If it’s ok to scope a hunting revolver I can’t see why an AR pistol would be any different.

I thought the only restrictions are no vertical foregrip & rifle stock.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

I understand that but you can't shoulder a revolver and you wouldn't use a rifle scope on one either.
By putting a rifle scope on an AR pistol it "may" show intent to use it as a SBR.

 

Why would you even want to mount a rifle scope on something that is supposed to be a pistol? To me, you would be admitting that the pistol is nothing but a SBR if you are only intending to shoulder fire it. Additionally, Why would you want a rifle scope on something that short? Why not a red-dot optic instead? It is much more practical and useful on an AR pistol.

 

Actually an AR pistol is not that short. With a 10.5 barrel it's only a few inches shorter than an AR rifle.

 

O.K., I'm not a lawyer but my understanding of the law is based on intent.

if your reason for mounting a rifle scope on a pistol it that you intend to use it as a SBR, than your committing a felony.

so the question is, how do you intend to use the rifle scope on your pistol with out looking like your intending to use it as a SBR?

 

There is nothing in the legal definition of SBR that specifically involves either your intent our how you actually use it. The legal definition is just a physical description of the gun itself.

The law 26 U.S.C. 5845(c):
(c) Rifle. The term '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, and shall include any such weapon which may be readily restored to fire a fixed cartridge.
https://www.atf.gov/file/58141/download

The ATF's NFA Handbook:
2.1.3 Rifle. A rifle is a firearm designed to be fired from the shoulder and designed to use the energy of an explosive in a fixed cartridge to fire only a single projectile through a rifled barrel for each single pull of the trigger. A rifle subject to the NFA has a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length. The ATF procedure for measuring barrel length is to measure from the closed bolt (or breech-face) to the furthermost end of the barrel or permanently attached muzzle device. Permanent methods of attachment include full-fusion gas or electric steel-seam welding, high-temperature (1100°F) silver soldering, or blind pinning with the pin head welded over. Barrels are measured by inserting a dowel rod into the barrel until the rod stops against the bolt or breech-face. The rod is then marked at the furthermost end of the barrel or permanently attached muzzle device, withdrawn from the barrel, and measured.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/atf-national-firearms-act-handbook-chapter-2/download

The only place I could see actual use or intent coming in is if you put on a brace that you and lots of other people use as a shoulder stock and which was designed to make a good shoulder stock, which shows it was actually "designed to be fired from the shoulder" which is pretty much the reality with the "wrist braces."

We put scopes on pistols all the time, so the scope is fairly irrelevant - it's the "brace" that is your main problem.

 

I wouldn't worry about it. Never heard of anyone getting jammed up for it. If you're concerned, pay the tax and get that piece of mind. Put a real stock on it and use any scope you like.

 

Just because it's a pistol you don't have to shoot it at arms length. Shoot it off a bi-pod, or a rest or nose to charging handle using the buffer tube for a cheek rest... any of those methods work fine with a short eye relief scope.

 

Scope 100 + scope mounts 10.99
Pistol + 100+ mods 60

 

I have a Ruger Mark III with an inexpensive scope, lots of fun.

 

I think the logic being used by ATF in some of the back and forth clarification letters was that since, as Bren pointed out, the law says: "The term 'rifle' means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder......" that if you install a brace on a pistol and then shoulder it, you remade it so it was intended to be fired from the shoulder. Under this same logic, adding a scope that could only be sighted by shouldering the weapon, may also support the position that this was the intent when the brace was added.

Under this same logic, shouldering a pistol that was sold with a brace shouldn't then render it an SBR since the manufacturer did not design it with the intent that you use it that way.

I honestly can't remember what their current position on this is and am not a lawyer. Just my attempt to think like the ATF, so take this for whatever it's worth.

 

If you look at these 2 letters, they appear to be in conflict with each other, but one deals with just shouldering a pistol with a brace, and the other with making one and then shouldering it.

