Would the installation of this item onto an AR Pistol make it illegal?
http://store.magpul.com/product/MAG414/88
http://store.magpul.com/product/MAG414/88
Legality for an AR Pistol
- Thread starter utnapishtim
- Start date
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
Bummer.
But I appreciate the info. Saved me investing $35 bucks that could end up costing thousands in fines. . . or worse.
Bummer.
But I appreciate the info. Saved me investing $35 bucks that could end up costing thousands in fines. . . or worse.
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
While vertical foregrips have been knocked ATF, I've read on another site where one guy recieved a letter (and posted it) from said ATF stating the Magpul was ok. While I won't be testing the waters anytime soon on that particular addition myself personally, some may. In the same breath our friends at the ATF have been known to change their minds to suit their needs. Tread lightly.
While vertical foregrips have been knocked ATF, I've read on another site where one guy recieved a letter (and posted it) from said ATF stating the Magpul was ok. While I won't be testing the waters anytime soon on that particular addition myself personally, some may. In the same breath our friends at the ATF have been known to change their minds to suit their needs. Tread lightly.
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tbag</div><div class="ubbcode-body">While vertical foregrips have been knocked ATF, I've read on another site where one guy recieved a letter (and posted it) from said ATF stating the Magpul was ok. While I won't be testing the waters anytime soon on that particular addition myself personally, some may. In the same breath our friends at the ATF have been known to change their minds to suit their needs. Tread lightly.
</div></div>
Not to be a dick, but I'd post a link to the post/letter from the ATF or quit feeding the rumor mill with hearsay.
Facts or nothing.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tbag</div><div class="ubbcode-body">While vertical foregrips have been knocked ATF, I've read on another site where one guy recieved a letter (and posted it) from said ATF stating the Magpul was ok. While I won't be testing the waters anytime soon on that particular addition myself personally, some may. In the same breath our friends at the ATF have been known to change their minds to suit their needs. Tread lightly.
</div></div>
Not to be a dick, but I'd post a link to the post/letter from the ATF or quit feeding the rumor mill with hearsay.
Facts or nothing.
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
Here's a link to the aforementioned letter from the ATF. ATF letter The AFG is mentioned near the end. While have no reason to question the legitimacy of the letter, I think I would be more comfortable having a personalized one on hand wherever I took the gun.
Here's a link to the aforementioned letter from the ATF. ATF letter The AFG is mentioned near the end. While have no reason to question the legitimacy of the letter, I think I would be more comfortable having a personalized one on hand wherever I took the gun.
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DPRoberts</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here's a link to the aforementioned letter from the ATF. ATF letter The AFG is mentioned near the end. While have no reason to question the legitimacy of the letter, I think I would be more comfortable having a personalized one on hand wherever I took the gun. </div></div>
...links & facts FTW. Wonder if its because you don't actually grip an AFG....
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DPRoberts</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here's a link to the aforementioned letter from the ATF. ATF letter The AFG is mentioned near the end. While have no reason to question the legitimacy of the letter, I think I would be more comfortable having a personalized one on hand wherever I took the gun. </div></div>
...links & facts FTW. Wonder if its because you don't actually grip an AFG....
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dtask</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tbag</div><div class="ubbcode-body">While vertical foregrips have been knocked ATF, I've read on another site where one guy recieved a letter (and posted it) from said ATF stating the Magpul was ok. While I won't be testing the waters anytime soon on that particular addition myself personally, some may. In the same breath our friends at the ATF have been known to change their minds to suit their needs. Tread lightly.
</div></div>
Not to be a dick, but I'd post a link to the post/letter from the ATF or quit feeding the rumor mill with hearsay.
Facts or nothing. </div></div>
Well actual your bald head is shining, but that's ok with me. This still doesn't negate the fact that I am not testing the water. Minimally legal likely due to it not being vertical.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dtask</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tbag</div><div class="ubbcode-body">While vertical foregrips have been knocked ATF, I've read on another site where one guy recieved a letter (and posted it) from said ATF stating the Magpul was ok. While I won't be testing the waters anytime soon on that particular addition myself personally, some may. In the same breath our friends at the ATF have been known to change their minds to suit their needs. Tread lightly.
