- Thread starter Ilya R
- Start date
Re: can i put Magpul AFG on AR pistol without stamp?
I think by adding a vertical foregrip on an AR pistol make it a AOW. Now the AFG isnt necessarily "vertical", but per the ATF, a pistol or handgun is ment to be shot with one hand. In my opinion that's a pretty grey area, and if it was me, I wouldn't install it.
There's a similar discussion on the High Road. See the attached link.
http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-503179.html
I think by adding a vertical foregrip on an AR pistol make it a AOW. Now the AFG isnt necessarily "vertical", but per the ATF, a pistol or handgun is ment to be shot with one hand. In my opinion that's a pretty grey area, and if it was me, I wouldn't install it.
There's a similar discussion on the High Road. See the attached link.
http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-503179.html
Re: can i put Magpul AFG on AR pistol without stamp?
Thanx. That was my understanding as well. Since pistol should be shot with one hand. Thanx for input eveyone.
Ilya. R
Thanx. That was my understanding as well. Since pistol should be shot with one hand. Thanx for input eveyone.
Ilya. R
Re: can i put Magpul AFG on AR pistol without stamp?
YES you can. The AFG is NOT a vertical fore grip and the tech bureau has made a ruling on it previously. Check you FA web sites there are copies of the original document.
Cheers,
Doc
YES you can. The AFG is NOT a vertical fore grip and the tech bureau has made a ruling on it previously. Check you FA web sites there are copies of the original document.
Cheers,
Doc
Re: can i put Magpul AFG on AR pistol without stamp?
Doc, tried to find original docs online dont have any luck. Would u be ao kind and post a link if u have a second. Thank you in advance for your time.
Ilya
Doc, tried to find original docs online dont have any luck. Would u be ao kind and post a link if u have a second. Thank you in advance for your time.
Ilya
Re: can i put Magpul AFG on AR pistol without stamp?
This is one response there are several others out there, Google is your friend
Question & Answer #7
http://www.guntrustlawyer.com/ATF%20Response%20-%20AFG%20on%20AR%20Pistol.pdf
Cheers,
Doc
This is one response there are several others out there, Google is your friend
Question & Answer #7
http://www.guntrustlawyer.com/ATF%20Response%20-%20AFG%20on%20AR%20Pistol.pdf
Cheers,
Doc
Re: can i put Magpul AFG on AR pistol without stamp?
Dunno about KAC and IWC but if it is VERTICAL then it is a no no. I would be leery of the finger groove looking thing that goes on the mag well but I have no data to support that conjecture. I only looked at the AFG because it came up when I was considering building a pistol w/ a piston.
Cheers,
Doc
Dunno about KAC and IWC but if it is VERTICAL then it is a no no. I would be leery of the finger groove looking thing that goes on the mag well but I have no data to support that conjecture. I only looked at the AFG because it came up when I was considering building a pistol w/ a piston.
Cheers,
Doc
Re: can i put Magpul AFG on AR pistol without stamp?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Smrkovsky</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think by adding a vertical foregrip on an AR pistol make it a AOW. Now the AFG isnt necessarily "vertical", but per the ATF, a pistol or handgun is ment to be shot with one hand. In my opinion that's a pretty grey area, and if it was me, I wouldn't install it.
There's a similar discussion on the High Road. See the attached link.
http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-503179.html </div></div>
The thread you linked to contradicts your conclusion. Toward the bottom there is a link to the ATF document that supports the AFG on an AR-15 pistol.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Smrkovsky</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think by adding a vertical foregrip on an AR pistol make it a AOW. Now the AFG isnt necessarily "vertical", but per the ATF, a pistol or handgun is ment to be shot with one hand. In my opinion that's a pretty grey area, and if it was me, I wouldn't install it.
There's a similar discussion on the High Road. See the attached link.
http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-503179.html </div></div>
The thread you linked to contradicts your conclusion. Toward the bottom there is a link to the ATF document that supports the AFG on an AR-15 pistol.
Re: can i put Magpul AFG on AR pistol without stamp?
Doc IS RIGHT.
ATF has allowed the AFG. Its NOT considered a vertical grip.
Matt (LEO SOUTH GA.)
Doc IS RIGHT.
ATF has allowed the AFG. Its NOT considered a vertical grip.
Matt (LEO SOUTH GA.)
Re: can i put Magpul AFG on AR pistol without stamp?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MST</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not even grey. A hand stop is verboten on a pistol.
A sling with a front QD swivel and a flashlight though would be fine and do what one wants it to. </div></div>You sounded pretty sure of yourself.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MST</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not even grey. A hand stop is verboten on a pistol.
A sling with a front QD swivel and a flashlight though would be fine and do what one wants it to. </div></div>You sounded pretty sure of yourself.
Re: can i put Magpul AFG on AR pistol without stamp?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eracer</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MST</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not even grey. A hand stop is verboten on a pistol.
A sling with a front QD swivel and a flashlight though would be fine and do what one wants it to. </div></div>You sounded pretty sure of yourself. </div></div>
Yes I did, my info coming directly from Knight about their hand stop. Which is nothing more than a flange that is rail mounted. I called, I asked, they said that atf tech had deemed them a NFA tax stamp on a AR or AK pistol, that it was not legal to install without.
Theirs is not a grip at all. Only a flange to prevent the hand from slipping off and infront of the muzzle.
