Let me just sum it up this way: yes, it works as advertised. And yes, it’s also stiff enough to be used as an actual buttstock. I know a leather version of this passed ATF muster, but the stiffer plastic used in SIG’s version might be enough to give the ATF’s technology branch a fit.
I believe that Sig advertises it as ATF approved, no?
ATI also had the GSG-5SD’s approved for import, and that ticket got pulled because someone decided that the barrel shroud was a suppressor. Mr Akins had tech branch approval for his accelerator, before it became a machine gun.
It’s ATF approved, till the ATF decides it isn’t…
The fact that there’s a government agency that would even have anything to say about this illustrates what’s wrong with this country.
I am sorry, but the whole idea of an AR15 “Pistol” is stupid. In my opinion. This is a short barrel rifle plain and simple. If you want a bullpup form then buy one. The FN PS90 comes to mind. This other thing is interesting but still stupid.
Wut?
What does an AR pistol vs SBR have to do with a bullpup configuration? A bullpup is completely different from having a sub 16″/26″ OAL weapon.
That’t true but it reminds me of the bullpup format. That’s all that I meant.
No SBR’s in MI. An AR15 “Pistol” is the only way to go to have less than a 16″ barrel on an AR platform here.
Interesting, I wasn’t aware the MI banned SBRs. Wonder why.
We recently unbanned full autos, and suppressors. It’s only a matter of time until we get SBR’s too. I’d like to see the handgun registry done away with before we work on SBR’s though.
We also removed the crap law about “Michigan Pistols” where in shorter rifles with folding stocks had to be registered.
Overall, it’s a pretty free state to live in, and the CPL from MI is one of the best in the nation in regards to reciprocity.
Same for CA. No ATF items at all, except for AOWs. So you want a SBR type gun, you buy an AR-pistol.
Interesting choice for some.
How soon before the ATF sees the potential of shoulder use of this item, and declares its use a de-facto creation of an SBR? Smells like tax stamp in the horizon….
Whether or not the device can be used as a shoulder stock will depend on how much air is allowed to escape when pressed into the shoulder.
Buffer tubes have a hole on the end to allow air to escape as the buffer is compressed. I have never tried blocking the hole, but I would expect it to affect function. It will be a very interesting test!
My M4 style buffer tubes have no relief holes in them, my fixed stock tubes don’t either. My guns work fine without them, I don’t see why they would need air relief holes since the buffer does not fit tightly in the tube. Maybe my guns are different than yours.
What does that make a Mauset C-96 with stock attached?
I think those are exempt, as they are considered curio&relics.
Actually the laws behind C&R pistols with detachable stocks are a bit sketchy. I am not a lawyer and someone please correct me if I’m wrong, but I’ve heard numerous times that if you buy the pistol with its original stock it’s legally exempt from SBR law and you can shoot it whichever way you choose. When buying a Plain Jane C96 and then later getting some random stock for it, the laws get kind of murky. Of course, unless some ATF agent happens to be at your local range on a power trip, I don’t think you have anything to worry about. Still, I thank the Germans for serial numbering every single part of their firearms and accoutrements with ocd-like consistency.
The stock must be original, AND everything must have been manufactured 1940.
Illegal in Cali for sure.
I’m wondering if atf decisions include any kind of grandfather clause, so that if you get one of these and they are later pulled for atf permission being withdrawn, do you automatically become a felon for owning a product they approved at the time?
Some laws include grandfather language, but I have no idea how a letter from the atf works in that regard.
There is no grandfather clause on an BATFE interpretation, which is what we’re talking about here, an interpretation of the submitted devices suitability for sale under the current laws. Often times, a law will have a grandfather clause, but the BATFE interpretation of that law doesn’t grandfather previous sales/possession. That’s why a lot of people are holding back on the slide-fire type stocks, which are currently legal.
A quote from the following article:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jan/2/gun-makers-baffled-by-atf-criteria/?page=all
“Len Savage, a Georgia firearms designer and manufacturer, said what ATF allows and disallows “follows no rhyme or reason” and described the regulatory technique as “enforcement by ambush.”
The owner of Historic Arms LLC, which makes and designs semi-automatic replicas of famous firearms, called the letters “worthless” because agency officials “can change their mind on a whim.”
Mr. Savage said it is impossible to know what is compliant and that the ATF can spontaneously rescind approvals for any project.
He said the ATF told him in a July 2005 letter that he could convert machine guns legally owned by collectors into belt-fed weapons, but said in April 2006 that it was overturning its decision “upon reconsideration.”
“It cost me $500,000 in orders,” he said, adding that he was forced to destroy several weapons he had built because ATF would not grandfather them.”
Deadpan/ i still want one on each arm with chainsaw bayonets. Or maybe one that would let me attach a stockless sbr to my peen. That would be literally epic ftw lol omg. /end deadpan
Suddenly I want an AR pistol…
Some of these comments about how the “ATF is going to change their mind” are so silly. You dont think the ATF thought about what they approved when they approved it? You dont think that Sigs legal people vetted all the possibilities prior to them putting this thing out??? The Akins stock was missing a component when submitted, changing what he asked approval for in the end, and that is why they told him to stop distribution….they didn’t change their mind. What if I put a bipod an one of those 10/22 pistols? Is it all of a sudden an AOW because the bipod can also be used as a vertical foregrip?? Is a the buffer tube used on the stander A2 Stock considered a stock on a pistol AR because it’s longer than a pistol buffer tube and shoulders more easily? The ATF makes decisions based on design or redesign and intent. It is so obvious that this was not designed or redesigned or intended to be a stock. It was designed apparently for wounded vets or for people with a handicap. Anything that gets a shooter back to shooting should be promoted.
ehhh….why spend that much money on a AR pistol you cant aim worth a damn (even with this wannabe stock) when you just buy an ACTUAL rifle??
ive never been a fan of the AR pistol, but i can see why some like em. A friend of mine loves them and said “its closest ill ever get to an AKS-74U.”
Looks like a stock, the ATF will probably see it as over the line. To make anyone feel better, it looks like this would be a great way to break your own arm and reduce mobility! Just get that joint lock together and fall and you’ll snap in no time.
I bought one at the NRA show. It comes with a copy of the letter from the BATFE that says the stock….err….wrist-brace is legal. I like mine. It went on easy enough and is comfortable in the “non-conventional” way of using it.
Comments are closed.