</div></div>
Not to be a dick, but I'd post a link to the post/letter from the ATF or quit feeding the rumor mill with hearsay.
Facts or nothing. </div></div>
Well actual your bald head is shining, but that's ok with me. This still doesn't negate the fact that I am not testing the water. Minimally legal likely due to it not being vertical.
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: attherange</div><div class="ubbcode-body">to put a front grip on a pistol you need the $5 AOW stamp. </div></div>
If you put a Vertical grip on a pistol it will cost you a $200 AOW stamp as you are an intended manufacture. If you buy it that way from a shop it's a $5 AOW transfer.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: attherange</div><div class="ubbcode-body">to put a front grip on a pistol you need the $5 AOW stamp. </div></div>
If you put a Vertical grip on a pistol it will cost you a $200 AOW stamp as you are an intended manufacture. If you buy it that way from a shop it's a $5 AOW transfer.
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tbag</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: attherange</div><div class="ubbcode-body">to put a front grip on a pistol you need the $5 AOW stamp. </div></div>
If you put a Vertical grip on a pistol it will cost you a $200 AOW stamp as you are an intended manufacture. If you buy it that way from a shop it's a $5 AOW transfer. </div></div>
+1 you beat me to it
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tbag</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: attherange</div><div class="ubbcode-body">to put a front grip on a pistol you need the $5 AOW stamp. </div></div>
If you put a Vertical grip on a pistol it will cost you a $200 AOW stamp as you are an intended manufacture. If you buy it that way from a shop it's a $5 AOW transfer. </div></div>
+1 you beat me to it
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
I would print that letter out from the ATF, fold it up small and jam it into the hollow part of the Magpul MIAD pistol grip, it may save you a lot of hassle to be able to show it to the LEOs on a moments notice.
I would print that letter out from the ATF, fold it up small and jam it into the hollow part of the Magpul MIAD pistol grip, it may save you a lot of hassle to be able to show it to the LEOs on a moments notice.
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
I saw the letter previously as well but I would expect it to not hold up. Fed Law is very established that a "handgun" is designed to be held and fired with one hand only. Any attachment designed to be held with a second hand turns the weapon into an AOW. Still, the AFG is definitely somewhere in the middle between a true VFG and a forearm (horizontal). So who knows? Personally, I would either want my own letter or I wouldn't do it. The Risk to Reward is too high in this case.
I saw the letter previously as well but I would expect it to not hold up. Fed Law is very established that a "handgun" is designed to be held and fired with one hand only. Any attachment designed to be held with a second hand turns the weapon into an AOW. Still, the AFG is definitely somewhere in the middle between a true VFG and a forearm (horizontal). So who knows? Personally, I would either want my own letter or I wouldn't do it. The Risk to Reward is too high in this case.
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jeremiah</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When in doubt, get your own letter. </div></div>
+1 with this statement, reality of the matter is that letter really only helps to cover the guy who it is addressed too. Its not blanket coverage for all. And that is the issue with these letters of protection.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jeremiah</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When in doubt, get your own letter. </div></div>
+1 with this statement, reality of the matter is that letter really only helps to cover the guy who it is addressed too. Its not blanket coverage for all. And that is the issue with these letters of protection.
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tbag</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well actual your bald head is shining, but that's ok with me. This still doesn't negate the fact that I am not testing the water.</div></div>
"well actual your bald head is shining" .... Oh shit! You nailed me bro!
Feel free to go by what an ATF letter on Google Docs said....I'd get a physical stamp or a letter of my own before I went down that road because I've seen plenty of shit that looks real that isn't on the internet. Also, like jasonk posted, if I did get a letter from the ATF, I'd keep it with the gun because the prevailing knowledge about a grip on a pistol is that it doesn't fly without a stamp.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tbag</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well actual your bald head is shining, but that's ok with me. This still doesn't negate the fact that I am not testing the water.</div></div>
"well actual your bald head is shining" .... Oh shit! You nailed me bro!
Feel free to go by what an ATF letter on Google Docs said....I'd get a physical stamp or a letter of my own before I went down that road because I've seen plenty of shit that looks real that isn't on the internet. Also, like jasonk posted, if I did get a letter from the ATF, I'd keep it with the gun because the prevailing knowledge about a grip on a pistol is that it doesn't fly without a stamp.
