Jump to content

Recommended Posts

A pistol lower with an attached stock is illegal...correct me if I'm wrong! Smells of a possible ATF scam? Check it for your self....people really need to read the laws before slapping parts together! :ded:

 

https://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=118574686

Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought 2 stripped pistol lowers yesterday and the LEO that I bought them from told me that as long as the upper had a 16" barrel, it would be legal, but put anything shorter on it while the stock was in place and I would be welcome to become his guess at the Cross Bar Motel. :):) and the link is dead.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Invalid link posted. Here is a good one: http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=118574686

 

As far as that receiver goes, so long as it's never been completely built, it can be built into anything.

 

"Pistol" markings don't mean sh** on a virgin AR15 receiver unless you are unfortunate and live in some commie locale.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As i understand it, if the receiver is FFL registered as a pistol (not just marked pistol) you can put a stock and 16+ inch barrel on it and be legal. Stock and shorter barrel and you have just made an un-authorized SBR and you are FUBAR if caught.

 

a pistol can always be made into a full length legal rifle and converted back, this is why there are carbine conversion kits for 1911, glock, Steyr .40 and others, they include the stock and a 16 inch barrel. Just install the barrel before the stock and you are legal. Other way around and you are screwed.

 

A good example, you can take a Ruger charger and put a standard 10/22 barrel 16+ inch and standard 10/22 stock on it and be legal.

 

Effectively you can make a "pistol" out of a rifle, but technically it will be an SBR because you can only do it legally with the SBR tax stamp.

 

 

know the rules....stay free....

Link to post
Share on other sites
As i understand it, if the receiver is FFL registered as a pistol (not just marked pistol) you can put a stock and 16+ inch barrel on it and be legal. Stock and shorter barrel and you have just made an un-authorized SBR and you are FUBAR if caught.

 

a pistol can always be made into a full length legal rifle and converted back, this is why there are carbine conversion kits for 1911, glock, Steyr .40 and others, they include the stock and a 16 inch barrel. Just install the barrel before the stock and you are legal. Other way around and you are screwed.

 

A good example, you can take a Ruger charger and put a standard 10/22 barrel 16+ inch and standard 10/22 stock on it and be legal.

 

Effectively you can make a "pistol" out of a rifle, but technically it will be an SBR because you can only do it legally with the SBR tax stamp.

 

 

know the rules....stay free....

The law says "virgin receiver" and has no language as to how it appears on the 4473. In the past, the FFL only had "Long gun" and "Hand gun" as choices, which according to the law, meant bupkus. A virgin receiver is a virgin receiver, no matter how it was marked on the older 4473.

 

Today's 4473s have 3 checkboxes "Long gun" "Hand gun" and "Receiver" to help folks be more clear when they buy a stripped receiver. A virgin receiver can be built as a long gun or hand gun under the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, the fact that it has had a stock attached makes no differance? Isn't that the rule when it comes to AOW's? NO STOCK EVER ATTACHED TO THE RECEIVER?

 

Maybe I'm trying to make that law fit this situation?? But isn't this the reason why no AOW S12's exist? He put a stock on the receiver, it's in the picture....so he can legally build up a 16" or longer barel rifle on the pistol receiver and then a 15.9" or less pistol by putting the smooth buffer tube on but not the other way around?

 

WOW, I should have known this one...learned something new today...thanks guys!!

 

Pistol ---> Rifle = Legal

Rifle ---> Pistol = FUBAR

 

AR's are such a lego-type weapon!! Pop On....Pop Off! Good Danielson, Mr Miyagi like!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
So, the fact that it has had a stock attached makes no differance? Isn't that the rule when it comes to AOW's? NO STOCK EVER ATTACHED TO THE RECEIVER?

 

Maybe I'm trying to make that law fit this situation?? But isn't this the reason why no AOW S12's exist? He put a stock on the receiver, it's in the picture....so he can legally build up a 16" or longer barel rifle on the pistol receiver and then a 15.9" or less pistol by putting the smooth buffer tube on but not the other way around?

 

WOW, I should have known this one...learned something new today...thanks guys!!

