ATF Determines AutoGlove To Be A Machine Gun

“Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal” is what the makers of the AutoGlove must have said last week when they received their rejection letter from the ATF. Even though I was never interested in the device that simulated fully automatic fire, I was impressed by the innovation. And although we all had a feeling this rejection was coming, it does highlight an important point – technology will continue to advance to the point where anyone will be able to manufacture any type of firearm with simple means. Then we will find out that regulating inanimate objects is not a successful method to control criminal actions.

Full details below.

Nope To AutoGlove

On 9/16/2017, we received some disappointing news from the ATF. The ATF tested the AutoGlove and responded with an unfavorable determination. The bottom line is, the ATF determined the AutoGlove may not be used or possessed by individuals and for this reason, we have issued 100% refunds to every person that ordered an AutoGlove.

As of 9/18/2017, refunds were “processed” for 100% of the customers – Customers can expect a refund check to arrive on or about 9/22/2017 (only those customers that paid with a credit card after 8/17/2017 will receive a credit on the credit card within the next 7 business days, everyone else will receive a paper check).

While we respectfully disagree with the ATFs determination, as the AutoGlove was not tested in accordance with our design criteria or provided instructions/limitations, we will NOT appeal the ATFs determination. As we have always stated, it was never our intention to thumb our nose at the ATF or NFA regulations, we were simply trying to develop a device that could work within the existing construct of the laws to create a device that could assist a person with pulling the trigger rapidly, whether it be a paintball gun, nail gun, or firearm. (The AutoGlove had many uses!) We still are still a bit shocked to understand how one can attach a sliding stock or modify a trigger to achieve simulated full automatic rates of fire but a stand-alone glove worn on the shooters hand is somehow considered modifying a firearm.

While our instructions and limitations specifically require the AutoGlove to ONLY be used on firearms that allow for specific clearances between the trigger when the Trigger Assist Device (TAD) is placed inside the trigger guard (in order to allow sufficient space for the actuation of the TAD “without” engaging the trigger, and therefore requiring the individual to make micro trigger pulls as the TAD takes up the slack in the trigger as shown in the instruction video), the AutoGlove was not tested by the ATF with these same restrictions and for this reason, we believe this maybe partially why we received the unfavorable determination. Second, the ATF cited several past interpretations that included key words and phrases that were not defined anywhere in the laws and could easily be misinterpreted if the generic meanings as outlined in the dictionary are used. For example, the ATF cited a letter from 1982 that stated, in part, that if an electric motor is “attached”… (our belief is the glove is not attached to the firearm and the motor is only attached to the glove). The ATF cited a letter from 1988 that states that the ATF previously determined a semiautomatic firearm having an electronic solenoid attached to the trigger… (our belief is that the AutoGlove is not “attached” to the firearm, the TAD is only attached to the glove). The ATF also stated that an electrically powered trigger actuator would fall within the purview of the NFA… A weapon on which a device such as you describe has been affixed… (again, our belief is the the glove is not affixed to the firearm just as a finger is not affixed or attached to the trigger). And the ATF cites section 5845(b), Title 26, USC that states that a machinegun shall also include “any part” “designed and intended solely and exclusively,” or combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting a weapon into machinegun [emphasis added](our understanding of this passage is that the AutoGlove is not a “part.” A part attaches to something to make it whole. The firearm is never modified and the AutoGlove does not replace any of the manufactures parts on the gun. Although we could not find the definition for gun “part” we do not believe the glove is a “part” and we believe the Glove is designed to be worn, affixed, attached to a persons hand. Furthermore, the AutoGlove is not a part “designed and intended solely and exclusively for converting a weapon into a machinegun. (The AutoGlove works great on semiautomatic paintball guns and nail guns as noted in the patent and therefore was never made “solely” for converting firearms into machineguns. The AutoGlove could be used on a variety of equipment with a trigger such as a firearm, paintball gun, nail gun, or any light equipment with a trigger.

While we are still confused as to how the AutoGlove violates the plain language of the laws cited by the ATF, we are a small company and do not have the resources to appeal the ATFs decision and will cancel the AutoGlove project effective immediately, and will immediately issue full refunds to everyone that placed an order with us.

