search
top

Bipod Grips

Uncle asks about whether ATF would argue a bipod grip attached to a handgun would make it an AOW.  I have to admit… the the bipod grip almost looks useless enough to be designed specifically to piss off the ATF.

6 Responses to “Bipod Grips”

  1. . . . the the bipod grip almost looks useless enough . . .

    Damn–I think it’s kinda cool ;).

  2. Sebastian says:

    Well, if it confounds the ATF, I approve.

  3. Mad Saint Jack says:

    My friend put one of those on his Walther G22 rifle. I had a similar worry that he was violating the 922 crap.

  4. Sebastian says:

    It’s fine on a rifle. A rifle is a rifle. A handgun is defined under the National Firearms Act as a firearm designed to be held by a single hand. ATF’s contention is because a grip makes it designed to be held by two hands, but it’s not a rifle or shotgun, which is “fired from the shoulder” then it falls under AOW, which is basically everything else.

  5. Mad Saint Jack says:

    It may not be fine on an imported rifle. I can not put a forward grip or a folding stock on my Egyptian Maadi with out installing X number of US parts to make the gun 922 compliant. The G22 should fall under the same importation law. I believe this is what is referred to as “the sporting purpose clause.”

    I understand the law in regards to AOW’s. At the NRA convention I saw that the company that makes the .22 cal MP-5 clone had a pistol version on display. This pistol had an accessory rail under the fore grip, and I took one look at it and said to the rep at the booth “you know someone is going to stick a grip on there and make it an illegal AOW.”

  6. Sebastian says:

    US parts are always OK. It’s foreign parts you have to watch out for.

top