Restrictions on AR pistols

[michael1073]

Hi folks!

(apologies if this has been asked already)

When it comes to AR pistols, are there any restrictions on LOP or OAL (min/max)?

I am considering a side-folding adapter for a brace (https://deadfootarms.com/products/mo...-carrier-group) or a PWD brace like this one (https://deadfootarms.com/products/sc...ace-gen-2.html).

Also, thinking about Foldar upper (https://foldar.com/product/foldar-mo...liber=556_nato).

Would either one of these braces or a combination of one of them and a Foldar violate any federal/state laws?

Thank you!

[Quiet]

Under current Federal laws... (this includes all the current Court actions)

BATFE approval is required for the legal making/transfer/possession of a Title 2 firearm.

If a brace, extension, or device is added to rear of a Title 1 Handgun that gives it a length of pull of 13.5" or greater; then that addition is legally considered a type of shoulder stock and the firearm will be considered a Title 2 SBR.

In order to determine if a firearm is a Title 1 Other or a Title 2 AOW, the firearm's overall length is measured with the firearm in the shortest possible fireable configuration (brace folded/collapsed or removed if quick detachable).
~If the overall length is 26" or greater, then the firearm is a Title 1 Other.
~If the overall length is less than 26", then the firearm is a Title 2 AOW.


Under CA laws...

CA SBR/SBS laws are more strict than Federal NFA laws.

A handgun with an arm stabilizing brace or any type of extension that is not required for the firearm to operate can be considered a SBR or SBS.
^Only a BATFE approved Title 2 AOW is exempt from this.


Therefore...

Per the advice of CA firearm lawyers (FPC/CGRF and CRPA/NRA), unless your firearm is a BATFE approved Title 2 firearm, do not install an arm stabilizing brace or any type of extension to your CA legal handgun.

[michael1073]

Thank you, @Quiet! Very detailed/informative! I was not aware of the CA stance on the the stabilizing braces... So, they are legal (currently) under the Federal NFA laws, but not under the CA laws? Is this being challenged somewhere?

[michael1073]

Just re-read your reply...

If a brace, extension, or device is added to rear of a Title 1 Handgun that gives it a length of pull of 13.5" or greater; then that addition is legally considered a type of shoulder stock and the firearm will be considered a Title 2 SBR.

Would it be correct to say (per Federal laws) that a Title 1 Handgun (in this case a semiautomatic AR pistol with a fixed magazine of 10 rounds or less) that has a brace, an extension, or a device added to the rear of it, with an LOP under 13.5", remains a Title 1 Handgun, regardless of the OAL?

I also didn't catch it right away, but you mentioned "Title 1 Handgun", "Title 1 Other" and "Title 2 AOW". What's a difference between a "Title 1 Handgun" and a "Title 1 Other"?

[ar15barrels]

I also didn't catch it right away, but you mentioned "Title 1 Handgun", "Title 1 Other" and "Title 2 AOW". What's a difference between a "Title 1 Handgun" and a "Title 1 Other"?

Barrel length and overall length.

[BigPimping]

Thought the brace was ok now? I have one that I removed from the gun. Was under the assumption there was a stay in that case. I?m probably misinformed.

[Quiet]

Thought the brace was ok now? I have one that I removed from the gun. Was under the assumption there was a stay in that case. I'm probably misinformed.

In regards to Federal laws/regulations, there are Court ordered injunctions that are staying the enforcement pending appeal.

In regards to CA laws/regulations, they are still restricted because the Federal Court injunctions does not affect individual State laws/regulations on the issue.

CA SBR/SBS laws are stricter than Federal NFA laws.
There are firearms that are not considered SBR/SBS under Federal laws, but are considered SBR/SBS under CA laws.

Installing an arm stabilizing brace or any type of extension that is not required for the firearm to operate on a handgun can make the resulting firearm into a rifle [PC 17090] and if that rifle does not meet the CA length requirements [PC 16640(b)], then the resulting firearm would be a SBR [PC 17170].

