Page 17 of 20 FirstFirst ... 71516171819 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 200

Thread: Pistol Caliber Carbine

  1. #161
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Columbus Ohio Area
    Quote Originally Posted by jwperry View Post
    Ah, verbage technicality.
    Well, I mean, open gun is separate from limited, etc.

    It is illegal to fire a pistol with an arm brace from the shoulder, so, I can't see USPSA allowing that.

    USPSA defines classes, so I can't imagine them letting a pistol be shot during a carbine match.

    What's the issue here?

  2. #162
    Site Supporter jwperry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Polk County, FL
    Quote Originally Posted by Josh Runkle View Post
    Well, I mean, open gun is separate from limited, etc.

    It is illegal to fire a pistol with an arm brace from the shoulder, so, I can't see USPSA allowing that.

    USPSA defines classes, so I can't imagine them letting a pistol be shot during a carbine match.

    What's the issue here?
    No issue, the wording was something I overlooked.
    I will say though, in my local multigun & 3 gun matches we have had more than a few guys shouldering AR/AK pistol variants. No one bats an eye. In my head, that's where the confusion came from as that was my point of reference.

    Edwin posted the rule specifically banning those type of pistol/carbine/other weapon, so my question is moot because USPSA already thought of it.

  3. #163
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Columbus Ohio Area
    Quote Originally Posted by jwperry View Post
    No issue, the wording was something I overlooked.
    I will say though, in my local multigun & 3 gun matches we have had more than a few guys shouldering AR/AK pistol variants. No one bats an eye. In my head, that's where the confusion came from as that was my point of reference.

    Edwin posted the rule specifically banning those type of pistol/carbine/other weapon, so my question is moot because USPSA already thought of it.
    My understanding is that the BATFE originally found no fault in shouldering pistol braces, but then reverse position and declared them to be SBR'd when fired from the shoulder. Tantamount to making your gun run full auto without a tax stamp. At this point, it's declared to be VERY illegal to do so, but, one could always be the first test case in court, and then we'd have an actual answer.

    If you see that activity, you should stop it.

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

  4. #164
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Columbus Ohio Area
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom_Jones View Post
    It's my understand that the BATFE said that putting a pistol brace on a pistol with the intent of shouldering it was building an SBR and that building an SBR without filing a Form 1 was illegal.

    I'm about as far from a lawyer as possible (in fact, I'm almost human) so I urge people to give no weight to my words on legal (or really any other) matters.
    "The pistol stabilizing brace was neither “designed” nor approved to be used as a shoulder stock, and therefore use as a shoulder stock constitutes a “redesign” of the device because a possessor has changed the very function of the item. Any individual letters stating otherwise are contrary to the plain language of the NFA, misapply Federal law, and are hereby revoked.
    Any person who intends to use a handgun stabilizing brace as a shoulder stock on a pistol (having a rifled barrel under 16 inches in length or a smooth bore firearm with a barrel under 18 inches in length) must first file an ATF Form 1 and pay the applicable tax because the resulting firearm will be subject to all provisions of the NFA."

    -from my ATF link

  5. #165
    Member Luke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Alabama
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom_Jones View Post
    (emphasis added)

    Isn't that what I said?

    No, you said intent.



    ETA:
    Last edited by Luke; 04-03-2016 at 06:12 PM.
    i used to wannabe

  6. #166
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Columbus Ohio Area
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom_Jones View Post
    (emphasis added)

    Isn't that what I said?
    You were referencing building with the intent: i.e., construction.

    They are referencing "intends to use": i.e., usage.

  7. #167
    Arguing about what the ATF really meant... Where's that popcorn .gif?
    Recovering Gun Store Commando. My Blog: The Clue Meter
    “It doesn’t matter what the problem is, the solution is always for us to give the government more money and power, while we eat less meat.”
    Glenn Reynolds

  8. #168
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Idaho
    We had our annual back-to-back High-capacity/Low-capacity match this weekend. Day 1 recognized only the high-capacity divisions (Open, Limited, PCC) and day 2 recognized only the low-capacity divisions (Production, SS, Limited 10, Revo). Both days shot exactly the same stages. I shot PCC in the hi-cap match, and Prod in the lo-cap match. I ended up with division wins in both, and 2nd overall in hi-cap, 1st overall in lo-cap. While it wasn't technically a major match, most of us that shoot it treat it as such, with trophies and annual bragging rights on the line.

    This match is one of my favorites because it gives me the chance to shoot the same stages multiple times in different divisions and compare the results. In this case, I beat my production scores by 15% when shooting PCC. My total time in PCC was 160, and my time in Production was 175. I also shot better points in PCC, with 1016 for PCC vs. 989 for Prod. I did beat PCC with production on two stages, both of which involved fairly tight movement and shooting through/around ports and walls at awkward angles. I'll try to get some video comparing PCC with pistol on the same stages up soon.
    TY83544

  9. #169
    Quote Originally Posted by Josh Runkle View Post
    "The pistol stabilizing brace was neither “designed” nor approved to be used as a shoulder stock, and therefore use as a shoulder stock constitutes a “redesign” of the device because a possessor has changed the very function of the item. Any individual letters stating otherwise are contrary to the plain language of the NFA, misapply Federal law, and are hereby revoked.

    Any person who intends to use a handgun stabilizing brace as a shoulder stock on a pistol (having a rifled barrel under 16 inches in length or a smooth bore firearm with a barrel under 18 inches in length) must first file an ATF Form 1 and pay the applicable tax because the resulting firearm will be subject to all provisions of the NFA."

    -from my ATF link

    The "remaking" logic that the ATF uses has already been shot down once. I forget which court, but it was over putting a VFG on a Glock
    "The rocket worked perfectly, except for landing on the wrong planet." - Wernher Von Braun

    http://www.teampegleg.com

  10. #170
    Quote Originally Posted by Talionis View Post
    We had our annual back-to-back High-capacity/Low-capacity match this weekend. Day 1 recognized only the high-capacity divisions (Open, Limited, PCC) and day 2 recognized only the low-capacity divisions (Production, SS, Limited 10, Revo). Both days shot exactly the same stages. I shot PCC in the hi-cap match, and Prod in the lo-cap match. I ended up with division wins in both, and 2nd overall in hi-cap, 1st overall in lo-cap. While it wasn't technically a major match, most of us that shoot it treat it as such, with trophies and annual bragging rights on the line.

    This match is one of my favorites because it gives me the chance to shoot the same stages multiple times in different divisions and compare the results. In this case, I beat my production scores by 15% when shooting PCC. My total time in PCC was 160, and my time in Production was 175. I also shot better points in PCC, with 1016 for PCC vs. 989 for Prod. I did beat PCC with production on two stages, both of which involved fairly tight movement and shooting through/around ports and walls at awkward angles. I'll try to get some video comparing PCC with pistol on the same stages up soon.
    You didn't mention Carry Optics?
    Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •