Legality of Handgun Stippling?

[Mauser2447]

Hey all,

I spent some time earlier today stippling my CC handgun to improve the grip. It was my first foray into stippling & I must admit it went really well; I guess having a steady hand & being semi-artsy helps.

Anywho, I was just bouncing around the interwebs admiring some other stippling patterns & came across some user comments stating that stippling a handgun frame constitutes an "illegal firearm modification" that prove costly as far as law enforcement/courts are concerned.

IANAL & I think this is BS from uninformed netlurkers, but figured it wouldn't hurt to get some educated comments here on the forum.

Thanks!



*I'm a regular stalker on these boards, although I seldom post anything worthwhile*

[ianb1116]

No way in hell. You can equate it to changing the grip on a firearm. Stipple away! Nothing illegal there.

The problems arise when you start doing it for others. That's a no-no as you must have an FFL to retain possession of someone else's gun (outside of loaning to a family member or friend in-state).

[arjohnson]

Just don't stipple over the serial#, if you do that then you broke the law.

[knight0334]

It is BS..

The only hazard is if you do it as an act of business, then you would be gunsmithing - which requires an FFL.

[dkf]

Bunch of bullshit.

[God's Country]

I think we need to write the ATF about this and wait for their ruling.
What could go wrong?

[bogey1]

If I borrow it and get blisters, Im going to sue. probably could too

[Bang]

It is not a violation of federal law per se. However, changing a frame to an aggressive grip will be used as indicative of an aggressive attitude should you be sued as a result of firing said hand gun at another person. Falls into the same (attackable) frame of mind with respect to premeditation, similar to how carrying a hand gun in a holster indicates a preset to employ the handgun against another. A case in chief based upon the forgoing is quasi-judicial via precedence by the in hoc verplenti decision.

[Mauser2447]

It is not a violation of federal law per se. However, changing a frame to an aggressive grip will be used as indicative of an aggressive attitude should you be sued as a result of firing said hand gun at another person. Falls into the same (attackable) frame of mind with respect to premeditation, similar to how carrying a hand gun in a holster indicates a preset to employ the handgun against another. A case in chief based upon the forgoing is quasi-judicial via precedence by the in hoc verplenti decision.

This is a similar train of thought to the some of the comments I was referencing in my original post. To quickly paraphrase, a case could be made (albeit it a thin one, but probably not out of the realm of possibility by a slick lawyer) that stippling a handgun frame could be construed as modifying the grip in an aggressive manner and adding to the lethality of a crime. Blah, blah, blah, et cetera. et cetera.

Probably a long shot -- like an epic long shot -- but I figured I could share & get some opinions here that are more factually-based, as well as some humor.

[Bang]

Well, I modified my Glock .40 to shoot 357 Sig. That's a no fucking around caliber that is so aggressive it's the caliber secret service carries.