Draco Pistol Legalities

[Smith]

TCA 39-11-106: (1) “Handgun” means any firearm with a barrel length of less than twelve inches (12²) that is designed, made or adapted to be fired with one (1) hand;"

Dunno if that is anything more than a "working definition" for the statutes, though, meaning, there doesn't seem to be an illegal act to have a 13" barreled weapon made to be fired with one hand, or whatever.

- OS

That's in regard to carry, right? You can have an 18" pistol (ie Buntline) but could not be able to carry it per TN code. The way I read it in context.

[mikegideon]

That's in regard to carry, right? You can have an 18" pistol (ie Buntline) but could not be able to carry it per TN code. The way I read it in context.

I'm kinda surprised that nobody proposed changes to the code. I don't want to see any more restrictions, but it wouldn't change my life if the state redefined the Draco and its .223 equivalents. Not something I would carry into a Walmart anyway.

[MikePapa1]

How far along is the case? Are there any filings for us laypersons to read yet to get some insight into how a DA thinks a draco isn't a handgun?

To be honest, I'm not sure. The case was bound over to Criminal Court last Spring and I'll check to see its status. It may not be this particular pistol it may be one of the AR pistols that are out. Let me check and I'll get back to you.

[JayC]

To be honest, I'm not sure. The case was bound over to Criminal Court last Spring and I'll check to see its status. It may not be this particular pistol it may be one of the AR pistols that are out. Let me check and I'll get back to you.

Thanks, I'd like to know more details.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

I'm not likely to open carry my PLR-16 or use it as a truck gun. OTOH, if it was judged not a pistol, would that mean a permit holder could not legally keep it in the truck with a chambered round? Not that I'd be likely to do that, but maybe somebody out on a farm might think it was a good idea for some reason.

If the state decides it ain't a pistol, does it become a rifle in the state's opinion? Or just a pistol that folks are forbidden to legally carry?

[mikegideon]

I'm not likely to open carry my PLR-16 or use it as a truck gun. OTOH, if it was judged not a pistol, would that mean a permit holder could not legally keep it in the truck with a chambered round? Not that I'd be likely to do that, but maybe somebody out on a farm might think it was a good idea for some reason.

If the state decides it ain't a pistol, does it become a rifle in the state's opinion? Or just a pistol that folks are forbidden to legally carry?

I was careful to say it wouldn't effect ME. Some folks may depend on these kinda weapons. To me, if you take a rifle, and lop off the stock and barrel, it doesn't remove all the rifle attributes. Still looks like a rifle to me, especially if to can turn it into an SBR in 15 minutes with a $50 stock kit. I'm not for changing the loophole, but it is what it is.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

I was careful to say it wouldn't effect ME. Some folks may depend on these kinda weapons. To me, if you take a rifle, and lop off the stock and barrel, it doesn't remove all the rifle attributes. Still looks like a rifle to me, especially if to can turn it into an SBR in 15 minutes with a $50 stock kit. I'm not for changing the loophole, but it is what it is.

I got mine just for a range toy. The long-barrel rifle-caliber pistols do not seem to have many practical uses except as a money pit. Am ignorant of war, but perhaps it could be somehow useful for CQB in a war. Dunno.

But adding a stock for SBR might not be necessary if somebody wants a compact "rifle substitute" for shooting coyotes or whatever on a farm at relatively short range. With a properly adjusted sling, aiming out to 50 yards seems nearly as accurate with a sling as with a stock.

A simple loop sling typically mounts to the back of the receiver. When a fully extended two-hand grip pulls the sling tight, it is a very stable sight picture and the recoil is trivial. Maybe somebody who can actually shoot could take it out well past 50 yards.

Anyway, the pistols are so heavy and front-heavy, you would have to be superman or the hulk to shoot it much without a sling. With a sling it doesn't require much strength at all.

I'm not a farmer and do not have the foggiest idea if these kinds of weapons would actually be useful in that setting.

[DaveTN]

I'm not likely to open carry my PLR-16 or use it as a truck gun. OTOH, if it was judged not a pistol, would that mean a permit holder could not legally keep it in the truck with a chambered round? Not that I'd be likely to do that, but maybe somebody out on a farm might think it was a good idea for some reason.

