Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > GENERAL DISCUSSION > General gun discussions
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

General gun discussions This is a place to lounge and discuss firearm related topics with other forum members.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-05-2019, 11:18 AM
Milsurp1's Avatar
Milsurp1 Milsurp1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,370
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default If you have an AR pistol or >26” “firearm” read this ATF determination

https://blog.princelaw.com/2019/07/0...ilizing-brace/

Some people build AR pistols, then modify them to “firearm” and non-pistol status by increasing overall length beyond 26 inches, and then add a vertical foregrip. This new measurement determination could throw many of these builds into AOW status.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-05-2019, 11:39 AM
Strykeback Strykeback is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,523
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Hmm I know a lot of you tube flyboys that might be needing to make adjustments from their 11" AR pistols with braces.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-05-2019, 11:43 AM
Nguyen's Avatar
Nguyen Nguyen is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Orange County
Posts: 3,033
iTrader: 103 / 100%
Default



Is my 1911 beyond 26 inches?
__________________


Quote:
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country."
- Dianne Feinstein
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-05-2019, 11:46 AM
Milsurp1's Avatar
Milsurp1 Milsurp1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,370
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nguyen View Post


Is my 1911 beyond 26 inches?
You mean the AOW in that photo?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-05-2019, 11:52 AM
Nguyen's Avatar
Nguyen Nguyen is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Orange County
Posts: 3,033
iTrader: 103 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Milsurp1 View Post
You mean the AOW in that photo?
no, my 1911.
__________________


Quote:
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country."
- Dianne Feinstein
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-05-2019, 12:04 PM
superhondaz50's Avatar
superhondaz50 superhondaz50 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: FORT MOHAVE, AZ
Posts: 2,577
iTrader: 47 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nguyen View Post


Is my 1911 beyond 26 inches?
That needs a tax stamp señor. Also an assault weapon. I'd prob wanna take that pic down if it were me.
__________________
Originally Posted By CTbuilder1 @ arfcom:
A lot of time and energy goes into thinking up ways to make perfectly good rifles into something dumb. Single shot ARs are gay. AR pistols are also gay. Just my opinion, of course, but a single shot AR pistol would be an AIDS cannon.

Last edited by superhondaz50; 07-05-2019 at 1:39 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-05-2019, 12:07 PM
vintagearms's Avatar
vintagearms vintagearms is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 6,481
iTrader: 52 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nguyen View Post
no, my 1911.
a forward handgrip on a pistol makes it an AOW.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-05-2019, 12:09 PM
psun786's Avatar
psun786 psun786 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Riverside County
Posts: 158
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
ATF has taken the position that once a vertical foregrip has been added to a firearm, it is no longer designed to be fired when held in one hand, removing it from the definition of a pistol, even though ATF previously lost this argument before the Ninth Circuit in U.S. v. Fix, 4 Fed. Appx. 324 (9th Cir. 2001).

ATF can say all they want. But it only matters when they can successfully and consistently prosecute people for those “violations”

My advice is what ever you do. NEVER post any photo of your modified firearm online, legal or not.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-05-2019, 12:21 PM
The Gleam's Avatar
The Gleam The Gleam is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,924
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by psun786 View Post

NEVER post any photo of your modified firearm online, legal or not.
And certainly no photos of any sporterized military surplus, please.

The horror... the horror....
__________________
-----------------------------------------------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
What compelling interest has any level of government in knowing what guns are owned by civilians? (Those owned by government should be inventoried and tracked, for exactly the same reasons computers and desks and chairs are tracked: responsible care of public property.)

If some level of government had that information, what would they do with it? How would having that info benefit public safety? How would it benefit law enforcement?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-05-2019, 12:40 PM
thetruecheese thetruecheese is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 338
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Gleam View Post
And certainly no photos of any sporterized military surplus, please.

The horror... the horror....
This.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 07-05-2019, 2:28 PM
sigstroker sigstroker is online now
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: not in CA
Posts: 7,252
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

When I first started shooting combat matches, there was a guy that had a gun like that, but the forward grip was welded onto the front of the trigger guard. But that was long before ATF was reclassifying everything under the sun.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-05-2019, 3:59 PM
Quiet's Avatar
Quiet Quiet is offline
retired Goon
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Bernardino County
Posts: 24,337
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Milsurp1 View Post
https://blog.princelaw.com/2019/07/0...ilizing-brace/

Some people build AR pistols, then modify them to “firearm” and non-pistol status by increasing overall length beyond 26 inches, and then add a vertical foregrip. This new measurement determination could throw many of these builds into AOW status.
That letter is consistent with what they were saying in 2018.

