Regarding legality of AR Pistol Grip removal and AOW status

[WolfAmongUs]

If, once fully assembled, the pistol grip is removed from the AR Pistol, does it become "any other weapon", an SBR by law, or does it remain a pistol/handgun? This may seem silly or out there, and this definitely seems like the sort of thing where I may be missing something very obvious, but I'm just trying to do my best to research this so as not to break the law and/or pay fines to comply with it.

Here's where I'm coming from when considering the possibilities:

1) Perhaps still a handgun by federal law if it can be argued that it is still designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand(which I am unaware of)?

2) Seems to not be a pistol by federal law, because there'd be nowhere to grip it below the bore.

3) It seems it would still be a handgun by Californian law, because it doesn't necessarily need to be a pistol or revolver, it only needs to be under 16" and concealable.

4) Potentially AOW if it is only a "handgun" but not a "pistol or revolver", as it is considered concealable being under the 16". May also be classified as being intended to fire from the shoulder.

5) Side note thoughts/questions: The only way I know of a handgun becoming an SBR is by putting a stock on one. Is there another way? Does the ATF notice that a handgun can be legally fired from the shoulder change any of this or not?

Thanks ahead of time for putting up with this if it's as ridiculous as I get the feeling it is. References below. This may be something I send in a letter about and/or get legal counsel about if there's no clear discernable answer, something obvious I'm missing, or apparent faulty logic.

A handgun is any pistol, revolver, or other firearm

is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single handand is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand; and
(b) Any combination of parts from which a firearm described in paragraph (a) can be assembled.

Pistol.
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) a chamber(s) as an integral part(s) of, or permanently aligned with, the bore(s); and (b) a short stock designed to be gripped by one hand and at an angle to and extending below the line of the bore(s).

Revolver.
A projectile weapon, of the pistol type, having a breechloading chambered cylinder so arranged that the cocking of the hammer or movement of the trigger rotates it and brings the next cartridge in line with the barrel for firing.

Semiautomatic pistol.
Any repeating pistol which utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing cartridge to extract the fired cartridge case and chamber the next round, and which requires a separate pull of the trigger to fire each cartridge.

Any weapon or device capable of being concealed on the person from which a shot can be discharged through the energy of an explosiveSuch term shall not include a pistol or a revolver having a rifled bore, or rifled bores, or weapons designed, made, or intended to be fired from the shoulder and not capable of firing fixed ammunition.

[Quiet]

Under Federal laws...
It may be considered a Title 2 AOW, because it no longer has a grip/short hand stock.
So, doing so would be a Federal felony, unless you obtain BATFE approval before doing so.
Clarification from the BATFE FTB & NFA Branches would be prudent.


Under CA laws...
It would still be considered a "handgun".

Modifying or redesigning a handgun with the intent to shoot it from the shoulder, would cause the handgun to also be considered a SBR/SBS.
BATFE letters has no sway on CA SBR/SBS laws.

In addition, no matter how it's configured it would still need to comply with CA assault weapons laws.



Penal Code 16530
(a) As used in this part, the terms "firearm capable of being concealed upon the person," "pistol," and "revolver" apply to and include any device designed to be used as a weapon, from which is expelled a projectile by the force of any explosion, or other form of combustion, and that has a barrel less than 16 inches in length. These terms also include any device that has a barrel 16 inches or more in length which is designed to be interchanged with a barrel less than 16 inches in length.
(b) Nothing shall prevent a device defined as a "firearm capable of being concealed upon the person," "pistol," or "revolver" 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 Sections 16530 and 16640, Sections 17720 to 17730, inclusive, Section 17740, Article 1 (commencing with Section 27500) of Chapter 4 of Division 6 of Title 4, and Article 1 (commencing with Section 33210) of Chapter 8 of Division 10 of Title 4, "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.

[ke6guj]

yup, Quiet nailed it.

[SkyHawk]

So what does that mean for the Henry Mares leg (pistol) or Rossi Ranch Hand? How exactly do they differ from an AR pistol without a pistol grip, and why does the ATF and CA consider them pistols but not an AR pistol with the pistol grip removed? Couldn't the bottom of the AR receiver itself or even the buffer tube be considered a hand grip? What if an alternate grip was installed on the AR pistol, like a Monsterman, or even just a plug? Would a cut down pistol grip with only room for one finger do it? Is there a law that says 5 fingers have to be on the gun, because who ever got 5 fingers on a NAA mini revolver? Or what about those weird 'zip' guns things being sold now, that seemingly have no grip? They are sold as pistols, nothing special.

In your opinion, what is the bare minimum 'grip' hardware that would need to be in place for the AR pistol to be viewed with the same eye as a USFA Zip, a Ranch Hand or Mares Leg?

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2013/01/15/usfa-zip-22/

http://www.cabelas.com/product/Rossi-Ranch-Hand-Lever-Action-Handgun/1370962.uts

http://www.henryrifles.com/rifles/mares-leg/

[Quiet]

The mare's leg has a short hand stock.
Which is why it is considered a Title 1 handgun under Federal laws/regulations.
CA considers it a handgun because it has a less than 16" barrel and does not have a shoulder stock.

