ATF clarification about shoulder use of an AR pistol

[ABNAK]

http://blogs.militarytimes.com/gears...-an-ar-pistol/

Basically says that shouldering a pistol does NOT change it's design and therefore does NOT make it an SBR. Best part is they specifically address the SB15. Granted, these "determination" letters are always subject to change but there it is.

[Koshinn]

The letters mean absolutely nothing except to the specific person it was written to. And even then, they hold no legal weight, they're merely insight into the mind of that particular ATF agent on that particular day.

[ABNAK]

The letters mean absolutely nothing except to the specific person it was written to. And even then, they hold no legal weight, they're merely insight into the mind of that particular ATF agent on that particular day.

Don't know what more you want; It's written pretty plainly. It's also written to a cop (why he was inquiring I can only guess).

I'll agree that they may not hold legal weight *per se*, but that specific person thing is BS. Also, if you had a brain and a decent attorney (should it come to that) showing that letter with it's official heading and signed by the chief of the FTB would be helpful in front of a jury (yep, even a retarded-when-it-comes-to-guns jury). You may not agree but that's your perrogative.....I see it differently.

I'm just waiting for some idiot to write ATF and ask them to double-dog swear they REALLY meant it.

[Iraqgunz]

I wrote them about this and am waiting for an answer also. I clearly pointed out that due to the approval of the "arm brace" by the BATF they have proven again how insane the NFA is in regards to SBR's and this thing clearly makes and AK/AR pistol into an SBR-ish weapon. The only difference is that the arm brace isn't cool and doesn't come in multiple flavors- B5, Magpul, Vltor, etc...

[ABNAK]

I wrote them about this and am waiting for an answer also. I clearly pointed out that due to the approval of the "arm brace" by the BATF they have proven again how insane the NFA is in regards to SBR's and this thing clearly makes and AK/AR pistol into an SBR-ish weapon. The only difference is that the arm brace isn't cool and doesn't come in multiple flavors- B5, Magpul, Vltor, etc...

Surely you jest........

[scooter22]

The letters mean absolutely nothing except to the specific person it was written to. And even then, they hold no legal weight, they're merely insight into the mind of that particular ATF agent on that particular day.

Although it may be "merely insight into the mind of that particular ATF agent on that particular day", it still has to hold some weight with regards to interpretation of the law.

[ABNAK]

Although it may be "merely insight into the mind of that particular ATF agent on that particular day", it still has to hold some weight with regards to interpretation of the law.

"That particular ATF agent" happens to be the CHIEF of the Firearms Technology Branch, the entity within the ATF that actually makes those determinations! It's not like it came from some bored desk-bound agent. Yeah, it's bound to carry some weight.

[Koshinn]

Not really, no. ATF letters are internal policy decisions only as accurate as the moment they're signed. If they change their minds, they won't update you via a letter.

Legally, if they've changed their mind since writing the letter (and they would have if the issue comes up at all), the letter is worth about as much as the paper it's printed on.

It doesn't matter if the head of the ATF wrote the letter. Their interpretation of the law via letter does not hold any legal weight. Period, full stop.

[thei3ug]

It's a hell of a way to create policy, that's for sure.
I'd love to see the face of one of my customers when I told them a letter on our letterhead was only as accurate as the moment I signed it.

I'm still debating using this as a justification for building a .30 cal pistol then putting an arm brace and seeing if the DNR will accept it as viable for pistol hunting or not. These determinations by letter leave loopholes so wide I can't imagine it's going to hold. Either that or there is really no point in enforcing most of the NFA as it is written.

[ABNAK]

Not really, no. ATF letters are internal policy decisions only as accurate as the moment they're signed. If they change their minds, they won't update you via a letter.

Legally, if they've changed their mind since writing the letter (and they would have if the issue comes up at all), the letter is worth about as much as the paper it's printed on.

It doesn't matter if the head of the ATF wrote the letter. Their interpretation of the law via letter does not hold any legal weight. Period, full stop.

Then what, pray tell, DOES carry weight? I'm no lawyer (and I don't think you are either) but common sense dictates that unless there has been a rescinding "letter" or ruling that said letter WOULD carry weight. You cannot in any way tell me that "changing their mind" with no documentation thereof for a legal device is binding in court. The letter referenced as well as others I've read concerning CAA stock saddles all mention that those devices DO NOT make the weapon an SBR. This current letter goes as far as saying that how you use an AR pistol also does not make it an SBR.

So, following your line of "ATF has omnipotent powers of GOTCHA" thinking, if they at some point decided that the SB15 brace is a no-go do you think they could just think it and then successfully prosecute everyone after that for having one on their AR pistol? No, they'd have to issue some kind of a published determination. So then would that letter be valid? Why that and not the one I linked?

Exactly what would you need to satisfy you? A law passed by Congress and signed by the POTUS? It ain't gonna get any "better" than this I can assure you.