We would however, ask that the ATF publish definitions of the following terms so someone else does not waste thousands of dollars developing something that appears to meet the “plain language” of the law. In the past few years, more and more regulatory agencies have been writing their laws and policies in plain language to eliminate such confusion. I would respectfully request that the ATF define these words that appear to have different meanings from the dictionary to avoid similar issues in the future. Words such as:

1. Affixed
2. Worn
3. Attached (does a person attach their finger to the trigger?)
4. Part (e.g. gun part)
5. Converting (eg. Converting a Weapon)
6. “Intended solely and exclusively” (The TAD can also be used on paintball guns and nail guns)

This is not the current ATF administrations fault. This language was incorporated into their policy over the past 30-years and I would just ask that the current ATF help better define these words.
We wish to thank all our supporters, and the hundreds of thousands of people that visited our website and watched our videos, but unfortunately we will no longer be able to accept any orders for the AutoGlove. The site will be removed once we issue the refunds early next week and have ensured everyone has received a full refund.

Thank you again to all our supporters , and please support (or continue to support) the NRA and/or their affiliates so we can continue to enjoy our second amendment freedoms long into the future!

Autoglove





Pete

LE – Science – OSINT.
On a mission to make all of my guns as quiet as possible.
Pete.M@staff.thefirearmblog.com
Twitter: @gunboxready
Instagram: @tfb_pete
https://www.instagram.com/tfb_pete/


Advertisement

  • Brett baker

    CURSES! FOILED AGAIN!

  • Some Guy

    That really was not suprising.

  • cons2p8ted

    Pssst….rebrand this as a rehabilitation device like the SB stocks!

    • I bet you can find some “personal massagers” out there that have parts which rapidly flap back and forth.

      …Might not be able to find any that fit inside a trigger guard, though.

  • DR.NUMBERS

    I love how nonsensical these determinations can seem. You can possess garden gloves, you can possess a cordless drill, but it is illegal for an individual to possess a garden glove with a cordless drill motor attached.

    Does having these items show an ‘intent’ to manufacture said prohibited glove as it would if you owned a stock and a non-SBRed pistol?

    • Don’t get busted on some other federal drug or weapons charges, and you’ll never find out!

      I don’t think anyone has ever found an instance of a Constructive Possession charge that wasn’t being leveled as part of a laundry list of stacking felonies by a prosecutor throwing as many books as possible at a suspect who was already being investigated for a host of other charges.

      • Longhaired Redneck

        A gun shop owner in southwest Arizona got jammed up in a sting5 or 6 years ago. A confidential informant came in the shop and purchased an AR15 pistol upper receiver (barrel length unknown), along with a complete AR15 lower receiver. The customer/CI then assembled his new purchase, now an SBR, and the ATF agents sitting outside listening went in and arrested the shop owner.

        • I’d gamble plenty of somebody else’s money that the laundry list of charges in that case was stacked up against the snitch.

          Also, wasn’t AZ five or six years ago about when and where AG Holder was fastly and furiously trying to distract public attention from the whole “delivering thousands of untrackable guns directly to Mexican narcoteroristas” thing? It was kind of a fool’s golden age for spurious prosecutions.

        • Bill

          Sounds more like a Darwin award to me. Unfortunately, you can go to any gun show and have more than one Gomer tell you it’s perfectly legal. I’ve heard all sorts of stories and had the DIY SBR pitched directly to me half a dozen times.

    • XT6Wagon

      Its pretty simple. A machine gun is one that fires more than once per pull of the trigger. This fired a gun multiple times for no pull of the trigger. There was no chance this was ever going to pass.

      Also note that if you fire multiple barrels at the same time with that single pull its legal, but not if you fire them sequentially. Hand cranked miniguns are also legal as its manual activation to fire each time.

      • DR.NUMBERS

        Oh I understand why the product was rejected. I just find the level to which they regulate whether people can/cant have such things / how they can be used, in addition to ‘intent’ determinations leads to a messy and often nonsensical practices.

        • Bill

          Funny thing is, states are now trumpeting that it is somehow legal to sell pot when it is flatly the opposite according to the same US Code that regulates firearms. The only difference here is that there are no raids, arrests or sieges occurring. What exactly is the definition of a double standard these days?