 

Didn't some guy get in trouble with the ATF lately for having some sort of gadget on the hand guard that was considered legal. It had been considered legal but he was charged with having an unregistered SBR anyway. I just don't want to the next guy they pick to charge.

 

Shouldering the sig brace was legal then illegal and now its legal again . Want a scope maybe a long eye relief handgun scope will cover your needs or a tube type dot optic with a multiplier behind it . LUCID makes a 2-5x multiplier with a hinged mount might serve your needs too . I have a AR pistol with a sig brace and 10.5 barrel . Tried a pistol scope mounted forward but I did not like it and my wife wanted her 2moa tube type optic and I have a 3x multiplier back on it . Good for 200 yard .

I use a scope but on a 16" AR15


This is from july 2018 - https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2...f-its-legal-to-shoulder-an-ar-15-pistol-equipped-with-an-sb-tactical-arm-brace/

 

Didn't some guy get in trouble with the ATF lately for having some sort of gadget on the hand guard that was considered legal. It had been considered legal but he was charged with having an unregistered SBR anyway. I just don't want to the next guy they pick to charge.

You didn't read the complete article or didn't see it at all (hear say) Lave a brace alone, use as is bottom line. Why scope the thing get a Dot.If you must get a hinged magnifier for it, see AMAZON for starters

 

I already have the scope. Was going to use it on my rifle but didn't like it on the rifle. It's a low power scope so I thought maybe it would work on a pistol build.
That's when it occurred to me that the ATF might not like it. I haven't heard anything on this one way or another so I thought I would ask the question here.
I'm not asking for scope advice. I'm asking for an opinion on whether it would be legal or not. I'm also not asking for professional legal advice but just what is the going opinion on this.

 

There may be a difference in eye relief. My pistols all have extended eye reliefs because they are held out at arms length but they are on pistols. Depends on how you will be holding the AR pistol when shooting it if it would be suitable.

 

Didn't some guy get in trouble with the ATF lately for having some sort of gadget on the hand guard that was considered legal. It had been considered legal but he was charged with having an unregistered SBR anyway. I just don't want to the next guy they pick to charge.

If you're thinking about the case in Ohio that was settled last week - the ATF lost in spectacular fashion.

Don't over-think it. Make sure the receiver is/was transferred as an "other" - or if it is/was purchased as a complete AR, that it is/was transferred as a "handgun" and invoiced appropriately. Do not install a vertical fore grip, or an actual rifle-stock, and your AR pistol will remain a legal pistol/handgun. Sights/optics have nothing to do with the legal designation of the firearm.

 

Thanks for your reply, I do appreciate and respect your opinion but just to clarify are you saying constructive intent doesn't apply here.

 

Please read before you post. I am not asking for advice on what scope I should use.

 

And you have the nerve to call me argumentative. The only reason you followed me here from my other thread was so you could start an argument. You lost nerve and edited your first post here but you just couldn't hold it in could you. why don't you go and pester someone else and give me a break.

Now, now, relax a minute. Read what you wrote. What faa pointing out is the optic doesn't change the piece. It's like dduuuuhhhh common sense. No one is following you, it's a public place.

 

Didn't some guy get in trouble with the ATF lately for having some sort of gadget on the hand guard that was considered legal. It had been considered legal but he was charged with having an unregistered SBR anyway. I just don't want to the next guy they pick to charge.

There was a lawsuit where the ATF charged someone for a rubber cane tip placed on the gun which made its length exceed the max SBR length. He was using it for storing the SBR in his safe. It was thrown out because among the other things they did wrong was measure incorrectly.

 

Don't do it, you'll get thrown in jail. The ATF has a special beacon that pinpoints folks that put scopes on pistols. Then they drive by with X-Ray glasses and peer into your safe. Then you're busted.

 

Don't do it, you'll get thrown in jail. The ATF has a special beacon that pinpoints folks that put scopes on pistols. Then they drive by with X-Ray glasses and pear into your safe. Then you're busted.