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
The BAD thing is you ask one ATF agent you get one answer... ask another... and well you get a different answer.
I have a buddy with them... he has said the same as the letter... The MAGPUL is GOOD TO GO... due it NOT being a grip that is VERTICAL...
Matt. (LEO SOUTH GA.)
**In all honesty... If i saw one on a traffic stop... and the guy is a lawful citizen.. I would just move on... and tell him its a cool looking weapon.. But that is just me.
The BAD thing is you ask one ATF agent you get one answer... ask another... and well you get a different answer.
I have a buddy with them... he has said the same as the letter... The MAGPUL is GOOD TO GO... due it NOT being a grip that is VERTICAL...
Matt. (LEO SOUTH GA.)
**In all honesty... If i saw one on a traffic stop... and the guy is a lawful citizen.. I would just move on... and tell him its a cool looking weapon.. But that is just me.
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
I had a similar question regarding placement of a bipod on the Quadrail foregrip of a Sig 556 pistol, which in theory could be used somewhat like a VFG. Sent my inquiry to ATF and about 2 months later got a reply similar to the one posted in this thread saying, "Yeah, it's ok as long as it's not a VFG that has the bipod come out of the bottom like a GripPod". I keep that letter in my range bag and made several copies for obvious reasons.
Turns out that a bipod on a 556 pistol is useless (duh!), but I was thinking about the Magpul AFG myself. Looks like I'll need my own copy of the letter above if I want one.
I had a similar question regarding placement of a bipod on the Quadrail foregrip of a Sig 556 pistol, which in theory could be used somewhat like a VFG. Sent my inquiry to ATF and about 2 months later got a reply similar to the one posted in this thread saying, "Yeah, it's ok as long as it's not a VFG that has the bipod come out of the bottom like a GripPod". I keep that letter in my range bag and made several copies for obvious reasons.
Turns out that a bipod on a 556 pistol is useless (duh!), but I was thinking about the Magpul AFG myself. Looks like I'll need my own copy of the letter above if I want one.
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jeremiah</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When in doubt, get your own letter. </div></div>
Damn straight, a letter addressing YOUR specific question. I can call an ATF branch on any given day, speak with 4 different agent's, inspector's or whatever and get 4 different answers to a same simple question.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jeremiah</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When in doubt, get your own letter. </div></div>
Damn straight, a letter addressing YOUR specific question. I can call an ATF branch on any given day, speak with 4 different agent's, inspector's or whatever and get 4 different answers to a same simple question.
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
dtaskFeel free to go by what an ATF letter on Google Docs said....I'd get a physical stamp or a letter of my own before I went down that road because I've seen plenty of shit that looks real that isn't on the internet. Also said:
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
I'm baffled that this thread continues on. There is hard, factual *PROOF* that a angled foregrip is legal on a AR pistol. The fact that it came from the "Chief firearms technology branch" should be more than enough for anyone. It wasnt some John Doe working at the base level, it came from up at the top.
The fact that this is still being argued is painfully retarded.
I'm baffled that this thread continues on. There is hard, factual *PROOF* that a angled foregrip is legal on a AR pistol. The fact that it came from the "Chief firearms technology branch" should be more than enough for anyone. It wasnt some John Doe working at the base level, it came from up at the top.
The fact that this is still being argued is painfully retarded.
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Alderleet</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm baffled that this thread continues on. There is hard, factual *PROOF* that a angled foregrip is legal on a AR pistol. The fact that it came from the "Chief firearms technology branch" should be more than enough for anyone. It wasnt some John Doe working at the base level, it came from up at the top.
The fact that this is still being argued is painfully retarded. </div></div>
To me its because there is such things as Photoshop and malicious intent. If I don't have a letter sent to me by the ATF, addressing the issue of my grip on my gun, I myself will not be claiming that there is "hard, factual proof". That there is a letter addressing it is something, but it's not everything and I, like most who have commented, would want my own letter.
