of a weapon made from a shotgun or rifle is the distance
between the extreme ends of the weapon measured along a line parallel to
the center line of the bore. Firearm does not include an antique
firearm.

View Quote

Technically the analysis seems correct, but I'd expect that there's plenty of cops out there who would think that it's a rifle and charge you accordingly (the brace looks like a stock and as we all know can function as one).

On a motion to dismiss, most judges would probably think that the issue of whether or not the brace is a stock is a factual issue for a jury to decide, so the motion would be denied. Keep in mind that the ATF letter is basically irrelevant in this context.

And I would expect most jurors, after hearing from a prosecution expert that people use braces as stocks to evade federal laws regarding SBRs and SBSs, to decide that it is, in fact, a stock, and to find you guilty of violating SAFE by possessing a rifle that qualifies as an "assault weapon."

Perhaps my analysis is incorrect. @aimless, what do you think?

Posted: 4/17/2019 9:23:40 AM EDT

[#8]

Quote History

Quoted:
So basically if you put any upper on a braced AR lower, with a VFG, and the OAL is 26" or more, it's not a rifle, not a pistol, and therefore not an "assault weapon."

OAL is end of barrel threads to end of buffer tube right?

So what is the minimum barrel length needed with say an SBA3 brace?

View Quote

I think an 11.5" barrel, but I'm not 100% sure.

Posted: 4/17/2019 9:29:00 AM EDT

[#9]

Quote History

Quoted:
Well, you don't want it to be a "firearm" under NY law:

Technically the analysis seems correct, but I'd expect that there's plenty of cops out there who would think that it's a rifle and charge you accordingly (the brace looks like a stock and as we all know can function as one).

On a motion to dismiss, most judges would probably think that the issue of whether or not the brace is a stock is a factual issue for a jury to decide, so the motion would be denied. Keep in mind that the ATF letter is basically irrelevant in this context.

And I would expect most jurors, after hearing from a prosecution expert that people use braces as stocks to evade federal laws regarding SBRs and SBSs, to decide that it is, in fact, a stock, and to find you guilty of violating SAFE by possessing a rifle that qualifies as an "assault weapon."

Perhaps my analysis is incorrect. @aimless, what do you think?

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:
Well, you don't want it to be a "firearm" under NY law:

"Firearm" means (a) any pistol or revolver; or (b) a shotgun having one or more barrels less than eighteen inches in length; or (c) a rifle
having one or more barrels less than sixteen inches in length; or (d)
any weapon made from a shotgun or rifle whether by alteration,
modification, or otherwise if such weapon as altered, modified, or
otherwise has an overall length of less than twenty-six inches; or (e)
an assault weapon. For the purpose of this subdivision the length of the
barrel on a shotgun or rifle shall be determined by measuring the
distance between the muzzle and the face of the bolt, breech, or
breechlock when closed and when the shotgun or rifle is cocked; the
overall length of a weapon made from a shotgun or rifle is the distance
between the extreme ends of the weapon measured along a line parallel to
the center line of the bore. Firearm does not include an antique
firearm.

Technically the analysis seems correct, but I'd expect that there's plenty of cops out there who would think that it's a rifle and charge you accordingly (the brace looks like a stock and as we all know can function as one).

On a motion to dismiss, most judges would probably think that the issue of whether or not the brace is a stock is a factual issue for a jury to decide, so the motion would be denied. Keep in mind that the ATF letter is basically irrelevant in this context.

And I would expect most jurors, after hearing from a prosecution expert that people use braces as stocks to evade federal laws regarding SBRs and SBSs, to decide that it is, in fact, a stock, and to find you guilty of violating SAFE by possessing a rifle that qualifies as an "assault weapon."

Perhaps my analysis is incorrect. @aimless, what do you think?

Yeah, I should have clarified that it's a "firearm" by ATF standards, but not by NY's definition of a "firearm", which are a no-go.

So the jury can find you guilty of a "rifle" charge, even though it doesn't fit any definition of a "rifle", state or federal, because NY doesn't accept the ATF's classification of pistol braces as not stocks, correct?