  • RSG

    I can’t lie- I have a lot of respect now for these folks in how they are handling this rejection. For that reason alone I wish they had the resources to fight this ruling. Also, they are right, “We the People” deserve plain language definitions of the words/terms that they use to infringe on our God given rights.

    • Yeah, full props to AutoGlove for how they handled this – both their customers, AND the ATF.

      The designers were wrong in their interpretation of teh applicable laws, regs, and historical determinations, but they manned up Like a Boss when ATF responded.

    • Wow!

      Well the Constitution is plain enough. The problem is we have people violating the law like with immigration and marijuana and in a whole bunch of other aspects, and their crimes have been normalized. It is what we have been saying for decades, criminals don’t follow the law.

    • AlDeLarge

      Everything the ATF said makes perfect sense if you don’t skip the fact that they consider the button to be the trigger. Everything they say is attached to the trigger is attached to the trigger. It doesn’t really matter that the two triggers are not attached, only that all the prohibited items are attached to one of them.

  • Congo Rick

    I godda side with the ATF on this one.
    You’ve just replaced the mechanical cycling with electrical cycling.
    So basically, you just made a minigun with a quick detach motor.
    If it were that easy, everybody would do it. You godda get clever like flint armory. Their echo triggers are brilliant.

    • Rasputin

      My thought as well. Just an electrical motor inside the trigger guard…

    • Budogunner

      I agree. The law is stupid, but it is the law and we have to obey it.

      The ATF has made it very clear in the past that anything motorized, or even spring driven, operating on a trigger won’t fly.

      • Wow!

        The law says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. That is the law people “have” to obey.

        • Budogunner

          I wish it were that simple, but dot gov is complicated. In the end, you can challenge the system but I don’t have the constitution to live in jail while a court case proceeds in an attempt to determine if any deviation from what the ATF says can be legal. I just want to live a quiet life.

          • Wow!

            True, but everything starts with recognizing that it is not us against the law, but them. Even if we don’t have time for politics, it has time for us.

          • Budogunner

            Well and truly said. I see your point.

          • Bill

            True-but are you willing to risk incarceration to prove a point? I know I’m not. I’ve gotten yelled at here more than once for depicting the world as it is rather than how we’d all like it to be, and I still stand by the belief that fighting the US government on your basement workbench rather than with the election process is a fool’s errand at best and a free ticket to federal prison at worst. Every one of the products mentioned above pokes the bear, and everyone involved knew or knows it.

          • Wow!

            Well, that definitely is a decision for us to make as individuals alone, it isn’t a group effort. Wither you do so or not entirely depends on how important you truly think the 2A is. That in itself is the basis and essence of the 2A. If the right is not used, its benefits are nullified either because it is not needed or the people did not deserve it. The founding fathers risked life and persecution because they thought the freedoms being contested were worth it. 2/3 of the English colonies did not agree with them, but they did it anyways because they saw it as a just cause. And of course, if one decides to go through with it, it isn’t like they can’t also vote, write letters to their representatives, and participate in the NRA.

        • Dan

          A glove is not a firearm therefore they decided you can neither keep or bear it. No where in the 2A does it say you have the right to purchase any firearm or accessory
          Accessories which i must point out are not firearms so not covered by 2A anyway.

          • Wow!

            The 2A is not limited to firearms. It says the right to keep and bear ARMS shall not be infringed. So yes that does mean you do have the right to purchase a firearm, or in the future a laser rifle, or a historical arm if available, or whatever. It is not limited to firearms. Accessories for a weapon is part of the weapon system. Do you think the founding fathers would put so much effort into saying the ability to keep arms “shall not be infringed” only to say, “except accessories like ramrods, ammunition etc, because ‘they aren’t arms'”. No that is a ridiculous interpretation of the 2A

            Hey, I guess by that twist of the 2A, the 1A must mean have the right to free speech, but not to writings, electronic media etc, because that isn’t actual verbal speech.

    • jcitizen

      You mean the Fostech Echo AR-11 trigger system?

    • David

      I have to agree. As soon as I saw the motor when this was announced, I was shaking my head.

      It is a bit funny that they state in their press release that they can’t figure out why a slide fire stock is allowed but their device isn’t. Really?

