ATF position change on measuring AR pistols and braces

[awp_101]

I wasn't sure if this should go here since it's technically pistol related or rifles and carbines since it's also AR related...

ATF Rescinds Prior Methods to Measure a Firearm’s Overall Length when Equipped with a Stabilizing Brace

In its letter, ATF specifies that

[m]akers also create an artificial overall length measurement by attaching a folding stabilizing brace. Such a measurement would be problematic because the firearm could avoid classification as an “AOW,” yet retain the conceivability and remain fully functional. Measuring a folding (or telescoping) stabilizing brace would therefore undermine the comprehensive statutory and regulatory design of the GCA and NFA.…The measurement of a folding or collapsible stabilizing brace in the overall length of a firearm creates an artificial overall length that would permit a maker to avoid classification as an NFA “firearm” without a viable design purpose or legal justification.

It goes on to say that even stationary braces cannot be included in the overall length measurement, but the receiver extension can be.

Based on this letter, it is safe to say that ATF is taking the position that firearms equipped with stabilizing braces need to have their overall length measured with the brace folded or to the end of the receiver extension if the brace is stationary and non-adjustable. Adding a vertical foregrip to a firearm that has an overall length of less than 26 inches results in the making of an AOW, which is subject to the National Firearms Act.

[Rex G]

Thanks. It is good to know this, as I have an AR pistol, with a LAW folder. I do not like VFGs, but my wife does, and there is a chance this may evolve to become “her” gun, by gradual persuasion, or upon my passing. We shall need to get out the tape measure.

[fwrun]

Every time I hear about an “update” from ATF, it blows my mind. The notion of my department just making up new rules for felony charges without legislative input is absolutely out of the question. ATF shouldn’t be any different.

Felony today, ok tomorrow, felony again next week.

[HCM]

Thanks. It is good to know this, as I have an AR pistol, with a LAW folder. I do not like VFGs, but my wife does, and there is a chance this may evolve to become “her” gun, by gradual persuasion, or upon my passing. We shall need to get out the tape measure.

The thread title is somewhat of a misnomer as the measurement method is really to distinguish pistols and AOW (< 26”) from “other firearms” (>26”). This is based on ATF’s long standing regs that 26” is the divide between “concealable” and not.

[whomever]

Felony today, ok tomorrow, felony again next week.

It would really suck to have something that was completely legal and not get the word that it was now a felony. You could be deployed, or busy going through chemo, or just be someone who carefully verified legality once and didn't follow the gun fora afterwards.

[RevolverRob]

I read this as:

If you want to add a VFG to an AR pistol, you can’t count a folding brace that is unfolded and locked in place as part of the 26” OAL. Because in many instances the gun is still capable of firing from a folded position.

[Hambo]

From reading the blog is doesn't sound as though ATF rescinded anything. Someone asked for clarification on how to measure and got it. The root problem is that too many people write to ATF.

[fwrun]

It would really suck to have something that was completely legal and not get the word that it was now a felony. You could be deployed, or busy going through chemo, or just be someone who carefully verified legality once and didn't follow the gun fora afterwards.

They have turned it into a full time hobby now, like weekly Fantasy Football. “Oh, better take my VFG off this week!”

[HCM]

Every time I hear about an “update” from ATF, it blows my mind. The notion of my department just making up new rules for felony charges without legislative input is absolutely out of the question. ATF shouldn’t be any different.

Felony today, ok tomorrow, felony again next week.

Felony charges may result but it is collateral. The technical decision here is intended clarify a “gray area” where different prosecutors, ATF offices, industry members etc have been measuring differently.

You have to understand how federal legislation works in the context of checks and balances. This is not just for ATF / Firearms - it applies to all federal legislation.

Congress passes the laws which provide the statute and intent. It is then up to the agency with responsibility and specific expertise to develop and issue the regulations on how to execute the statute and congress’s intent in detail. This is done via the Code of Federal Regulations. When technical issues come up which are not clearly specified in the statute or CFR, agencies issue letter head decisions like these. Many agencies do this, Commerce, DHS on Immigration and customs issues etc.

The checks on this are via the judicial branch (lawsuits) and via congress oversight and power of the purse. They could defund the agency or the specific program within the agency if the agency acts unreasonably or outside of congress’ intent.

This is true of ATF, the EPA, the forest service, Immigration etc. look at the lawsuits on things like DACA, wall construction, immigration enforcement policies etc.

While ATF is part of the executive branch and therefore somewhat subject to influence from POTUS they are at least career professionals with technical knowledge of firearms. The alternative would have congressional staffers who don’t know a brace pistol from “the shoulder thing that goes up.” making these determinations.

Without that clarity you have you have US Attorneys prosecuting people and the courts determining how to measure a gun to see if it is 26” using different methods - then the circuits disagree on how to measure and it is a damn mess. Not that plenty of stuff in the federal system isn’t a mess already but it could be far worse.

Not to mention that Brace pistols and Shockwave type “firearms” are creations of ATF Regulations and technical decisions in the first place. You think congress would have OK’ed sig brace pistols if they won’t repeal the NFA ?

Along those lines, clearly defining the braces as accessories actually reinforces the current interpretations regarding brace pistols being legit. Stocks, as found on rifle, shotguns, SBR and SBS are part of the gun, braces are accessories which are not part of the gun. By clarifying that a brace is not a stock, you negate the argument that how you hold it (shouldering a brace ) can make it a “stock.”

Second, “other firearms” have recently seen a huge increase in popularity due to NY and CT laws. There has been a lot of gray area about how to get over the “magic” 26 inch mark that divides “concealable” pistols and AOW from “other firearms.” I think the clarification of what is and is not part of the length strengthens the position of those whose only option is “other firearms.”

[HCM]

From reading the blog is doesn't sound as though ATF rescinded anything. Someone asked for clarification on how to measure and got it. The root problem is that too many people write to ATF.

This right here. ^^^^