Posted: 4/17/2019 9:31:57 AM EDT

[#10]

Thinking these are legal...not a pistol rifle or firearm in NY. A firearm is a pistol...which these are not.

And since the store in Westchester is indeed selling these and they are very uptight I can't imagine they are illegal.

Posted: 4/17/2019 9:33:00 AM EDT

[#11]

Quote History

Quoted:
So basically if you put any upper on a braced AR lower, with a VFG, and the OAL is 26" or more, it's not a rifle, not a pistol, and therefore not an "assault weapon."

OAL is end of barrel threads to end of buffer tube right?

So what is the minimum barrel length needed with say an SBA3 brace?

View Quote

11 minute double tap? I like your style.

Posted: 4/17/2019 9:34:22 AM EDT

[#12]

Quote History

Quoted:

11 minute double tap? I like your style.

View Quote

Haha you beat my edit! my phone lost internet connection and I didn't think it posted.

Posted: 4/17/2019 9:49:02 AM EDT

[#13]

Quote History

Quoted:
Yeah, I should have clarified that it's a "firearm" by ATF standards, but not by NY's definition of a "firearm", which are a no-go.

So the jury can find you guilty of a "rifle" charge, even though it doesn't fit any definition of a "rifle", state or federal, because NY doesn't accept the ATF's classification of pistol braces as not stocks, correct?

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Well, you don't want it to be a "firearm" under NY law:

"Firearm" means (a) any pistol or revolver; or (b) a shotgun having one or more barrels less than eighteen inches in length; or (c) a rifle
having one or more barrels less than sixteen inches in length; or (d)
any weapon made from a shotgun or rifle whether by alteration,
modification, or otherwise if such weapon as altered, modified, or
otherwise has an overall length of less than twenty-six inches; or (e)
an assault weapon. For the purpose of this subdivision the length of the
barrel on a shotgun or rifle shall be determined by measuring the
distance between the muzzle and the face of the bolt, breech, or
breechlock when closed and when the shotgun or rifle is cocked; the
overall length of a weapon made from a shotgun or rifle is the distance
between the extreme ends of the weapon measured along a line parallel to
the center line of the bore. Firearm does not include an antique
firearm.

Technically the analysis seems correct, but I'd expect that there's plenty of cops out there who would think that it's a rifle and charge you accordingly (the brace looks like a stock and as we all know can function as one).

On a motion to dismiss, most judges would probably think that the issue of whether or not the brace is a stock is a factual issue for a jury to decide, so the motion would be denied. Keep in mind that the ATF letter is basically irrelevant in this context.

And I would expect most jurors, after hearing from a prosecution expert that people use braces as stocks to evade federal laws regarding SBRs and SBSs, to decide that it is, in fact, a stock, and to find you guilty of violating SAFE by possessing a rifle that qualifies as an "assault weapon."

Perhaps my analysis is incorrect. @aimless, what do you think?

Yeah, I should have clarified that it's a "firearm" by ATF standards, but not by NY's definition of a "firearm", which are a no-go.

So the jury can find you guilty of a "rifle" charge, even though it doesn't fit any definition of a "rifle", state or federal, because NY doesn't accept the ATF's classification of pistol braces as not stocks, correct?

Sort of.

It's not a matter of NY accepting or not accepting the classification; the ATF letter has to do with an entirely separate federal law, so it's technically irrelevant. It can be raised by one of the parties as "persuasive authority" and most judges in NY would probably disregard it. In the legal world, courts are only required to obey "mandatory authority," and as a practical matter most judges find a reason to accept persuasive authority that they want to accept and reject persuasive authority that they want to reject.* It's human nature.

If you put that in front of a jury, and the jurors are convinced that it's a stock, then they'd find that it was designed to be fired from the shoulder, and in that case the gun absolutely does fit the NY definition of a rifle, doesn't it?

*This is a simplification but it's sufficient explanation for these purposes.

Posted: 4/17/2019 9:51:13 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Thinking these are legal...not a pistol rifle or firearm in NY. A firearm is a pistol...which these are not.

And since the store in Westchester is indeed selling these and they are very uptight I can't imagine they are illegal.