  • I cannot imagine what possesed these dinguses to convince themselves that their Kindergarten Technicality of “…But it’s not connected to the firearm, [huge smirk]” was going to make ATF just throw its hat down on the ground and stomp on it like Roscoe P. Coltrane watchin’ Them Duke Boys jump their Charger over the river. They were one loose screw away from a ~~Sovereign Citizen~~ smugly declaring that the judge behind the bench has no authority over them because there’s ~~yellow fringe~~ on the US Flag in the corner.

    • Set

      Can you tell me that US firearm laws right now aren’t subject to weird workarounds? AR pistols are probably my favorite example of that. “It’s not a short barreled rifle because it should be fired one handed.” *wink wink*

      Even better, the accessories for them. The Sig Brace is fine, but “don’t shoulder it” (at least until recently). Vertical grips are forbidden, unless they’re angled foregrips. Or if the “handgun” is over a certain length.

      Silencerco sells a rifle with a suppressor on it, but you don’t have to do any paperwork on it because it takes ammo from the front. But Remington’s Ultimate Muzzle Loader requires a 4473 because it has a bolt. Yeah, that makes sense.

      Stop and think about all of the downright stupid laws and intepretations of them, and tell me they didn’t have a precedent for really dumb workarounds. I can’t fault them from trying.

      • raz-0

        In general, I can see your point. For this one in specific, there has been precedent for a motor actuating the trigger being denied. The fact hey packaged it differently than back in the 80s wasn’t likely to mitigate it. The AR pistol and forearm brace thing was at least novel.

      • The most obvious difference between this doofy thing and the various arm braces is that the SIG Brace et al. actually do serve a practical purpose like it says on the tin– you really can use them as a brace for one handed long range shooting– and were specifically intended as an adaptive aid for disabled shooters, so that any wink-wink-nudge-nudge use was entirely on the owner rather than the manufacturer. There was no winking or nudging involved with these gloves, though; they were explicitly and expressly sold as a device to fire a gun full auto and skirt federal law, with no attempt made to justify the product’s existence beyond relying on a childish interpretation of the concept of “technicality”.

    • Bullphrog855

      I thought the same thing about the arm brace but somehow that was okay with the ATF.

      • An arm brace can actually be used as… y’know, an arm brace, just like it says on the box, for disabled shooters or for improving one handed accuracy/stability in general. These gloves are nothing but “This ONE WEIRD TRICK the ATF HATES will let you fire a gun full auto without a stamp!”, they have no other purpose, except maybe keeping a ladyfriend entertained after the range closes.

  • winterhorse

    Pretty much a no brainer. Using an electric motor to pull the trigger.

  • Jim Slade
  • Mr._Exterminatus

    Not surprising at all, sucks for the company, but they had to know that this would probably happen.

  • TheNotoriousIUD

    Nail guns.
    lol
    There goes the ATF again attacking the American housing industry.

    • Zebra Dun

      Having framed houses in my youth I did say “Nail Guns?” with wonderment having never seen the need to nail the floggin’ hell out of a board more than twice.
      We had automatic staple guns that installed weather wrap called felt but that’s something that is needed beats a slap stapler.

  • Uniform223

    Can we just ban the ATF?

    • Maj. Thomas Paine

      I thought the U.S. Constitution did that (through omission of a specifically delineated power) back in 1787 and then again 1791. They claim it’s all “for taxes,” because it’s foggy on limiting their ability to tax things which we are endowed as rights. But a tax on a liberty is an infringement.

      Imagine a $200 tax and 8-10 month wait on a book. Or a $200 tax on a license to have your own faith. Or speak your mind, or assemble peaceably?

      All can be construed as “dangerous,” but they’re all still rights. So why is the right to protect one’s self/family/community/state/country from threats (i.e. evil), so heavily restrained?

      We’re supposed to be a nation of liberty, which requires personal responsibility. But I suppose it’s easier to control a people by making them dependent on you for everything. That includes doing away with personal responsibility. A shame really.

      • Budogunner

        Marriage licenses, long-standing faith based definition of who can marry whom, textbooks that are mandatory for college education but WAY overpriced (sales tax, ka-ching), having to file applications for peaceful events on public grounds…

        Just because there isn’t a pretty stamp they give you doesn’t mean your other freedoms aren’t also being taxed.

        • Wow!

