IWI Uzi with a vertical, folding stock.
I got a nosebleed just laying my eyes on the page. And where did she get the registering thing? If that was true, you’d be hearing the screaming all over gun forums and the thunder of chest thumping like African drums in an old Tarzan movie
I still have family in Spain that are shepherds, but I know squat about sheep and do not write about the cursed animals nor I pretend I know about them.
Just what you expect from somebody with no actual knowledge of the situation…
As for the registration thing, that is almost correct. If you happen to be one of those people that suddenly find that their firearm is to short because of how it is measured, you will need to register your newly minted aow or sbr.
I couldn’t figure it out as to which is which.
Still, an amazing amount of click bait and ignorance.
If you really want your brain to hurt try reading an article from The National Interest on ARs…
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/ultimate-guide-building-ar-15-legally-68042
I couldn’t make it past the first page, I felt I was losing IQ points too fast.
I am not an ATF agent, so take my analysis as only the opinion of an amateur, but…
From that picture, that Mini-Uzi with a folding brace is still a pistol.
The OAL issue should only matter for people who wanted a folding brace AND a vertical fore grip, as long as it has a rifled barrel.
That is what makes it an AOW, the vertical fore grip AND OAL of less than 26 inches.
If in doubt, don’t put a vertical fore grip on it.
As far as I can determine, the way they measure a firearm changed. Thus if you have a folding or collapsible stock, the overall length is based on the fixed part of the firearm. So for an AR platform that is from the end of the buffer tube to the tip of the muzzle (not an attached muzzle device). IF and only IF the attached muzzle device is pinned, does it count towards the length.
This means that some AR platforms that were rifles when measured the old way are now AOWs when measured the new way. Because I’m not up on these laws and rulings, I’m not clear as to why this is an AOW and not a SBR. Maybe it is because the barrel is still long enough but the overall length is not.
On top of the measuring bit, there was a secondary part that has to do with “was this intended to be shot with one hand or two”. So the fact that I normally shoot pistol with two hands doesn’t mean the pistol is “intended to be shot two handed”. But if I put a vertical fore grip on a platform, that means it can’t be a pistol any more. But other types of grips (not sure what they are called), don’t make it “not a pistol”.
In addition, I’m guessing that many AK platforms with folding stocks or stocks that collapse are now way shorter than they use to be because I believe that they now measure AK platforms from the rear of the receiver rather than from the extended or unfolded stock.
(I was looking for the “ATF FIreArm Classification meme that shows just how confusing all of this is. I.e. “this is a pistol, this is an AOW because vertical grip” to insert here.)
J.Kb, you’re right.
This only concern HANDGUNS with VERTICAL FORWARD GRIPS.
THIS HAS NOT ONE DAMN THING TO DO WITH RIFLES or how OAL of RIFLES are measured!
YES I’M YELLING!!!
That article even has access to the PrinceLaw article and still didn’t get it right. Dumbasses!
All anyone has to do is IF THEY HAVE PUT A VERTICAL FORWARD GRIP on a handgun, thinking that the measurement was with the arm brace on or unfolded/extended is to TAKE THE FORWARD VERTICAL GRIP OFF.
Then, if they really want it on, file a ATF Form 1 and make the gun a AOW.
It’s as if the ATF looked at the IRS and said “Hold my beer…”
Seriously, this is getting ridiculous. Which I suppose, from the point of view of a bureaucrat, is a feature not a bug.
@boris, somewhere in the deep history of my mind, I remember reading that a law wasn’t going to pass muster if an average person reading it could not understand what was forbidden and what was required.
I spend way to much time reading RFCs. At the top of each well written RFC it says “SHOULD” means … and “MUST” means.
For ATF rulings it seems more like we exist in this limbo where anything could be come forbidden tomorrow if somebody decides it is forbidden due to some new “guidance”. How many times have we seen ATF reverse a ruling? How many times have we seen the ATF rule that something that wasn’t legal is now legal and then change their minds just moments later?
I don’t work with NFA stuff, but at one point I was making fireworks. I had the land and space to do it safely. In order to store the black powder used for launching, I had to store it in a locked container inside a locked room. Which for the ATF meant if the building locked or the room inside the building locked and then I had it in an approved storage (cabinet) then all would be good.
But when I wrote asking for a ruling on an approved storage unit, that request went unanswered for over two years and three attempts.
Which meant that I could only have a very limited amount of supplies on hand. And after I made a mortar it had to be fired because there was no “approved” storage.
They don’t do anything to make it easy for people to exercise the right to keep and bear Arms.
For that mater, as a farmer, wanting to break up an out crop of granite required me to hire it out, as there was no way for me to get the explosives to do it myself . In order to get a license to handle explosives I would have had to intern for at least a year with somebody that already had that license.