In 02-2018, BATFE determined the method to measuring overall length to determine if a firearm is a Title 1 Handgun, Title 1 Other, or Title 2 AOW as the following:
1. Firearm is measured in the shortest possible firing configuration (arm stablizing brace is removed or folded/collapsed if it permanently attached).

Per BATFE...
Since the firearm is not intended to be fired from the shoulder, the arm stablizing brace can not be included in measuring overall length to determine what type of non-rifle/shotgun firearm it is.

This all stems from a FFL being busted by the BATFE for making & transferring illegal Title 2 AOW.
The FFL was making & selling the firearms as Title 1 Other (less than 16" barrel length, vertical forward grip, arm stablizing brace) because with the arm stablizing brace extended the firearms had an overall length that was greater than 26".
However, with the arm stablizing brace removed or collapsed/folded (for those that were permanently attached), the firearms overall length was less than 26". This caused the BATFE to consider the firearms to be Title 2 AOW, not Title 1 Other.
__________________


"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.” - Dalai Lama (Seattle Times, 05-15-2001).
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-06-2019, 10:05 AM
1911su16b870's Avatar
1911su16b870 1911su16b870 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 7,031
iTrader: 151 / 100%
Default

So on an AR pistol with standard receiver extension that is required for the operation of the firearm - include it in the overall measurement.

On a firearm equipped with a brace that is not required for the operation of the firearm - measure from the shortest/folded position or removed.
__________________
Trump on RKBA "The Second Amendment to our Constitution is clear. The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed upon. PERIOD."

CGF Contributor
NRA Endowment Life Member, CRPA Life Member
Beretta 90 series, GLOCK (Gen 1-5, G42/43), Colt AR15/M16/M4, Sig P320, Remington 870, HK UMP Factory Armorer
Remington Nylon, 1911, HK, Ruger Armorer just for fun!
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-06-2019, 10:31 AM
waawaaweenie waawaaweenie is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central, Ca
Posts: 525
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nguyen View Post


Is my 1911 beyond 26 inches?
As long as you put on the shoulder thing that goes up, you are OK.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-06-2019, 12:40 PM
Zuceman Zuceman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 169
iTrader: 29 / 100%
Default

So where would the Franklin Armory XO-26 fall in, inquiring minds would like to know?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-06-2019, 1:13 PM
Bigedski Bigedski is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 806
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

The lib's and open borders nutcases what to abolish the border patrol we should demand to abolish the ATF.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-06-2019, 4:10 PM
Jedediah Munroe Jedediah Munroe is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 334
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default If you have an AR pistol or >26” “firearm” read this ATF determination

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zuceman View Post
So where would the Franklin Armory XO-26 fall in, inquiring minds would like to know?


I’m pretty sure it’s over 26 inches even without the brace. So I think it’s still OK


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-06-2019, 4:30 PM
bohoki's Avatar
bohoki bohoki is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: 92688
Posts: 18,614
iTrader: 20 / 100%
Default

seems logical to me i guess its just a folding stock rifle measurement counted as the stock in the extended position is the illogical stance
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-06-2019, 4:37 PM
Dan_Eastvale's Avatar
Dan_Eastvale Dan_Eastvale is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 1,850
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vintagearms View Post
a forward handgrip on a pistol makes it an AOW.
In "some" parts of Westminster anything goes.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-06-2019, 5:30 PM
3rd_gear 3rd_gear is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: San Jose
Posts: 475
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

What are you trying to prove?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nguyen View Post


Is my 1911 beyond 26 inches?
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 07-06-2019, 6:41 PM
67Cuda's Avatar
67Cuda 67Cuda is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 861
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3rd_gear View Post
What are you trying to prove?
He's trying to prove, I want that grip. Where did you get it?
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-06-2019, 8:58 PM
17+1's Avatar
17+1 17+1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,467
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by superhondaz50 View Post
That needs a tax stamp señor. Also an assault weapon. I'd prob wanna take that pic down if it were me.
Chill bruh it’s clearly photo shop.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-07-2019, 9:43 AM
SCVlongstroke's Avatar
SCVlongstroke SCVlongstroke is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 74
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Vendetta Precision 24 hand stop works well
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-07-2019, 11:43 AM
LEAD LAUNCHER LEAD LAUNCHER is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Simi Valley
Posts: 1,129
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Milsurp1 View Post
https://blog.princelaw.com/2019/07/0...ilizing-brace/

Some people build AR pistols, then modify them to “firearm” and non-pistol status by increasing overall length beyond 26 inches, and then add a vertical foregrip. This new measurement determination could throw many of these builds into AOW status.
Whoa-you scared me there for second posting this!

