AR/AK pistol rules actually in danger of change?

D

dakota.potts

New member
I keep reading on a lot of less-than-reputable sites that the latest in executive moves by the DOJ is a reclassification of "high-powered" pistols. There are sites, like this one saying that they are trying to get them re-classified as "any other weapon".

That site links to this page here which links to a proposal from 2005 that appears to have been recently revived http://reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201504&RIN=1140-AA23

Clicking one of the links on the page will take you to the section of law defining pistol, which is:
"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). "

The gpo link is not extraordinarily helpful and doesn't actually seem to reveal the text of the proposed change, which I am having a hard time finding. The best I'm finding is people on some forums saying that the proposed rule would change part (b) to "a short fixed stock designed to be
gripped by one hand and at an angle to
and extending below the line of the
bore(s)"

And that that would raise an issue for AR and AK pistols which have removable grips.

Does anybody have real information on the subject yet?
 
Note that the website above isn't directly linkable - replace the "-censored--censored--censored--censored-" with a more scatalogical term if you'd like to view it.

The title and the type of merchandise they sell is strike one. Given that most of the content on the site is click-baty titles that are just half-copied articles following a link to the original, I'll give it a second strike.

As far as the idea that the ATF wants to NFA rifle-actioned pistols, it's possible. But given the number of panicky articles I've red referencing years dead legislative proposals that never made it out of comity and came to nothing and the amount of actual outcry when the ATF tried to reclassify ammunition, I'm not particularly worried.
 
Note that the website above isn't directly linkable - replace the "-censored--censored--censored--censored-" with a more scatalogical term if you'd like to view it.
Click to expand...
The problem is, the censored word is part of the name of the website. That should give us a hint as to its credibility. This rumor is floating around on a bunch of second-tier blogs. The closest thing to a credible source is The Hill (yep...), and they're getting their information from the NAGR.

As far as the proposed rule goes, the comment period ended 05/09/2005. For some reason, there is now a date of 01/00/2016 attached to it. We have no text of the proposal.

If anyone has valid information, please post it. If not, I don't see much point in worrying over this.
 
Short of some bs attempt around the normal channels, the definition of "pistol" would have to be rewritten.
Neither of these avenues is likely to get much traction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top