At that time tech seemed to be interpreting the law as anything intended to interact with the hand other than the handguard.
With intent in design being a large part of their leaning.
If they have changed their feelings in the last couple, cool.
Me? I am not willing to take the chance of having to try to explain my side while they say 'you misunderstood when you mistook me at my word, oh that piece of paper you have from us is no longer valid either'.
Not worth it, the law for SBR is clear. If you want all the bells and whistles. I am personally happy they at least let the pistols be and not declare them destructive devices.
I would not be willing to wage a multi thousand dollar war for a $30 add on.
So when you pop off that I sound pretty sure of myself, when you've personally called the manufacturer of the part and asked specifically if it is legal in this application and they tell you "No sir it is not". Wouldn't you feel certain too?
?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eracer</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MST</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not even grey. A hand stop is verboten on a pistol.
A sling with a front QD swivel and a flashlight though would be fine and do what one wants it to. </div></div>You sounded pretty sure of yourself. </div></div>
Yes I did, my info coming directly from Knight about their hand stop. Which is nothing more than a flange that is rail mounted. I called, I asked, they said that atf tech had deemed them a NFA tax stamp on a AR or AK pistol, that it was not legal to install without.
Theirs is not a grip at all. Only a flange to prevent the hand from slipping off and infront of the muzzle.
At that time tech seemed to be interpreting the law as anything intended to interact with the hand other than the handguard.
With intent in design being a large part of their leaning.
If they have changed their feelings in the last couple, cool.
Me? I am not willing to take the chance of having to try to explain my side while they say 'you misunderstood when you mistook me at my word, oh that piece of paper you have from us is no longer valid either'.
Not worth it, the law for SBR is clear. If you want all the bells and whistles. I am personally happy they at least let the pistols be and not declare them destructive devices.
I would not be willing to wage a multi thousand dollar war for a $30 add on.
So when you pop off that I sound pretty sure of myself, when you've personally called the manufacturer of the part and asked specifically if it is legal in this application and they tell you "No sir it is not". Wouldn't you feel certain too?
?
Re: can i put Magpul AFG on AR pistol without stamp?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MST</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eracer</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MST</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not even grey. A hand stop is verboten on a pistol.
A sling with a front QD swivel and a flashlight though would be fine and do what one wants it to. </div></div>You sounded pretty sure of yourself. </div></div>
Yes I did, my info coming directly from Knight about their hand stop. Which is nothing more than a flange that is rail mounted. I called, I asked, they said that atf tech had deemed them a NFA tax stamp on a AR or AK pistol, that it was not legal to install without.
Theirs is not a grip at all. Only a flange to prevent the hand from slipping off and infront of the muzzle.
At that time tech seemed to be interpreting the law as anything intended to interact with the hand other than the handguard.
With intent in design being a large part of their leaning.
If they have changed their feelings in the last couple, cool.
Me? I am not willing to take the chance of having to try to explain my side while they say 'you misunderstood when you mistook me at my word, oh that piece of paper you have from us is no longer valid either'.
Not worth it, the law for SBR is clear. If you want all the bells and whistles. I am personally happy they at least let the pistols be and not declare them destructive devices.
I would not be willing to wage a multi thousand dollar war for a $30 add on.
So when you pop off that I sound pretty sure of myself, when you've personally called the manufacturer of the part and asked specifically if it is legal in this application and they tell you "No sir it is not". Wouldn't you feel certain too?
?</div></div>
As a "neutral party" who doesn't even have an AR pistol, here's my thought on the AFG.
If a signed letter directly from the ATF conflicted with what some tech said on a phone once, I would at the very least consider it a "grey area" instead of saying the tech was the 100% sure thing. Especially if the signed letter approved the actual part by name (AFG) and the tech on the phone was talking about a completely different part.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MST</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eracer</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MST</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not even grey. A hand stop is verboten on a pistol.
A sling with a front QD swivel and a flashlight though would be fine and do what one wants it to. </div></div>You sounded pretty sure of yourself. </div></div>
Yes I did, my info coming directly from Knight about their hand stop. Which is nothing more than a flange that is rail mounted. I called, I asked, they said that atf tech had deemed them a NFA tax stamp on a AR or AK pistol, that it was not legal to install without.
Theirs is not a grip at all. Only a flange to prevent the hand from slipping off and infront of the muzzle.
At that time tech seemed to be interpreting the law as anything intended to interact with the hand other than the handguard.
With intent in design being a large part of their leaning.
If they have changed their feelings in the last couple, cool.
Me? I am not willing to take the chance of having to try to explain my side while they say 'you misunderstood when you mistook me at my word, oh that piece of paper you have from us is no longer valid either'.
Not worth it, the law for SBR is clear. If you want all the bells and whistles. I am personally happy they at least let the pistols be and not declare them destructive devices.
I would not be willing to wage a multi thousand dollar war for a $30 add on.
So when you pop off that I sound pretty sure of myself, when you've personally called the manufacturer of the part and asked specifically if it is legal in this application and they tell you "No sir it is not". Wouldn't you feel certain too?
?</div></div>
As a "neutral party" who doesn't even have an AR pistol, here's my thought on the AFG.
If a signed letter directly from the ATF conflicted with what some tech said on a phone once, I would at the very least consider it a "grey area" instead of saying the tech was the 100% sure thing. Especially if the signed letter approved the actual part by name (AFG) and the tech on the phone was talking about a completely different part.
Similar threads