[JustDynamicsLLC]

In regards to Federal laws/regulations, there are Court ordered injunctions that are staying the enforcement pending appeal.

In regards to CA laws/regulations, they are still restricted because the Federal Court injunctions does not affect individual State laws/regulations on the issue.

CA SBR/SBS laws are stricter than Federal NFA laws.
There are firearms that are not considered SBR/SBS under Federal laws, but are considered SBR/SBS under CA laws.

Installing an arm stabilizing brace or any type of extension that is not required for the firearm to operate on a handgun can make the resulting firearm into a rifle [PC 17090] and if that rifle does not meet the CA length requirements [PC 16640(b)], then the resulting firearm would be a SBR [PC 17170].

I appreciate that your advice trends toward the safest and most conservative in furtherance of ensuring no drama/liability from an activist DA. However, some cases, as here, require a notation regarding the counterpoint. Specifically, a stabilizing brace, depending on several factors, may not constitute an SBR pursuant to pC 17170.

Everyone has their own risk tolerance.

[Quiet]

I appreciate that your advice trends toward the safest and most conservative in furtherance of ensuring no drama/liability from an activist DA. However, some cases, as here, require a notation regarding the counterpoint. Specifically, a stabilizing brace, depending on several factors, may not constitute an SBR pursuant to pC 17170.

Everyone has their own risk tolerance.

FWIW...

I am echoing what CA firearm lawyers (FPC/CGRF and CRPA/NRA) have advised.

They also advised that due to the CA SBR/SBS laws, an arm stabilizing brace is only 100% CA legal when installed on a BATFE approved Title 2 AOW because BATFE approved AOWs are exempt from CA SBR/SBS laws [PC 17710(a)].

[CAL.BAR]

Thank you, @Quiet! Very detailed/informative! I was not aware of the CA stance on the the stabilizing braces... So, they are legal (currently) under the Federal NFA laws, but not under the CA laws? Is this being challenged somewhere?

Not specifically. State law can be more strict than Federal Law unless the Feds have specifically occupied the field with legislation

[SigSauerP226]

FWIW...

I am echoing what CA firearm lawyers (FPC/CGRF and CRPA/NRA) have advised.

They also advised that due to the CA SBR/SBS laws, an arm stabilizing brace is only 100% CA legal when installed on a BATFE approved Title 2 AOW because BATFE approved AOWs are exempt from CA SBR/SBS laws [PC 17710(a)].

Assuming a Title 2 AOW won?t happen in CA? Looks like you need to file an ATF Form 1 and could maybe turn an AR pistol into a Title 2 AOW and then add a stock? Of course in CA, think it?d still need to be mag locked and <10rd mags still, but stock would be cool.

[Quiet]

Assuming a Title 2 AOW won't happen in CA? Looks like you need to file an ATF Form 1 and could maybe turn an AR pistol into a Title 2 AOW and then add a stock? Of course in CA, think it'd still need to be mag locked and <10rd mags still, but stock would be cool.

Several forum members have legally made or obtained BATFE approved Title 2 AOW in CA.

Only BATFE approval is required to legally make or transfer a Title 2 AOW in CA.
^There is no CA DOJ involvement.

With BATFE approval, a Title 1 Handgun or Title 1 Other can legally be made into a Title 2 AOW. (ATF Form 1 for AOW + $200 tax stamp)
^A Title 2 Rifle or Title 2 Shotgun cannot be made into a legal Title 2 AOW.

Under Federal laws, installing a shoulder stock on a Title 2 AOW makes that firearm into a Title 2 SBS/SBS and it is illegal to do so, unless BATFE approval is obtain to make the Title 2 AOW into a Title 2 SBR/SBS.
^This is why it is not legal for an AOW to have a shoulder stock installed on it.
~A CA legal AOW with a shoulder stock installed on it would not be a CA illegal SBR/SBS, but would be a Federally illegal SBR/SBS.

In order to be CA legal, the BATFE approved Title 2 AOW must comply with CA assault weapons laws.

Therefore, in order to be legal under Federal and CA laws...