View Quote

It sucks that this even needs to be discussed and pondered. I agree, that on paper, everything looks legal. I just can't imagine encountering any sort of NY LEO who wouldn't charge you for one, though. But I guess a test case would be the only way to get it documented that these things were in fact legal in NY. If only I had "fuck you" money to throw at a gang of the best defense lawyers who specialize in gun rights to fight a charge. I think paying a terminally ill homeless man to be the test subject would be the way to go. If we win, he gets paid handsomely and lives out the rest of his days like a king. If we lose, he's the inmate with the most stacked commissary account ever.

Posted: 4/17/2019 9:53:12 AM EDT

[#15]

Quote History

Quoted:
Sort of.

It's not a matter of NY accepting or not accepting the classification; the ATF letter has to do with an entirely separate federal law, so it's technically irrelevant. It can be raised by one of the parties as "persuasive authority" and most judges in NY would probably disregard it. In the legal world, courts are only required to obey "mandatory authority," and as a practical matter most judges find a reason to accept persuasive authority that they want to accept and reject persuasive authority that they want to reject.* It's human nature.

If you put that in front of a jury, and the jurors are convinced that it's a stock, then they'd find that it was designed to be fired from the shoulder, and in that case the gun absolutely does fit the NY definition of a rifle, doesn't it?

*This is a simplification but it's sufficient explanation for these purposes.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Well, you don't want it to be a "firearm" under NY law:

"Firearm" means (a) any pistol or revolver; or (b) a shotgun having one or more barrels less than eighteen inches in length; or (c) a rifle
having one or more barrels less than sixteen inches in length; or (d)
any weapon made from a shotgun or rifle whether by alteration,
modification, or otherwise if such weapon as altered, modified, or
otherwise has an overall length of less than twenty-six inches; or (e)
an assault weapon. For the purpose of this subdivision the length of the
barrel on a shotgun or rifle shall be determined by measuring the
distance between the muzzle and the face of the bolt, breech, or
breechlock when closed and when the shotgun or rifle is cocked; the
overall length of a weapon made from a shotgun or rifle is the distance
between the extreme ends of the weapon measured along a line parallel to
the center line of the bore. Firearm does not include an antique
firearm.

Technically the analysis seems correct, but I'd expect that there's plenty of cops out there who would think that it's a rifle and charge you accordingly (the brace looks like a stock and as we all know can function as one).

On a motion to dismiss, most judges would probably think that the issue of whether or not the brace is a stock is a factual issue for a jury to decide, so the motion would be denied. Keep in mind that the ATF letter is basically irrelevant in this context.

And I would expect most jurors, after hearing from a prosecution expert that people use braces as stocks to evade federal laws regarding SBRs and SBSs, to decide that it is, in fact, a stock, and to find you guilty of violating SAFE by possessing a rifle that qualifies as an "assault weapon."

Perhaps my analysis is incorrect. @aimless, what do you think?

Yeah, I should have clarified that it's a "firearm" by ATF standards, but not by NY's definition of a "firearm", which are a no-go.

So the jury can find you guilty of a "rifle" charge, even though it doesn't fit any definition of a "rifle", state or federal, because NY doesn't accept the ATF's classification of pistol braces as not stocks, correct?

Sort of.

It's not a matter of NY accepting or not accepting the classification; the ATF letter has to do with an entirely separate federal law, so it's technically irrelevant. It can be raised by one of the parties as "persuasive authority" and most judges in NY would probably disregard it. In the legal world, courts are only required to obey "mandatory authority," and as a practical matter most judges find a reason to accept persuasive authority that they want to accept and reject persuasive authority that they want to reject.* It's human nature.

If you put that in front of a jury, and the jurors are convinced that it's a stock, then they'd find that it was designed to be fired from the shoulder, and in that case the gun absolutely does fit the NY definition of a rifle, doesn't it?

*This is a simplification but it's sufficient explanation for these purposes.

Gotcha. And yeah, if the jury decides that the brace is a stock, then the gun is a "rifle", and you're proper fucked.

Posted: 4/17/2019 9:55:21 AM EDT

[#16]

Quote History

Quoted:
Thinking these are legal...not a pistol rifle or firearm in NY. A firearm is a pistol...which these are not.