But nothing is actually changing from what I have been researching the last couple months.

But it’s good to have actual confirmation. Glad you posted this.

“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.”

So if you DON’T have a law or similar brand folder that your brace is mounted on- measure from the back of receiver extension to tip of barrel or permanently mounted muzzle device.

If you DO have your brace mounted on a folder, fold it and measure from the back of the folded gun to tip of barrel or permanently mounted muzzle device.

This will determine if you are at the 26 inches or longer so you can legally mount your forward pistol grip without triggering AOW status.

..
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-07-2019, 11:48 AM
Milsurp1's Avatar
Milsurp1 Milsurp1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,370
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

And hopefully everyone knows that the buffer tube is not the receiver extension.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-07-2019, 11:59 AM
LEAD LAUNCHER LEAD LAUNCHER is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Simi Valley
Posts: 1,129
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Milsurp1 View Post
And hopefully everyone knows that the buffer tube is not the receiver extension.
???

https://www.brownells.com/search/ind...iver+extension

182FFA3B-8859-4E15-8437-6C011F2BC3E8.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 07-07-2019, 1:14 PM
Jedediah Munroe Jedediah Munroe is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 334
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Maybe I misunderstood but I interpreted it as at pistol w law folder would still be measured to end of extension (not folded); as it is not designed to be fired when folded.

And obviously even without folding, many AR pistols are less than 26” if you exclude the brace and muzzle device.

Other pistols such as MPX, Mp5, and Draco’s that can be fired without brace extended are measured only to but end of receiver.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 07-07-2019, 2:24 PM
LEAD LAUNCHER LEAD LAUNCHER is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Simi Valley
Posts: 1,129
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jedediah Munroe View Post
Maybe I misunderstood but I interpreted it as at pistol w law folder would still be measured to end of extension (not folded); as it is not designed to be fired when folded.
....
Yes you have misunderstood-per the ATF letter:


318378D5-AF98-4A16-8FF4-85678ACC93B1.jpg




...
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-07-2019, 2:42 PM
Milsurp1's Avatar
Milsurp1 Milsurp1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,370
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Hmm, I might be wrong about that terminology!
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 07-07-2019, 6:59 PM
Jedediah Munroe Jedediah Munroe is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 334
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LEAD LAUNCHER View Post
Yes you have misunderstood-per the ATF letter:


Attachment 818137




...
Seems you are right about what it says in black and whitel I suppose I read into it what I believed to be true. But I am still surprised the ATF is not going to include the a folding, but "integral for function", AR pistol buffer extension in the OAL, especially when it is not able to function as designed when folded.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 07-07-2019, 7:05 PM
Strykeback Strykeback is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,523
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jedediah Munroe View Post
Seems you are right about what it says in black and whitel I suppose I read into it what I believed to be true. But I am still surprised the ATF is not going to include the a folding, but "integral for function", AR pistol buffer extension in the OAL, especially when it is not able to function as designed when folded.
Saw something about concealability in the letter vs functionality as their reasoning to measure folded vs open

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 07-08-2019, 1:56 PM
Philosophical's Avatar
Philosophical Philosophical is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: So Cal
Posts: 145
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Just make sure everything you own has straight "non-rifling" rifling, and you can do anything you want......until the rules change again.

http://www.reformationfirearms.com/services.html

POINT 1: The Reformation® line of firearms features Franklin Armory®’s Reformation® barrel technology. Since the barrel does not impart spin on the projectile, it does not meet the definition of “rifling.”

POINT 2: Franklin Armory® has engineered fin and flare stabilized projectiles and ammunition for sub MOA performance in Reformation® barrels. (Ammunition release date is still to be determined.)

POINT 3: Franklin Armory® has safely tested off the shelf ammunition in a Reformation® barrel and routinely achieved 3.5" @100 yards with white box ammunition.