If the state decides it ain't a pistol, does it become a rifle in the state's opinion? Or just a pistol that folks are forbidden to legally carry?

The PLR-16 would need some very specific language to outlaw it. Unlike the AK or AR it was designed and built as a handgun and has never been a rifle.

So no, I don't think it could just “become a rifle". I would think it would have to be specifically outlawed (same as the Buntline example). what would be more likely would be addressing caliber.

[mikegideon]

Yep, the AR variants might as well have a stock, since the buffer tube keeps them from being much shorter.

[Guest buttonhook]

not all have a buffer tube

OA-93 - AR-15 Pistol [OA-93 - AR-15 Pistol] - $960.00 : J & S Gun Parts, We carry, Olympic Arms, Bushmaster, Ruger, Colt, Rock River, DPMS, Fat Bastard, Rock River and so much more

[MikePapa1]

OK, I've done some checking and here's the status of the case I mentioned in Sumner County. The person arrested is has a HCP and had in his possession a Kel Tec PLR-16. He was a driver of a car and the KelTec was in the center console. Also in the car were three other individuals, two who were convicted felons and one of whom was in possession of Schedule II (Cocaine). The Defendant has no prior convictions but based upon his tattoos he is believed to be affiliated with a gang. The Defendant's PLR had the forend and he was arrested for possession of a shortbarreled rifle under TCA §39-17-1302. TCA § 39-17-1301 a short barreled rifle is:

(14) “Rifle” means any firearm designed, made or adapted to be fired from the shoulder and to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed metallic cartridge to fire a projectile through a rifled bore by a single function of the trigger;

(15) “Short barrel” means a barrel length of less than sixteen inches (16²) for a rifle and eighteen inches (18²) for a shotgun, or an overall firearm length of less than twenty-six inches (26²);

A preliminary hearing was held in General Sessions and the case was bound over by the Judge. The Grand Jury indicted the Defendant under the prohibited weapon statute. The case remains pending having been taken under advisement because they are supposedly awaiting an Attorney General's opinion on whether federal law designating this a pistol preempts the state law which suggests it is a short barreled rifle. The DA's argument is that a pistol is designed to be fired with one hand while a rifle is designed to be fired with two hands, hence the importance of the fore end on the PLR. He further argues that the .223 round is, and was designed as a rifle round, hence the PLR should be considered under the Tennessee statute, a short barreled rifle.

The defense counsel worked out a deal for the under advisement based upon his knowledge that this weapon is the subject of a request for the AG's ruling based upon someone arrested with the same weapon in Percy Warner Park in Davidson County. The case has been under advisement for about 6 months and after one year, if the defendant has no other arrests, it will be dismissed. There is a hearing scheduled in March based upon the defense lawyer's request of the return of the weapon to the Defendant. Apparently they expect the AG's opinion before the hearing.

That's what I know.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Thanks MikePapa1

Ain't arguing with you, only thinking out loud here--

Unless the DA is pulling from different pieces of law that were un-quoted above, is he inventing the theory that a rifle is intended to be fired two-handed?

The quoted (14) paragraph mentions "fired from shoulder" and the PLR was never designed to be shoulder-fired.

I could easily demonstrate to the DA the true purpose of that fore-stock on the PLR--

0. Remove the fore-stock.

1. Shoot-out one mag of ammo.

2. Firmly grasp the empty gun by the barrel.

3. Try not to say too many bad words as the barrel severely burns your hand.

[JayC]

I'm just curious how one can argue that a PLR-16 is design, made or adapted to be fired from the shoulder? Can you post the case number so those of us interested in in reading the full record can go pull it up?

[mikegideon]

How does a forend satisfy the definition of a rifle? I'm curious about this, since these types of "pistols" require a handguard.

[MikePapa1]

He is inventing the theory of two hands. Frankly, I think he'd be better served with demonstrating how the weapon is fired with the sling, which hangs from the shoulder and is used to brace the pistol when fired. I'm ambivalent with regard to whether these are true pistols or SBR. If I were, for example, to take the butt stock off of an AK, does that make it a pistol or SBR? I honestly don't know.