          What you listed is legal under the law however. Marriage licences for example are done because of the tax relief you can get being married. If you want to claim marriage, no one is stopping you, only if you want legal acknowledgement.

          The 2A on the other hand is part of the supreme law with very specific protections on the ability to keep and bear arms. And this is a problem, many people don’t truly understand the hierarchy of their rights, and part of that stems from the progressives claiming random things to be a “right” when it is not.

          • Budogunner

            Yeah, the “living document” Philosophy doesn’t jive well with “Inalienable Rights.”

  • GaryOlson

    “Firearms — not automated electronic actuators”

  • Some Rabbit

    So I can’t jam my girlfriend’s vibrator into the trigger guard either? Bummer.

    • Some Squirrel

      You unoriginal bastard, you took my idea!

    • Vhyrus

      The username is what makes this post epic.

    • Pete – TFB Writer

      Damn that’s funny.

    • Dan

      Better send a sample to the ATF for a determination.

  • QuadGMoto

    Two thumbs up for opening with a classic Firefly reference!

  • Mmmtacos

    At first reading of the title of the article I was indignant towards the ATF. After reading a little bit of the letter and the reasons stated, the sections of the GCA & NFA cited, and knowing more about how the glove works… I have to agree with the ATF.

    It sucks, it’s stupid and it should not be that way… but they make valid points. I wish it were otherwise, but I think their determination about how the glove technically counts as modifying the gun to full auto makes sense.

    We operate within the confines of the law, even if we don’t like it. There’s recourse for us, that’s why our system is the way it is. It doesn’t happen overnight, it may take years, but I am happier knowing we abide by the laws of the system to get the result we want instead of flagrant disregard for it. The ATF isn’t moving goal posts here, so it’s hard to put blame on them.

    • Wow!

      Well sure, if you make up the rules and then point to foul when someone breaks your made up rules you would be in the right. You forget that while the BATFE isn’t currently moving goal posts, they already have.

      “We operate within the confines of the law, even if we don’t like it.” That line should be only directed to the BATFE. Is following the law of a criminal following the law? If that was the case, a coups would be considered legally permissible, and that is the path to anarchy.

    • AlDeLarge

      All their arguments fall apart when you get to the ATF’s determination that the button on the device is the trigger. It’s true that the device is not attached to the gun, but the device is the trigger and all that prohibited stuff is attached to the device, therefore attached to the trigger. I don’t see what’s to be confused about the ATF’s decision here.

  • EdgyTrumpet

    CALLED IT!

  • Christian Hedegaard-Schou

    Looks exactly like the old “Gatling guns are legal, but you can’t hook up a drill motor to the crank” idea.

    This is a glove with a drill motor. Yeah, that’s NEVER been ok according to the ATF. No idea why these people thought their product was special.

  • Vhyrus

    they started taking people’s money before they even got the determination letter? Not cool. At least they refunded it.

  • Arie Heath

    Nice Firefly reference, I see you’re a man of culture as well.

    • Pete – TFB Writer

      Such a great series.

  • Fred Fagan

    Watched Jerry Miculek fire a handgun at the same speed as an AK-47 full auto. I guess if these guys wanting to shoot fast they could spend twenty or thirty years at the range practicing.

    • James Smith

      And 2 million rounds like Jerry.

  • ATWA

    Because, little do people know that the ‘A’ in ATF stands for arbitrary, not alcohol.

  • Perhaps one good thing from this ruling is the lady shooting in the video no longer has to worry about where her future shots end up. After the first shot, most of her shots were angled upward at about a 20-30 degree angle, landing God-knows-where.

  • spencer60

    I really can’t fathom them thinking this would pass muster. As the ATF says, they have 30 years of history saying that using an electric motor to fire a gun is a ‘machine gun’.

  • Josh

    Uh…. actually, I don’t think the ATF can regulate this. It’s not legally a firearm. It’s not even technically a firearm part. It’s a piece of clothing that happens to have a motor attached.

    • Nashvone

      When the actuator is inserted inside the trigger guard, it becomes a mechanical part of the firearm. That is a no-go from the ATF.

    • Wow!

      When has the law ever stopped the BATFE?

  • JD

    Lmao! This thing is so ass! Even if they were legal, I wouldn’t buy one!

  • civilianaf

    Who spends hard earned money developing this? The spend money manufacturing this. Then sells this, before having a determination letter in place from the ATF? Most importantly, who would buy this?

