expeditionx

I tried to find an earlier example of what your saying but can't find one in writing. If you know of any documented on any website, please let me know to compare it.

I can't imagine what mech tech is going to do now. Just recently the ATF stopped allowing virgin receivers from being sold to people under 21 because they can be made into a pistol.

TC arms once had such a kit they sold like that. The kit was defended in the supreme court case. I know of no other such kits.

This is not any thing new. I think there has been much misinformation in the past about this concept. I sent out a letter to othe BATF asking for clearification of the following Question 1. Would it be a violation of the law to change a Contender pistol (purchased originally as a pistol from the manufacturer in 1995) from a pistol configuration to a rifle configuration (with a shoulder stock and 18 inch barrel) and then back to a pistol configuration (no stock and 10 inch barrel)? Question 2. Would it be a violation of the law to change a Contender rifle (purchased

I read the actual court published transcript on another website and no where does it define what you can and can't do. The case was about whether TC can distribute a frame, pistol grip, short barrel, shoulder stock, and long barrel in the same box. The ATF has held the opinion that going from a pistol to a rifle is ok, but reversing that is illegal according to all the online ATF letter sources I have seen. Many are well familiar with the stockless receiver is ok for an AOW same is true for a pistol build. paragraph 2 line 1 "A rifle receiver that has never been stocked as a rifle m

Life goes on

I agree 100 percent with what your saying I can't understand how TC does not have this concept in their legal policy. I have seen many bardwell subguns letters and other letters that state once a rifle always a rifle no exceptions generally.

From the letter: Oct 30, 2003 converting a new contender or encore rifle to a pistol ... results in making an NFA firearm. Someone hasn't bothered to let the tech branch in on the case outcome. If someone gets caught, doing this I don't think TC is going to pay their legal fees.

Why is the ATF stating that it's not ok to swap back and forth from Rifle to pistol in the letter on the link I provided? The letter on that link is dated far after the TC supreme court case. Can anyone possibly point out the exact wording from the case that actually says its now ok to make a TC rifle into a pistol? If this is true, it can be argued that we have equal protection under the constitution to do the same to non-TC rifles.

I contacted TC arms about what they recommend as far as interchangability between original pistols and rifles ,and vice versa. They basically said swap back and forth all you want it's legal for either pistols or rifles to go in either direction. First the email: "Gail Lynch" <GLynch@tcarms.com> Send me you mailing address and I will send you some paperwork on this matter. It is not illegal to go back and forth Gail Thompson/Center Arms Then I called and spoke to Customer Service and was told it's ok to make one of their rifles into a pistol. She said she

You are confusing the AR15 "drop in go-fast parts" with AK military surplus FCG parts. You can have all the US legal AKs you want and all the 'full auto AK FCG parts sets" you want under your roof. Until you perform certain mechanical operations to a major component of your AKs, they won't work at all in "go-fast" mode (this is why you see them for sale everywhere - they don't work until you punch your own ticket to Club Fed). If you want to wrap the tinfoil tighter, having a hacksaw and a long gun under your roof is 'constructive intent' to create an unregistered SBS/SBR. I

+1 If they actually start cracking down on this stuff, Bubba is going to have several new girlfriends.

5 pc. Full Auto Fire Control Parts Set IIRC there can also be trouble if someone owns the set above and any ak weapon that can use them under the same roof based on constructive intent. Maybe I am wrong, but aren't these completely legal to sell to anyone and the end user is liable for what may happen. Maybe this isn't relevant , but there is a guy that is in prison from a recent ATF case against him involving possession of an airgun noise suppressor. It was clearly made to work only with airguns, but they insisted it still constituted a firearms noise suppressor. Anyway, th

The TC case was about whether a box of parts can be sold that could potentially be configured as a short barrel rifle. TC won the case that they can sell the same parts in a box and that does not constitute constructive intent as it might if you have a full auto drop in sear and a gun that can utilize that sear. There is no ambiguity in that case. The Supreme Court decided that since a legal firearm configuration could be achieved with a box of parts from TC the box of parts would not automatically constitute constructive intent as the ATF suggested. The end user can still get in tr

A pistol can only be configured from a receiver that has never had a stock on it. They consider configuring the same as assembly. Read the extra letter below. When a stock is placed on a pistol, it becomes a rifle. Reversing this cannot be done without a tax stamp. That's their rules. Anyway you cut it, you can't swap back and forth.

That would be correct according to how the feds see things. That would be correct as to the last interpretation of the revenuers. Before about 6 months ago, it was okay with them to go from handgun to rifle back to handgun. The law hasn't changed, just the revenuers interpretation of it. Y'all keep this in mind. This 2004 letter posted on gunco.net declares a pistol can be made from a receiver that has never been stocked. According to them, if it has ever had a buttstock on it can not be made into a pistol without a tax stamp. I'm still wondering if the mech tech comp

They do not count for 922 compliance parts, and using them in a stock saiga is a violation of 922r. 14 total import parts and not importable with the 8 rounder. 13 parts if without the muzzle attachment/thread protector.

Is this why the MD arms drums are limited to 2 3/4 inch loads?

Has anyone ever known a 5 round mag to break like this?

What a surprise! Yeah I guess things do change after 3 years.

I like the saiga gas block better than the standard akm gas blocks. Can a saiga gas block work on an akm barrel without modification? Will it work with a standard akm length gas piston? Anyone know who might sell just the Saiga gas block online?

This would be available also http://www.mechtechsys.com/ but the manufacturer will not get in trouble. According to the feds, its legally irreversible.

Tony R. and Bob Ash are in a business that requires careful detail to laws such as these. Hopefully, they chime in and comment on retro-configuring a pistol to rifle then back to pistol.

That would be correct according to how the feds see things.

Thats fine if you want to believe that a 4473 establishes whether a gun is legally a rifle or pistol, but the ATF letter posted on this link at a credible gunsmith's website says on page 2 http://www.bellmtcs.com/store/index.php?cid=239 that listing it on a 4473 when sold is not itself a legal classification. If Nodak lists them as just receivers, then once they are built into pistols they are legally pistols, and likewise as rifles.