And since the store in Westchester is indeed selling these and they are very uptight I can't imagine they are illegal.

View Quote

I recently had occasion to talk to a sergeant from NYSP who handles issues with pistol permits and assault weapons the other day. I'm working on an AW related issue for a client.

Pleasant enough guy, and he is a gun guy, and doesn't seem unsympathetic to us, but it's clear that he has a job to do and he's going to do it whether he agrees with it or not.

We chatted about some different things like braces, Tac-14s, etc, and his position basically boiled down to "that stuff seems legal, and it might be, but until someone is arrested for it we won't know." He was clear that he wasn't going to give opinions because he had no authority to do so. He said that when SAFE was passed, the legislature should have created an office in NYSP or elsewhere with authority to issue opinion letters like ATF and California DOJ do, so at least we'd have some level of certainty on these things.

Posted: 4/17/2019 9:58:56 AM EDT

[#17]

Quote History

Quoted:
I recently had occasion to talk to a sergeant from NYSP who handles issues with pistol permits and assault weapons the other day. I'm working on an AW related issue for a client.

Pleasant enough guy, and he is a gun guy, and doesn't seem unsympathetic to us, but it's clear that he has a job to do and he's going to do it whether he agrees with it or not.

We chatted about some different things like braces, Tac-14s, etc, and his position basically boiled down to "that stuff seems legal, and it might be, but until someone is arrested for it we won't know." He was clear that he wasn't going to give opinions because he had no authority to do so. He said that when SAFE was passed, the legislature should have created an office in NYSP or elsewhere with authority to issue opinion letters like ATF and California DOJ do, so at least we'd have some level of certainty on these things.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Thinking these are legal...not a pistol rifle or firearm in NY. A firearm is a pistol...which these are not.

And since the store in Westchester is indeed selling these and they are very uptight I can't imagine they are illegal.

I recently had occasion to talk to a sergeant from NYSP who handles issues with pistol permits and assault weapons the other day. I'm working on an AW related issue for a client.

Pleasant enough guy, and he is a gun guy, and doesn't seem unsympathetic to us, but it's clear that he has a job to do and he's going to do it whether he agrees with it or not.

We chatted about some different things like braces, Tac-14s, etc, and his position basically boiled down to "that stuff seems legal, and it might be, but until someone is arrested for it we won't know." He was clear that he wasn't going to give opinions because he had no authority to do so. He said that when SAFE was passed, the legislature should have created an office in NYSP or elsewhere with authority to issue opinion letters like ATF and California DOJ do, so at least we'd have some level of certainty on these things.

I, of course, wish the Safe Act didn't exist, and that NY was a free state. But since it's not, it would at least be nice to know exactly what is legal and what is not. But I suppose the lack of clarity is by design.

Posted: 4/17/2019 11:07:48 AM EDT

[#18]

I bought this up to my very pro 2A LGS when the concept really took off and UNSAFE was enacted. He didn’t want to be the test case.

If brick and mortar shops are selling these it lends some defense at the most important time, that being when LEO is deciding what to do. I’d rather say I bought it at LGS than say I made it myself.

Thus far much discussion in this thread is about perception of the brace as a stock. OK so how does this change if there is no brace just the tube?

Posted: 4/17/2019 11:28:57 AM EDT

[#19]

Quote History

Quoted:
I bought this up to my very pro 2A LGS when the concept really took off and UNSAFE was enacted. He didn’t want to be the test case.

If brick and mortar shops are selling these it lends some defense at the most important time, that being when LEO is deciding what to do. I’d rather say I bought it at LGS than say I made it myself.

Thus far much discussion in this thread is about perception of the brace as a stock. OK so how does this change if there is no brace just the tube?

View Quote

I was wondering if there would be any difference, in court, if it came to home built vs store bought. Joe Schmoe gun owner who doesn't realize just how restrictive NY gun laws are, could easily assume all is good if a store is selling them. Most people would assume that a legit business isn't going to sell them something that would get their ass in hot water.