[
Stick to your day job, you're never going to make it as a comedian.

 

I shot a 10 inch barreled thing called a "pistol" that fired .223, and had a scope on it.

 

Actually an AR pistol is not that short. With a 10.5 barrel it's only a few inches shorter than an AR rifle.

Well by definition it's about 6 inches shorter, that's more than a "few" in my book. That's a lot if you're talking close quarters maneuvering. Or you can mount a can on it and be no longer than a 16" rifle.

 

There is nothing in the legal definition of SBR that specifically involves either your intent our how you actually use it. The legal definition is just a physical description of the gun itself.

The law 26 U.S.C. 5845(c):
(c) Rifle. The term '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, and shall include any such weapon which may be readily restored to fire a fixed cartridge.
https://www.atf.gov/file/58141/download

The ATF's NFA Handbook:
2.1.3 Rifle. A rifle is a firearm designed to be fired from the shoulder and designed to use the energy of an explosive in a fixed cartridge to fire only a single projectile through a rifled barrel for each single pull of the trigger. A rifle subject to the NFA has a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length. The ATF procedure for measuring barrel length is to measure from the closed bolt (or breech-face) to the furthermost end of the barrel or permanently attached muzzle device. Permanent methods of attachment include full-fusion gas or electric steel-seam welding, high-temperature (1100°F) silver soldering, or blind pinning with the pin head welded over. Barrels are measured by inserting a dowel rod into the barrel until the rod stops against the bolt or breech-face. The rod is then marked at the furthermost end of the barrel or permanently attached muzzle device, withdrawn from the barrel, and measured.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/atf-national-firearms-act-handbook-chapter-2/download

The only place I could see actual use or intent coming in is if you put on a brace that you and lots of other people use as a shoulder stock and which was designed to make a good shoulder stock, which shows it was actually "designed to be fired from the shoulder" which is pretty much the reality with the "wrist braces."

We put scopes on pistols all the time, so the scope is fairly irrelevant - it's the "brace" that is your main problem.

gotta disagree with you Bren,

26 U.S.C. 5845(c) clearly defines a rifle as being "intended to be fired from the shoulder" but doesn't specify any configuration as to brace/butt stock/optics.

the clear intent of a wrist brace, regardless of how it is actually used, is to strap it to your forearm when firing a pistol.

by using optics with a short eye relief your showing intent to raise the weapon to your eye for sighting, not sighting at arms lenght.

how does one sight a short eye relief scope on a pistol while the wrist brace is strapped to your forearm?

so back to my question, how do you intend to use the rifle scope on your pistol with out looking like your intending to use it as a SBR?

 

deleted, double post

 

:cow:

 

https://www.atf.gov/file/55526/download

 

A reply to the general masses.

Optic choice has no impact upon weapon designation, weapon use, or intent of use. If you put a scope on a Glock 17, it does not magically make it a rifle.

 

This isn't as simple as it sounds, most on here understand that you don't have to actually break the law to be charged with a crime. If they can show you intended to break the law you can be charged. Just tie a shoestring to a mini 14 and let the ATF see it and you will know what I mean. You don't have to actually fire it full auto just having the shoe string on it is enough to be charged.
So the same could be said for putting a rifle scope on an AR pistol. The only practical way to fire it would be shouldered as a SBR so the ATF might say you intended to use it as a SBR. The key point here is intent, the brace is not necessarily intended to be used from the shoulder but the rifle scope is.

 

Actually an AR pistol is not that short. With a 10.5 barrel it's only a few inches shorter than an AR rifle.

We know the different lengths

 

And some say there is no such thing as a stupid question........I disagree

Wow......

 

And you have the nerve to call me argumentative. The only reason you followed me here from my other thread was so you could start an argument. You lost nerve and edited your first post here but you just couldn't hold it in could you. why don't you go and pester someone else and give me a break.