[JayC]

The solution is to get long gun carry covered by the HCP, and then forget about all this silliness.

[Guest Jamie]

The solution is to get long gun carry covered by the HCP, and then forget about all this silliness.

You're still gonna have trouble with the "it's a sawed-off rifle, so it's illegal" crowd, even for that.

[mikegideon]

He is inventing the theory of two hands. Frankly, I think he'd be better served with demonstrating how the weapon is fired with the sling, which hangs from the shoulder and is used to brace the pistol when fired. I'm ambivalent with regard to whether these are true pistols or SBR. If I were, for example, to take the butt stock off of an AK, does that make it a pistol or SBR? I honestly don't know.

The language is pretty specific. This will be interesting to watch, especially if it results in an overturned conviction on appeal.

[mikegideon]

The solution is to get long gun carry covered by the HCP, and then forget about all this silliness.

I'm afraid the silliness is here to stay. They're whipping us some newer and sillier as we speak.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

I'm not in the habit of chauffeuring around drug-holding felons with a loaded PLR-16 in the console, but this case is still disturbing.

Makes one wonder if it is risky tossing the unloaded pistola in the back of the truck and driving it to the range, if unlucky enough to get stopped by the wrong policeman.

[Oh Shoot]

...Makes one wonder if it is risky tossing the unloaded pistola in the back of the truck and driving it to the range, if unlucky enough to get stopped by the wrong policeman.

I think the Sumner County DA is an embarrassment. Classical "we don't care how y'all do it up north" attitude. The fact that this firearm is allowed to be sold in the state of TN should be proof enough that like the feds, TN considers it a legal pistol.

States' rights with regard to having state laws that are more restrictive than federal ones is one thing, but this is just dumb ass redneck trumped up crap.

Though the perps seem a bit on the umm, "unsavory" side, I hope the HCP fellow finds a way to sue their socks off. I know I'd seek every resource I could find to do it if I were the one charged with it.

- OS

[Reservoir Dog]

If I were, for example, to take the butt stock off of an AK, does that make it a pistol or SBR? I honestly don't know.

It would not be a pistol. You cannot make a pistol out of a rifle. Once something is a rifle, it will always be a rifle. AK pistols (like the Draco) were manufactured in pistol form, and have never had a shoulder stock attached, therefore it is considered a pistol.

Per your question, it would more than likely be considered a SBR. It would depend on the overall length (OAL) after the shoulder stock was removed. If the OAL is less than 26", then it would be considered a SBR. If OAL is still 26" or greater, then it would still be a rifle.

[mikegideon]

I'm not in the habit of chauffeuring around drug-holding felons with a loaded PLR-16 in the console, but this case is still disturbing.

Makes one wonder if it is risky tossing the unloaded pistola in the back of the truck and driving it to the range, if unlucky enough to get stopped by the wrong policeman.

Yes, it's disturbing. Sounds like the DA is just making stuff up to suit his needs. I hope the NRA is watching.

[DaveTN]

How does a forend satisfy the definition of a rifle? I'm curious about this, since these types of "pistols" require a handguard.

PLR-16 doesn’t require a hand guard; mine didn’t come with one. It is an accessory.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

PLR-16 doesn’t require a hand guard; mine didn’t come with one. It is an accessory.

Yes, I think some of the pistols are sold with the guard and a flash hider pre-installed, but I had to add those items to mine as well.

I added the flash hider partly because internet wisdom said that the flash hider directs more noise down-range, making the gun a better citizen at a shooting range. It is supposedly a nasty-loud weapon to the side without a flash hider or compensator. Also the flash hider looks kewl.

I admit mainly adding the stock because it looks kewl, but after shooting the pistol, realized that without the stock you might risk a nasty burn if you grab the barrel after firing a couple of mags of ammo.

The ergonomics of the pistol are such that two-handed on the grip, with a sling, is the way to ACCURATELY shoot the thing. You can hold one hand on the grip and one hand forward of the magwell, but the strong arm can't be straight and accuracy goes way down, at least for me. Aimed firing with one hand on the grip and the other hand on the stock just makes aimed fire even more non-ergonomic and inaccurate.

For hip-firing against a zombie horde, a green laser would be desirable.