As for the lack of a brace, I dunno. That's a good question. I remember when AR pistols started becoming popular in general (in the rest of the country, anyway), way before the brace was invented. Everyone just had bare tubes on theirs.

Posted: 4/17/2019 2:01:41 PM EDT

[#20]

Quote History

Quoted:

I recently had occasion to talk to a sergeant from NYSP who handles issues with pistol permits and assault weapons the other day. I'm working on an AW related issue for a client.

Pleasant enough guy, and he is a gun guy, and doesn't seem unsympathetic to us, but it's clear that he has a job to do and he's going to do it whether he agrees with it or not.

We chatted about some different things like braces, Tac-14s, etc, and his position basically boiled down to "that stuff seems legal, and it might be, but until someone is arrested for it we won't know." He was clear that he wasn't going to give opinions because he had no authority to do so. He said that when SAFE was passed, the legislature should have created an office in NYSP or elsewhere with authority to issue opinion letters like ATF and California DOJ do, so at least we'd have some level of certainty on these things.

View Quote

Ive been saying this for years. Until someone is granted authority in the NYSP and will put that opinion in writing, any person regardless of the LE rank or assignment offering an opinion is still guessing just like the rest of us. My personal feeling is that there will be arrests. Im not sure if those arrests will end in convictions, but it will cost a ton of time and money to fight the charges. Not to mention the risk of loosing your ability to legally own a firearm. The best course of action esp. since campaign season is on us, may be to ask your local district attorney candidates how they would treat these situations.

disclaimer: Personal opinion only, not representing my employer(s)

Posted: 4/18/2019 4:14:13 AM EDT

[#21]

This is an interesting concept.

I say build as many as possible in NY before Andy catches wind of it.

I may also have to explore this for science reasons.

Posted: 4/18/2019 7:57:11 AM EDT

[#22]

Quote History

Quoted:
This is an interesting concept.

I say build as many as possible in NY before Andy catches wind of it.

I may also have to explore this for science reasons.

View Quote

The SBA3 is on sale for like $100 at a few places right now. Primary Arms and then Brownells has it for $109, but there's usually a 10% off code + free shipping on $99+.

Posted: 4/18/2019 8:55:04 AM EDT

[#23]

Interesting. I guess I didn't consider this an option when I was building my pistol. It's a 10.3 but with a pinned warcomp it's a little over 26"

Keep building them, gentlemen.

Posted: 4/18/2019 10:23:26 AM EDT

[#24]

Quote History

Quoted:
Interesting. I guess I didn't consider this an option when I was building my pistol. It's a 10.3 but with a pinned warcomp it's a little over 26"

Keep building them, gentlemen.

View Quote

With the SBA3 on sale, and the 11.5" Ballistic Advantage BA Hansen barrel on sale...it's tempting. I have a property in PA where I keep my fun toys. I might just build a regular pistol there and call it good, but still be able to toss on a VFG for this "firearm" workaround in NY, if I'm feeling adventurous.

Posted: 4/18/2019 10:24:32 AM EDT

[#25]

Quote History

Quoted:
Thus far much discussion in this thread is about perception of the brace as a stock. OK so how does this change if there is no brace just the tube?

View Quote

@BushBoar Any thoughts on this?

Posted: 4/18/2019 11:25:02 AM EDT

[#26]

Quote History

Quoted:
@BushBoar Any thoughts on this?

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Thus far much discussion in this thread is about perception of the brace as a stock. OK so how does this change if there is no brace just the tube?

@BushBoar Any thoughts on this?

I'd feel a lot better about that, because one could demonstrate to the jury that the tube is an essential component of the manner in which the gun operates. The fact that you can brace the tube against your shoulder as a half-assed stock doesn't mean that a gun that has one was "designed or redesigned, made or remade" to be fired from the shoulder.

Depends on the jury though.

Posted: 4/18/2019 11:30:27 AM EDT

[#27]

Quote History

Quoted:
I'd feel a lot better about that, because one could demonstrate to the jury that the tube is an essential component of the manner in which the gun operates. The fact that you can brace the tube against your shoulder as a half-assed stock doesn't mean that a gun that has one was "designed or redesigned, made or remade" to be fired from the shoulder.

