There is a lot of discussion across Internet forums on the impact, meaning, and validity of "ATF Letters" and what/who they apply to, especially when they are used to classify an NFA item . There is also debate on why individuals would write to the ATF in the first place, or keep repeating questions that the ATF already gave an opinion on. The recent letters posted on the Internet that state the classification of an AR pistol can change from a non-NFA pistol to an NFA SBR based on how it is used are causing quite a stir. The recent, unvetted letter says that a Sig Brace is legal on an AR pistol when used as designed, but using the Sig Brace as a stock would create an NFA SBR out of that same pistol.
That opinion is a direct contradiction of an ATF opinion given by the same individual earlier this year that use, or misuse of an accessory does not change the classification of an AR pistol; specifically the Sgt. Bradley letter that declared it is legal to shoulder an AR-15 pistol, and further stated that accessories like the "Sig Stabilizing Brace" are not stocks and do not change the classification even when misused, as in shouldering an AR 15 pistol equipped with a Sig Brace.
So what do ATF letters mean when they are addressing an individual's question? Does the opinion only apply to the individual or to the specific items, or combination of items, addressed in the letter? The answer can't be one way when convenient and the other way when unpopular.
The "ATF letters" are all we have to cite in defense of AR pistols and accessories in many cases. If they only apply to the adressee, then only the adressee can legally use the combination of items adressed by the opinion. The biggest case in point that I am aware of is the legal classification of the AR pistol in the first place. The ATF definition of a pistol can be found on the website and reads:
"Pistol
18 U.S.C., § 921(A)(29) and 27 CFR § 478.11
The term “Pistol” means a weapon originally designed, made, and intended to fire a projectile (bullet) from one or more barrels when held in one hand, and having:
a chamber(s) as an integral part(s) of, or permanently aligned with, the bore(s);
and a short stock designed to be gripped by one hand at an angle to and extending below the line of the bore(s).
declares it is weapon designed, made and intended to be fired (snip) when held in one hand, and having (snip) a short stock designed to be gripped with one hand at an angle to the bore..........
http://www.atf.gov/content/firearms/...inition-pistol
How does an AR 15 pistol meet that definition? Who believes they are a "weapon originally designed, made, and intended to fire a projectile (bullet) from one or more barrels when held in one hand?"
The link below contains ATF rulings and can be argued as an official ATF mandate, unlike the "letters". I can't find anything in it that makes an AR pistol legal. I can deduce that the definition of a rifle maintains it is designed and intended to be fired from the shoulder, which an AR pistol is clearly not. But what about that other part that a handgun and pistol are both designed and intended to be fired with one hand?
https://www.atf.gov/files/regulation...ing-2011-4.pdf
The first thing I can find is an ATF opinion letter to Mr. Bigbore indicating he can legally build an AR pistol on a virgin receiver. But, it incorrectly refers to AR-15 style "rifle" receivers, probably because it was written prior to the revision to Form 4473 which added "other" to the options. Is this all we have that allows us to build AR pistols? Does it only apply to Mr. Bigbore? Is it worth the paper it is written on? Is there anything "official" from the ATF that allows AR pistols or does this letter have any value to those of us who build pistols.
Yeah, I know, screw the ATF, the NFA, all politicians,...................etc.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by DWood
Bookmarks