ATF Rules AutoGlove Illeagal

GA Firing Line

dougiemac

Lord of Chaos
Owner
Lifetime Supporter
Aug 26, 2014
3,140
3,695
113
North Georgia


"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.
Finally, if you are in possession of one of the few "FOR PAINTBALL USE ONLY" AutoGloves sent to you by the manufacturer Ballistic Studio in Fort Collins, Colorado, you MUST destroy it immediately and return the "serialized part only" using the method outlined below: YOU MAY ONLY RETURN the serialized motor section (do not send the cloth glove with it as it must be destroyed before mailing it) and mail the serialized motor piece to the following address (COD will also be accepted). We are doing this so we can document that all "for Paintball Use Only" AutoGloves have been properly destroyed as they have similar design characteristics as the regular glove.
The AutoGlove manufacturer, Ballistic Studio will not accept returns, therefore we have set-up a special return address for destroyed "for Paintball Use Only" AutoGlove motors. The return address will be mailed to you with your refund statement (you will receive a refund check separate from the refund statement). Please mail the destroyed serialized motor to this address as soon as possible.
To Destroy the "For PaintBall Use Only" AutoGlove: take a pair of scissors to cut (or pull) to disconnect the two wires from the activation plunger on the middle finger, then cut the plastic ties holding the motor and wires to the glove. Then pull or cut the motor from remaining parts of the cloth glove (it maybe glued to parts of the glove). This should remove the motor from the glove and effectively destroy the AutoGlove. For added measure, you can take a hammer and hit the small plastic trigger assist arm that moves in and out of the motor and break it (the trigger assist arm is the plastic piece that was meant to touch the trigger). Just do not destroy the serial number on the trigger assist device so we can prove that the "For Paintball Use Only" glove has been properly destroyed and returned.
Do not worry, refunds will still be issued, even if you still need time to destroy and return the "for Paintball Use Only" AutoGloves. We will mail ALL refund checks and they are scheduled to arrive on 9/22/2017 for all customers.
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!"


http://www.autogloveusa.com/index.html
 

Mac11FA

Disgruntled large member
Super Moderator
Lifetime Supporter
Patriot Lifetime
Mar 26, 2015
3,840
3,011
113
Locust Grove, GA
Zip code
30248
This is just an electrically operated version of the old trilobial crank system of the past. I think it was called Tri-Fire or something like that. The 10/22 has the BMF trigger activator and it clamps to the trigger guard. I think the ATF is afraid that it will turn any firearm into fast firing gun. I would not be willing to wear a glove with that much bulk, sorry.
 

~ZENAS~

Tracker
Mar 14, 2016
509
41
63
44
Correct, and this is one push of a button firing multiple rounds.

That grey line is a crazy thin line!

I honestly don't see any gray area at all here. The echo trigger is one input action of the shooter to fire one round. That is and has always been the definition of semi-auto. This glove is a single action of input from the shooter to fire multiple rounds. That is and has always been the definition of automatic. Don't get me wrong, I would support an NFA repeal as I believe it to be unconstitutional on its face, but under the current law, there is no question whatsoever that this is illegal and the echo trigger is not.

Another way to look at this device is to think about if it were internal to the gun. If someone designed a gun with this type of device on the inside with a button on the outside for the shooter to actuate this type of trigger system, I don't think anyone would be trying to argue it was not full auto. The fact that the connector isn't in constant contact with the "trigger" (or trigger bar if done internally) would be irrelevant if the system was internal. So why would the fact that they move this firing mechanism outside the gun and onto a glove change it's function? It doesn't. This is so clearly a device to make a gun fully auto by definition that there really is no rational room for debate.

And further, I've never understood the appeal of this anyway. As a shooter, I always want to be in complete control of my firearm (as I'm responsible for every bullet that comes out of it). And I can effectively fire a gun VERY quickly and still have my rounds go where they are supposed to go. However, if you pause this video on the second round of the burst when the lady is shooting the pistol, the bullet is going EXTREMELY high in the air and nowhere near her target. To me that is irresponsible gun ownership just to get some cheap thrills, when just honing your skills could get you nearly as fast a rate of fire but would do so safely and efficiently.
 
Last edited:

SouthernSlammed

Gingerbeard Operator
Lifetime Supporter
Aug 29, 2015
3,107
2,616
113
Fapville
Zip code
31061
I honestly don't see any gray area at all here. The echo trigger is one input action of the shooter to fire one round. That is and has always been the definition of semi-auto. This glove is a single action of input from the shooter to fire multiple rounds. That is and has always been the definition of automatic. Don't get me wrong, I would support an NFA repeal as I believe it to be unconstitutional on its face, but under the current law, there is no question whatsoever that this is illegal and the echo trigger is not.

I agree! I'm talking about ATF rules and regulatons in general. Shoulder a brace for example.
 

ReservoirDawg10

Sniper
Site Supporter
Apr 10, 2016
1,655
1,571
113
Gwinnett
Zip code
30519
It's a stupid idea anyways. I'd shame anyone buying one of those just like someone putting plastic testicles on their truck.
 
  • Like
Reactions: karlvv

Mac11FA

Disgruntled large member
Super Moderator
Lifetime Supporter
Patriot Lifetime
Mar 26, 2015
3,840
3,011
113
Locust Grove, GA
Zip code
30248
I honestly don't see any gray area at all here. The echo trigger is one input action of the shooter to fire one round. That is and has always been the definition of semi-auto. This glove is a single action of input from the shooter to fire multiple rounds. That is and has always been the definition of automatic. Don't get me wrong, I would support an NFA repeal as I believe it to be unconstitutional on its face, but under the current law, there is no question whatsoever that this is illegal and the echo trigger is not.

Another way to look at this device is to think about if it were internal to the gun. If someone designed a gun with this type of device on the inside with a button on the outside for the shooter to actuate this type of trigger system, I don't think anyone would be trying to argue it was not full auto. The fact that the connector isn't in constant contact with the "trigger" (or trigger bar if done internally) would be irrelevant if the system was internal. So why would the fact that they move this firing mechanism outside the gun and onto a glove change it's function? It doesn't. This is so clearly a device to make a gun fully auto by definition that there really is no rational room for debate.

And further, I've never understood the appeal of this anyway. As a shooter, I always want to be in complete control of my firearm (as I'm responsible for every bullet that comes out of it). And I can effectively fire a gun VERY quickly and still have my rounds go where they are supposed to go. However, if you pause this video on the second round of the burst when the lady is shooting the pistol, the bullet is going EXTREMELY high in the air and nowhere near her target. To me that is irresponsible gun ownership just to get some cheap thrills, when just honing your skills could get you nearly as fast a rate of fire but would do so safely and efficiently.
Agree wholeheartedly on this. Also, if you watch the video, the chick firing the pistol was all over the place. I am guessing every other round went over the backstop and down range where it should not have!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: dial1911

Jake

Steering wheel holder
Super Moderator
Kalash Klub
Lifetime Supporter
Aug 11, 2015
8,361
36,820
113
Ball Ground
Zip code
30189
As others have said, this thing is stupid and there's no way that you could even possibly control a pistol using this thing. You are responsible for every bullet that leaves your barrel. This was a disaster waiting to happen IMO. I'm all for repealing the NFA but people need to stop trying to skirt around the rules and laws that are currently in place until that happens. If there were any accident using this type of device don't think for a second that the Dems wouldn't use it as a tool to help push their anti-gun agenda.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SouthernSlammed