Depends on the jury though.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Thus far much discussion in this thread is about perception of the brace as a stock. OK so how does this change if there is no brace just the tube?

@BushBoar Any thoughts on this?

I'd feel a lot better about that, because one could demonstrate to the jury that the tube is an essential component of the manner in which the gun operates. The fact that you can brace the tube against your shoulder as a half-assed stock doesn't mean that a gun that has one was "designed or redesigned, made or remade" to be fired from the shoulder.

Depends on the jury though.

Gotcha, thanks. That makes sense.

Decisions, decisions.

Posted: 4/18/2019 11:42:42 AM EDT

[#28]

Quote History

Quoted:
Gotcha, thanks. That makes sense.

Decisions, decisions.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Thus far much discussion in this thread is about perception of the brace as a stock. OK so how does this change if there is no brace just the tube?

@BushBoar Any thoughts on this?

I'd feel a lot better about that, because one could demonstrate to the jury that the tube is an essential component of the manner in which the gun operates. The fact that you can brace the tube against your shoulder as a half-assed stock doesn't mean that a gun that has one was "designed or redesigned, made or remade" to be fired from the shoulder.

Depends on the jury though.

Gotcha, thanks. That makes sense.

Decisions, decisions.

In pretty much all of my answers on this kind of subject, you should read the following:

*But I wouldn't want to be sitting at the Defendant's table while my lawyer made that argument.

Posted: 4/18/2019 12:00:01 PM EDT

[#29]

Quote History

Quoted:
In pretty much all of my answers on this kind of subject, you should read the following:

*But I wouldn't want to be sitting at the Defendant's table while my lawyer made that argument.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Thus far much discussion in this thread is about perception of the brace as a stock. OK so how does this change if there is no brace just the tube?

@BushBoar Any thoughts on this?

I'd feel a lot better about that, because one could demonstrate to the jury that the tube is an essential component of the manner in which the gun operates. The fact that you can brace the tube against your shoulder as a half-assed stock doesn't mean that a gun that has one was "designed or redesigned, made or remade" to be fired from the shoulder.

Depends on the jury though.

Gotcha, thanks. That makes sense.

Decisions, decisions.

In pretty much all of my answers on this kind of subject, you should read the following:

*But I wouldn't want to be sitting at the Defendant's table while my lawyer made that argument.

I understand.

Posted: 4/18/2019 2:01:15 PM EDT

[#30]

Quote History

Quoted:

If brick and mortar shops are selling these it lends some defense at the most important time, that being when LEO is deciding what to do. I'd rather say I bought it at LGS than say I made it myself.

View Quote

Personally I would not want to take a risk on the premise that because a LGS is selling it that it must be okay. Plenty of big box hardware stores were happy to sell you a utility knife that would get you busted for having an illegal weapon. DA Vance made it a point to go after those stores eventually but still remind people it was their fault for having the illegal knife in the first place.

Posted: 4/18/2019 3:37:25 PM EDT

[#31]

One way to address this is publish in LEO magazines and others and on billboards a description of the rifle and why it’s legal. With a big disclaimer that if they arrest they will be sued for rights violations since they now know. Might educate some, make others think twice. Then again that’s a guaranteed way to get them banned.

The truly saddening part is that clearly they are legal. Yet the environment of hate and judicial activism makes people afraid to do something legal. Corruption has already won.

Posted: 4/18/2019 5:24:56 PM EDT

[#32]

Quote History

Quoted:
The truly saddening part is that clearly they are legal. Yet the environment of hate and judicial activism makes people afraid to do something legal. Corruption has already won.

View Quote

This.
The anti gun culture of NY is strong.
I remember being questioned at the range on the legality of things pre safe.
I had a S&W MP22 that really pissed off a fudd. It was a damn 22 with 10 round mags and a fixed stock with no muzzle device.

The gun culture in other states is worlds different. Go to a range in PA and see. Want to rent a full auto? Here you go.

Posted: 4/18/2019 5:38:23 PM EDT

[#33]

Quote History

Quoted:
This.
The anti gun culture of NY is strong.
I remember being questioned at the range on the legality of things pre safe.
I had a S&W MP22 that really pissed off a fudd. It was a damn 22 with 10 round mags and a fixed stock with no muzzle device.