Retarded (in my estimation) would be doing it based on the scanned letter and then rationalizing your position to an officer that it was all good because you saw a Google Doc on the internet addressed to someone else that stated it was OK to do - but that is just me.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Alderleet</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm baffled that this thread continues on. There is hard, factual *PROOF* that a angled foregrip is legal on a AR pistol. The fact that it came from the "Chief firearms technology branch" should be more than enough for anyone. It wasnt some John Doe working at the base level, it came from up at the top.
The fact that this is still being argued is painfully retarded. </div></div>
To me its because there is such things as Photoshop and malicious intent. If I don't have a letter sent to me by the ATF, addressing the issue of my grip on my gun, I myself will not be claiming that there is "hard, factual proof". That there is a letter addressing it is something, but it's not everything and I, like most who have commented, would want my own letter.
Retarded (in my estimation) would be doing it based on the scanned letter and then rationalizing your position to an officer that it was all good because you saw a Google Doc on the internet addressed to someone else that stated it was OK to do - but that is just me.
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Alderleet</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm baffled that this thread continues on. There is hard, factual *PROOF* that a angled foregrip is legal on a AR pistol. The fact that it came from the "Chief firearms technology branch" should be more than enough for anyone. It wasnt some John Doe working at the base level, it came from up at the top.
The fact that this is still being argued is painfully retarded. </div></div>
I didn't know that being retarded was painful. Interesting......
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Alderleet</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm baffled that this thread continues on. There is hard, factual *PROOF* that a angled foregrip is legal on a AR pistol. The fact that it came from the "Chief firearms technology branch" should be more than enough for anyone. It wasnt some John Doe working at the base level, it came from up at the top.
The fact that this is still being argued is painfully retarded. </div></div>
I didn't know that being retarded was painful. Interesting......
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
Oh yeah, I forgot. People always falsify scanned documents for no reason. They guy that uploaded it probably wants to get everyone they can in trouble with the ATF.
I need to go to the grocery store later for some tin foil. I need a new hat.
Oh yeah, I forgot. People always falsify scanned documents for no reason. They guy that uploaded it probably wants to get everyone they can in trouble with the ATF.
I need to go to the grocery store later for some tin foil. I need a new hat.
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Alderleet</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Oh yeah, I forgot. People always falsify scanned documents for no reason. They guy that uploaded it probably wants to get everyone they can in trouble with the ATF.</div></div>
You can speculate a handful of scenarios as to why it was posted in the first place and why it's real or fake - that is the point. People fake documents. That is a fake. EWhy the do it? That is up for speculation.
I'm not saying that this one in particular is fake, just that I would not rely on an anonymous (redacted), internet based document as hard proof.
You go ahead and bank on it being real because no one would ever just do such a thing as upload something that was manipulated onto the interwebs to mess with people for no reason....never.....ever....neverever..../b/.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Alderleet</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Oh yeah, I forgot. People always falsify scanned documents for no reason. They guy that uploaded it probably wants to get everyone they can in trouble with the ATF.</div></div>
You can speculate a handful of scenarios as to why it was posted in the first place and why it's real or fake - that is the point. People fake documents. That is a fake. EWhy the do it? That is up for speculation.
I'm not saying that this one in particular is fake, just that I would not rely on an anonymous (redacted), internet based document as hard proof.
You go ahead and bank on it being real because no one would ever just do such a thing as upload something that was manipulated onto the interwebs to mess with people for no reason....never.....ever....neverever..../b/.
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jeremiah</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When in doubt, get your own letter. </div></div>
+1
ATF seems to change their mind on some issues seemingly overnight. I've seen letters that people posted for a collapsible stock on a Benelli M4 that was ok'd, and another letter where it wasn't due to 922r. It seems like it all depends on who you get and what day it is.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jeremiah</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When in doubt, get your own letter. </div></div>
+1
ATF seems to change their mind on some issues seemingly overnight. I've seen letters that people posted for a collapsible stock on a Benelli M4 that was ok'd, and another letter where it wasn't due to 922r. It seems like it all depends on who you get and what day it is.
Re: Legality for an AR Pistol
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Alderleet</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The fact that this is still being argued is painfully retarded. </div></div>
+1
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Alderleet</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The fact that this is still being argued is painfully retarded. </div></div>
+1
Similar threads