There is no law/regulation to determine how much of a short hand stock is good enough. It's subjective to the whims of the BATFE (for Federal determination).

[SkyHawk]

The mare's leg has a short hand stock.
Which is why it is considered a Title 1 handgun under Federal laws/regulations.
CA considers it a handgun because it has a less than 16" barrel and does not have a shoulder stock.

There is no law/regulation to determine how much of a short hand stock is good enough. It's subjective to the whims of the BATFE (for Federal determination).

So then what about the USFA Zip? Where is it's short hand stock, and how is that any different from the flat bottom of an AR receiver where a pistol grip would go? And don't forget the AR pistol doesn't have a shoulder stock either according to ATF. The argument I am hearing is that the presence of an AR pistol grip is the difference between pistol or AOW. I'm trying to understand how exactly that is - let's use the USFA zip to compare.

And what about this new pistol - it seems ATF is considering many unconventionally gripped items as pistols:

http://www.palmpistol.com/

PS - does anyone even know how to hold the USFA zip? I sure don't. There is nothing to grab except the whole receiver overhand so far as I can see, that is why I am wondering how a bare AR is any different. Thanks!

[Quiet]

On palm guns, the rear of the receiver is considered a short hand stock.

[SkyHawk]

On palm guns, the rear of the receiver is considered a short hand stock.

But not on an AR pistol? I didn't know palm guns was a class to itself that got special consideration for being gripped by the receiver alone. I also don't think the USFA zip is considered a palm gun - it is a good sized hand gun. PS - found a video of someone shooting it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxkI9HdxzbE At 10:54 you can see the one hand grip.

I know I ask questions that get folks to think - not trying to be difficult, just convinced. It seems like there is plenty of grip on an AR pistol without a pistol grip in place - no less than this anyhow:



That is a pistol but this is not, that's what we're saying?



What about this?

[Quiet]

That is a pistol but this is not, that's what we're saying?

The fact that the AR pistol has a second handgrip

What about this?

The forward horizontal handgrip is an issue because it would indicate that the firearm is to be fired with more than one hand.
Which is why "palm guns" do not utilize a second handgrips. (the USFA Zip is a type of "palm gun")

Remove it and it may be considered a Title 1 handgun.

[Quiet]

As indicated in my original post...
Keep in mind everything is speculations, because it really depends on the BATFE FTB Branch and BATFE NFA Branch. Since, it is determined by their whims.

[ke6guj]

basically, submit a sample to BATF FTB, either physical or a rendering, and find out how they rule.

edit: too slow, should have refreshed

[Mute]

One other question regarding all this. If you have an AOW (with all the proper paperwork), can the AOW be modified in any way as long as you retain all the features that make it an AOW or do you have to keep it configured exactly as it was approved?

E.g. You have an AR pistol with 7.5" barrel converted to AOW, can you, later on, change the barrel to a longer one as long as you don't exceed 26" OAL?

[ke6guj]

One other question regarding all this. If you have an AOW (with all the proper paperwork), can the AOW be modified in any way as long as you retain all the features that make it an AOW or do you have to keep it configured exactly as it was approved?

E.g. You have an AR pistol with 7.5" barrel converted to AOW, can you, later on, change the barrel to a longer one as long as you don't exceed 26" OAL?

yes, you can modify an AOW away from its original configuration. ATF requests that you notify them of any permanent changes, but it isn't required.

[Mute]

yes, you can modify an AOW away from its original configuration. ATF requests that you notify them of any permanent changes, but it isn't required.

Very cool!

[SkyHawk]

On the Federal level:

A lot of people said the Sigtac brace was illegal on an AR pistol before ATF ruled otherwise.

http://www.sigsauer.com/upFiles/ATF-Compliant-Letter.pdf

A lot of people said the Magpul AFG was illegal on an AR pistol before the ATF ruled otherwise.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B0qyloA48O3XZWFjYjMwYTMtYTg1MC00NzVhLWI3NmMtZDRiNTMzNzdhMzUx/edit?pli=1&hl=en#

A lot of people said a vertical mag well grip was illegal on an AR pistol before the ATF said otherwise

http://www.ar15.com/media/viewFile.html?i=32560

A lot of people said that shouldering an AR pistol was illegal, especially if it had a Sigtac brace - before the ATF said otherwise.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/216207869/SIG-BATFE-LETTER

A lot of people said a rubber cane tip on an AR pistol was illegal before the ATF said otherwise.

http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/4001/batfeletterarpistols1.jpg

http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/2101/batfeletterarpistols2.jpg

For that matter, a lot of people said an AR pistol was illegal period before the ATF said otherwise.

The bottom line is we wont know what ATF thinks until someone asks them the question. Plenty of people have said 'that is illegal' when asked about a myriad of AR pistol mods, then found out later they were wrong. I would have bet every dollar I had on *all those other things above* making the AR pistol something illegal before I would have believed that simply removing the pistol grip was any more nefarious. I'm dubious, but don't take my word for it - mail the ATF a letter and see what happens, they may just answer one way or another even without a firearm being submitted for eval.