The gun culture in other states is worlds different. Go to a range in PA and see. Want to rent a full auto? Here you go.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
The truly saddening part is that clearly they are legal. Yet the environment of hate and judicial activism makes people afraid to do something legal. Corruption has already won.

This.
The anti gun culture of NY is strong.
I remember being questioned at the range on the legality of things pre safe.
I had a S&W MP22 that really pissed off a fudd. It was a damn 22 with 10 round mags and a fixed stock with no muzzle device.

The gun culture in other states is worlds different. Go to a range in PA and see. Want to rent a full auto? Here you go.

I remember telling people how crazy NY gun laws are when I lived in SC, and they would look at me like I had 10 heads. And this was pre Safe Act, too. Even the idea that you needed a permit, and the process involved to get it, just to simply own a handgun, blew their minds.

Posted: 4/18/2019 10:26:52 PM EDT

[#34]

There is a screen shot on a long island gun forum of an email from the head of the Nassau county police pistol unit to an FFL on the island declaring them illegal.

Posted: 4/18/2019 10:28:28 PM EDT

[#35]

Quote History

Quoted:

This.
The anti gun culture of NY is strong.
I remember being questioned at the range on the legality of things pre safe.
I had a S&W MP22 that really pissed off a fudd. It was a damn 22 with 10 round mags and a fixed stock with no muzzle device.

The gun culture in other states is worlds different. Go to a range in PA and see. Want to rent a full auto? Here you go.

View Quote

Last week at Knob Creek I was out on the hotel patio working on my Vickers MMG. Another guy was working on a 1917a1. Another guest walked by and sat down like there was nothing of interest. Other guests walked back and forth paying no attention. In NYS there would have been two dozen cop cars.

Knob Creek. 300 machine guns. 2 million rounds of ammo. Nobody hurt, robbed, or raped. I wonder if maybe the problem isn’t guns.

Posted: 4/18/2019 11:54:06 PM EDT

[#36]

Quote History

Quoted:
There is a screen shot on a long island gun forum of an email from the head of the Nassau county police pistol unit to an FFL on the island declaring them illegal.

View Quote

I assume that's worth as much as an email declaring them legal; not much.

Does he go into detail about why they're illegal in the email?

Posted: 4/19/2019 1:36:48 AM EDT

[#37]

Which store in Westchester is selling them?

Posted: 4/19/2019 2:07:29 AM EDT

[#38]

Quote History

Quoted:
I assume that's worth as much as an email declaring them legal; not much.

Does he go into detail about why they're illegal in the email?

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
There is a screen shot on a long island gun forum of an email from the head of the Nassau county police pistol unit to an FFL on the island declaring them illegal.

I assume that's worth as much as an email declaring them legal; not much.

Does he go into detail about why they're illegal in the email?

No I don't think they elaborated. According to the forum there was at least one dealer on the island selling them that stopped.

A few years ago the Suffolk county pistol unit (adjacent county) issued a letter addressed to NYS firearms dealers giving the green light on shockwave "other" shotguns.

Does anyone know if these county pistol units have some authority / duties beyond just pistol permits? Are they involved in state gun dealer licensing?

Posted: 4/19/2019 6:59:37 AM EDT

[#39]

They "considered it to be" an SBR. I'll try to find the email.

Posted: 4/19/2019 7:26:00 AM EDT

[#40]

Quote History

Quoted:
They "considered it to be" an SBR. I'll try to find the email.

View Quote

Well then how about a braced or tubed 16 inch barrelled "firearm" with a VFG?

Not an sbr...not a rifle...not a pistol...not covered by NY gun laws...legal.

Posted: 4/19/2019 7:28:30 AM EDT

[#41]

Quote History

Quoted:
There is a screen shot on a long island gun forum of an email from the head of the Nassau county police pistol unit to an FFL on the island declaring them illegal.

View Quote

Yeah they also say fixed mag AR pistols are illegal.

Nassau county pistol goons don't know a god damn thing.

These are the same as shockwave shotguns. Legal in NY.