ATF Firearms Technology - Industry Services Branch classified Reformation® as a non-rifle, non-shotgun in August of 2017. Upon examination of a 7.5" barreled Reformation® variant with a forward vertical grip in November of 2018, ATF again concluded that Reformation® is not a firearm regulated under the National Firearms Act. (More details available on our FAQ page.)



Here are the benefits:
No NFA!
Short Barreled!
Shoulder stocked!
Legal with a Forward Vertical Grip!
Not an NFA SBR!
Not an NFA SBS!
Not an NFA AOW!
No Tax Stamp!


I can just imagine getting pulled over by Officer Bubba Backwoods from the Podunk PD, and trying to explain to him that it's not an illegal weapon because the rifling has a 0:12 twist rate......

This will either help with the repeal of the NFA, or cause yet another round of additional laws, regs, and restrictions - anyone care to take bets on which one it will be? (!(
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 07-08-2019, 2:23 PM
PogoJack's Avatar
PogoJack PogoJack is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Sonoran Desert (having fled from Los Angeles)
Posts: 253
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jedediah Munroe View Post
Seems you are right about what it says in black and whitel I suppose I read into it what I believed to be true. But I am still surprised the ATF is not going to include the a folding, but "integral for function", AR pistol buffer extension in the OAL, especially when it is not able to function as designed when folded.
What about getting one of those LAW tactical folding thingies?

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 07-08-2019, 8:14 PM
Jedediah Munroe Jedediah Munroe is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 334
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PogoJack View Post
What about getting one of those LAW tactical folding thingies?

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk


Yes that is what I am talking about.

But I a curious what were the guns involved in the case that resulted in this new determination/clarification from the atf?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 07-08-2019, 8:30 PM
PogoJack's Avatar
PogoJack PogoJack is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Sonoran Desert (having fled from Los Angeles)
Posts: 253
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jedediah Munroe View Post
Yes that is what I am talking about.

But I a curious what were the guns involved in the case that resulted in this new determination/clarification from the atf?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I had always assumed that adding the vertical foregrip was instant AOW territory. Wasn't that why the angled foregrips are used on AR pistols?

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 07-08-2019, 8:52 PM
Doheny's Avatar
Doheny Doheny is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Prescott, in the pines
Posts: 12,804
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Stumbled across this today:

Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 07-18-2019, 1:42 PM
dfletcher's Avatar
dfletcher dfletcher is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 13,159
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

I went to the ATF letter. Link is in here:

https://blog.princelaw.com/2019/07/0...ilizing-brace/

In effect, the definition of a rifle requires shooting it from the shoulder. Therefor a folding shoulder stock must be used and to be used it must be in the "unfolded" position. Hence measuring in the unfolded position, not closed. The same can't be said for a "stabilizing brace" as they are designed to be fired NOT from the shoulder.

I would expect this foolishness to be addressed by manufacturers coming up with "shoulder stocks" that look quite a bit like a stabilizing brace. To tell the truth, until I read this it hadn't occurred to me to use a brace with folder or a collapsible type in place of a folding stock. Now that I have - I think I'd like to give it a try, assuming someone makes one.

As an aside, when one reads these ATF letters and the language used it is chilling to realize that a few words can determine the difference between "no big deal" and prohibited. That entirely unrelated matters, such as the definition of a rifle established so long ago, can become mired in an unrelated and recent issue such as a pistol brace. And we have virtually no recourse, it's mostly bureaucratic fiat.

Last edited by dfletcher; 07-18-2019 at 1:49 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 07-18-2019, 2:44 PM
damon1272 damon1272 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,936
iTrader: 20 / 100%
Default

So for clarity this affects folks with rifles and stabilizers and not pistols with braces correct?
Basically folks were getting away with a rifle as short as possible with the stabilizer.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 07-18-2019, 3:08 PM
Milsurp1's Avatar
Milsurp1 Milsurp1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,370
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

The author of that article does not understand the new ATF letter. It does not treat braces as stocks or force AR pistol owners to register them as SBRs. It clarifies the measurements for whether a gun is a non-pistol “firearm” which can have a front vertical grip without being a federal AOW or whether it is a pistol with a front vertical grip which requires an AOW stamp.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 07-18-2019, 4:37 PM
spfabrication's Avatar
spfabrication spfabrication is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: ID
Posts: 958
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Thread title fail.
__________________
GO NAVY
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:43 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.