1. A CA resident obtains a host firearm (CA legal handgun or other) and submits a completed ATF Form 1 with $200 to make an AOW to the BATFE NFA branch.
2. After BATFE approval, the CA resident makes their CA legal handgun or other into a CA legal AOW and engraves their info on to it.
3. As a CA legal AOW, it can legally have an arm stabilizing brace installed on it.

[walmart_ar15]

Reading the CA SBR reg?PC 17170

As used in this part, ?short-barreled rifle? means any of the following:

(a) A rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length.

(b) A rifle with an overall length of less than 26 inches.

(c) Any weapon made from a rifle (whether by alteration, modification, or otherwise) if that weapon, as modified, has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length.

(d) Any device that may be readily restored to fire a fixed cartridge which, when so restored, is a device defined in subdivisions (a) to (c), inclusive.

(e) Any part, or combination of parts, designed and intended to convert a device into a device defined in subdivisions (a) to (c), inclusive, or any combination of parts from which a device defined in subdivisions (a) to (c), inclusive, may be readily assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person.

Unlike Fed reg it does not say anything about ?made from a pistol?. It?s all about rifle.

So if adding a brace to a pistol, how would CA argue it?s now a SBR?

Just curious how a DA would argue and prove that?

[Quiet]

Reading the CA SBR reg PC 17170

Unlike Fed reg it does not say anything about "made from a pistol". It's all about rifle.

So if adding a brace to a pistol, how would CA argue it's now a SBR?

Just curious how a DA would argue and prove that?

In regards to CA SBR/SBS laws, CA goes by how the firearm is currently configured.
It is CA legal to make a handgun into a CA legal rifle and no notification/update to CA DOJ is required for that legal making.

Installing an arm stabilizing brace or any type of extension that is not required for the firearm to operate on a handgun can make the resulting firearm into a rifle. [PC 17090]
^CA DOJ BOF holds the viewpoint that a non-disabled person doing this redesigns/remakes the weapon to be fired from the shoulder.

If that rifle does not meet the CA length requirements, then the resulting firearm would be a SBR [PC 17170].

CA laws also allows handguns that meet the definition of a SBR/SBS to be considered a SBR/SBS. [PC 16640(b)]



Penal Code 16640
(a) As used in this part, "handgun" means any pistol, revolver, or firearm capable of being concealed upon the person.
(b) Nothing shall prevent a device defined as a "handgun" from also being found to be a short-barreled rifle or a short-barreled shotgun.

Penal Code 17090
As used in Sections 16530, 16640, 16650, 16660, 16870, and 17170, Sections 17720 to 17730, inclusive, Section 17740, subdivision (f) of Section 27555, Article 2 (commencing with Section 30300) of Chapter 1 of Division 10 of Title 4, and Article 1 (commencing with Section 33210) of Chapter 8 of Division 10 of Title 4, "rifle" means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed cartridge to fire only a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of the trigger.

Penal Code 17170
As used in this part, "short-barreled rifle" means any of the following:
(a) A rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length.
(b) A rifle with an overall length of less than 26 inches.
(c) Any weapon made from a rifle (whether by alteration, modification, or otherwise) if that weapon, as modified, has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length.
(d) Any device that may be readily restored to fire a fixed cartridge which, when so restored, is a device defined in subdivisions (a) to (c), inclusive.
(e) Any part, or combination of parts, designed and intended to convert a device into a device defined in subdivisions (a) to (c), inclusive, or any combination of parts from which a device defined in subdivisions (a) to (c), inclusive, may be readily assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person.

[swift]

FWIW...

I am echoing what CA firearm lawyers (FPC/CGRF and CRPA/NRA) have advised.

They also advised that due to the CA SBR/SBS laws, an arm stabilizing brace is only 100% CA legal when installed on a BATFE approved Title 2 AOW because BATFE approved AOWs are exempt from CA SBR/SBS laws [PC 17710(a)].

Quiet,
Do you have a link to what the FPC/CGRF attorneys advised? I have an AOW and would like to use a brace.