  • Nashvone

    “You should expect no sympathy when you push me to defend that which I deplore.”
    There should have been zero expectations as to whether or not the ATF would approve this device.

  • Alex A.

    So don’t market it towards firearms, instead market it towards paintball/airsoft and for people with arthritis who need to use a nail gun.

    • Concerned Third Party

      fully automatic BB guns are already on the market.

  • MB

    This is what happens when “regulations” supersede laws. Get rid of the BATF. That being said, although I understand the developers intent, I don’t see it as anything 99.99% of the shooters would want. Just a toy for the undisciplined yahoo’s that already give shooters a bad name. Robbery, Assault and Murder are already a crime, we don’t need regulations to control the objects used, otherwise hammers, axes and cars would be under the BATF control….

  • Ace

    I get it. No different from attaching an electric motor to a .308 cal minigun… Just attached to the glove on hand instead…

  • JB

    No surprise,they say a piece of string is a machine gun….Mini14 and string

    I see posters supporting atf…
    You know what you need to do. Your Traitors. Do it by your own hand, Loyalist’s!

    • Blake

      The reason this isn’t surprising is because all they did was move the trigger. How in the world did they expect to get this through when there’s just a different item somewhere else on the gun that can be pressed and held?

  • Texas-Roll-Over
  • Lockmazter

    Author is a Firefly fan, no doubt???

  • uisconfruzed

    That thing’s a bit goofy.

  • uisconfruzed

    Practice and an AR Gold trigger.

  • Core

    lol How the hell can the BATFE actually ban a mechanical device that is not attached to a firearm that is outside the domain of firearms? It could be used for airsoft, and construction.. Too much government oversight, but yeah it’s a gimmicky device that makes your gun shoot wildly out of control and would probably result in more problems than solutions but hey it’s a free country..isn’t it?

  • jcitizen

    Well we all could see this coming a mile off!

  • Zebra Dun

    That resembles a Red Green adaptation of a cordless drill and a gun to achieve auto fire.
    For those who recall Red Green adaptation of a cordless drill to a windshield roll up to achieve electric roll up windows.
    I am against any gun control but dang that just looks like something that won’t work or be allowed.

  • carlcasino

    Correct me if I’m WRONG but the ATF just confirmed that it’s the Human aspect that needs Correcting and not the Gun. My Vault is still full of guns that have never fired themselves or even left the premises without my assistance and unless I was sleepwalking has never taken a human life. I will admit though that I have read a number of obituaries that didn’t tear me up. When the “Rest of the Story” is revealed about LV, my money will be the LSD media will find a way to make it’s case for more “Gun Control”. Stalin & Mao & Hitler may have never personally pulled the trigger to kill close to a 100 million but their rhetoric and ideology certainly did. I can see the parallel with the Progressive movement of today, but I guess after 80 years my rear view mirror is larger than most.

  • Edohiguma

    To be fair, I’m not surprised the ATF canned it. I mean, you are not pulling the trigger. You have basically a device that pulls it repeatedly for you.

  • Jason Adams

    LOL … Well they asked for it. The ATF is not a judge in a court room where if they really wanted to challenge that would be the place to do it. If you ask the ATF of course they will even say bump fire is full auto. DUH! Besides it is only a waste of ammo anyway. When the time comes for it full auto will easily be available to anyone with the ammo and a vise and and some files.

  • Eric B.

    I own two “assault” style semi auto rifles, one with 30 round mags and one with 50 round mags.

    I live in the ‘Vegas valley. After this past week’s horrendous shooting I agree with the BATF ban on this full auto “glove”. And I know we’ll see a swift ban on “bump fire” stocks as well.

    We here in the valley are all feeling deeply affected by the massacre, as though a fog of profound sadness has descended over us. Semi-auto guns are enough to defeat any zombie apocalypse. We are the best privately and federally armed nation in the world. That will not change.

  • Jim_Macklin

    No doubt, someday the Army and the Mayo Clinic will make a “Star War” prosthetic hand that could be programmed to work very fast.
    Will ATF ban the VA repairing injured veterans?
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/994ca486abfb09fae034b3e64670318bb799aec5194a6bc57bcf8de72312fbe8.jpg