Posted: 4/19/2019 7:55:49 AM EDT

[#42]

Quote History

Quoted:
They "considered it to be" an SBR. I'll try to find the email.

View Quote

Yeah, please post if it you find it. If he's saying it's a short barreled rifle, then he must be considering the brace as a stock. So I wonder how he would reply to a bare buffer tube.

Posted: 4/19/2019 8:15:02 AM EDT

[#43]

This open letter from the ATF states that braces are not stocks. I know BushBoar said that letters from the ATF are irrelevant in NY, but I wasn't sure if he meant all letters, or just the letters written by random people from ATF's tech branch in reply to a specific individual's question. This is an open letter from the acting chief of the tech branch.

https://www.atf.gov/file/11816/download

Sorry to keep pestering you, @BushBoar.

Posted: 4/19/2019 8:27:20 AM EDT

[#44]

I mean yeah NY doesn't care what the ATF says (and their letters are not binding as we all know)... but IMHO a jury would be hard pressed to ignore the firearms "experts" at the ATF. If they say it's not a stock it's not a stock.

Posted: 4/19/2019 9:26:08 AM EDT

[#45]

Interesting. It doesn't *have* to have a short barrel though, right? Anything goes, as long as OAL is over 26"? Don't care for short barrels. I'm thinking a normal 16" AR, just like the one I lost in one of those boating accidents, but with a brace and a VFG... Still not a rifle? Obviously there's no point of doing that in free states, I'm thinking purely from FUAC perspective...

Posted: 4/19/2019 9:30:36 AM EDT

[#46]

Quote History

Quoted:
I mean yeah NY doesn't care what the ATF says (and their letters are not binding as we all know)... but IMHO a jury would be hard pressed to ignore the firearms "experts" at the ATF. If they say it's not a stock it's not a stock.

View Quote

I'm of the same opinion. I would hope a jury wouldn't look at that information and say "Nah. It's definitely a stock". But that's a mighty big gamble.

Posted: 4/19/2019 9:31:18 AM EDT

[#47]

Quote History

Quoted:
Interesting. It doesn't *have* to have a short barrel though, right? Anything goes, as long as OAL is over 26"? Don't care for short barrels. I'm thinking a normal 16" AR, just like the one I lost in one of those boating accidents, but with a brace and a VFG... Still not a rifle? Obviously there's no point of doing that in free states, I'm thinking purely from FUAC perspective...

View Quote

Yeah, as long as the OAL is greater than 26", it has a VFG, and isn't designed to be fire from the shoulder.

Posted: 4/19/2019 9:40:05 AM EDT

[#48]

https://www.instagram.com/li_outdoorsman/p/BpTHP0uho2w/?hl=en

And not to be petty but these are "others" not "firearms."

Posted: 4/19/2019 9:49:06 AM EDT

[#49]

This is SCPD ok letter for the Shockwave.

https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.dark-storm.com/images/promo/0/SCPD-Shockwave-Letter-5-19-2017.pdf&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwiOpZLFpdzhAhUEVN8KHctGD48QFjAAegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw0FzABTth64TQ_EacNQfWnd

Posted: 4/19/2019 9:50:13 AM EDT

[#50]

Quote History

Quoted:
https://www.instagram.com/li_outdoorsman/p/BpTHP0uho2w/?hl=en

And but to be petty but these are "others" not "firearms."

View Quote

Yeah, I was using "firearm" by the ATF definition, because I forgot NY defines "firearm" differently until BushBoar commented on it earlier.

That email is extremely vague. But it has to be that they are considering the brace to be a stock, if they are claiming it's a "short barreled rifle". If you look down in the comments on that IG post, someone brings up a great point that I will use to offer up this question for discussion: If NYS is going to consider a brace as a stock, then how do they (I know all counties are different, but just for sake of argument) allow actual AR pistols to be added to pistol permits, when they have a brace? Many have made braced AR pistols in the more relaxed counties in NY and had them added to their permit, from what I've read.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Anyone seeing AR "firearms" (basically AR pistols with >26" OAL + VFG) at NY gun stores? (Page 1 of 5)

Hometown » New York

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us