 

Pistol ---> Rifle = Legal

Rifle ---> Pistol = FUBAR

 

AR's are such a lego-type weapon!! Pop On....Pop Off! Good Danielson, Mr Miyagi like!!

Until the receiver is part of a functioning weapon, it's not been "built".

 

Once a complete upper is put on that receiver, it'll be considered "built".

 

Saiga-12s come to us completely built with a buttstock and ready to shoot. This is why you can't AOW them.

 

If Izhmash were allowed to send us bare receivers, or if they started shipping them here with only pistol grips (no buttstock from the factory) we would have Saiga AOWs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
As i understand it, if the receiver is FFL registered as a pistol (not just marked pistol) you can put a stock and 16+ inch barrel on it and be legal. Stock and shorter barrel and you have just made an un-authorized SBR and you are FUBAR if caught.

 

a pistol can always be made into a full length legal rifle and converted back, this is why there are carbine conversion kits for 1911, glock, Steyr .40 and others, they include the stock and a 16 inch barrel. Just install the barrel before the stock and you are legal. Other way around and you are screwed.

 

A good example, you can take a Ruger charger and put a standard 10/22 barrel 16+ inch and standard 10/22 stock on it and be legal.

 

Effectively you can make a "pistol" out of a rifle, but technically it will be an SBR because you can only do it legally with the SBR tax stamp.

 

 

know the rules....stay free....

The law says "virgin receiver" and has no language as to how it appears on the 4473. In the past, the FFL only had "Long gun" and "Hand gun" as choices, which according to the law, meant bupkus. A virgin receiver is a virgin receiver, no matter how it was marked on the older 4473.

 

Today's 4473s have 3 checkboxes "Long gun" "Hand gun" and "Receiver" to help folks be more clear when they buy a stripped receiver. A virgin receiver can be built as a long gun or hand gun under the law.

 

Correct, i was not aware of the various boxes to check, my feeling though is that if you are going to build a pistol, make sure that receiver is registered as a pistol. Give no one a chance to say you built an SBR without the stamp.

 

Great topic!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, it all goes back to the Thompson Center court case when the BATF took them to court over building the Contender carbine kits. If it starts as a pistol, you can put a 16"+ barrel on it with a buttstock and it is legal, you cannot however put a 14.5" barrel on the pistol lower with a buttstock attached, that would be an SBR. You can put a 16"+ barrel on a pistol lower and still have a pistol so long as there is no buttstock attached. I bought a papered pistol lower so that I could do whatever the hell I wanted to with it (so long as it's not SBR, can't have those in the Sheeples Republic Of Iowa).

 

Quite honestly this law is about as stupid as it gets, but until such time as it's changed, violation of it will get you a 10 year Federal sentence with an 85% mandatory term, not someplace I'd want to be. Jail is a decent place to work, but I don't want to live there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
a pistol can always be made into a full length legal rifle and converted back, this is why

 

Sorry Bro thats not true.

 

see file below

Where's the rest of the letter?

 

 

Once a buttstock is attached, it can't become a pistol unless a tax stamp

or proper licencing applies.

Maybe so.

 

 

Maybe next week, the revenuers'll send out another letter contradicting this one.

 

 

The ATF does not make law. They interpret it, and judging from their track record, they interpret it differently just about every time they're asked.

Link to post
Share on other sites
a pistol can always be made into a full length legal rifle and converted back, this is why

 

Sorry Bro thats not true.

 

see file below

Where's the rest of the letter?

 

 

Once a buttstock is attached, it can't become a pistol unless a tax stamp

or proper licencing applies.

Maybe so.

 

 

Maybe next week, the revenuers'll send out another letter contradicting this one.

 

 

The ATF does not make law. They interpret it, and judging from their track record, they interpret it differently just about every time they're asked.

Vultite had it right. To the ATF, the manufacturer serial number and long gun/ handgun

designation is what determines whether it is a long gun or hand gun. The FFL

background check(yellow form) does not make that determination. If the ATF calls a manufacturer to check the serial number and type of gun, that determines the

designation.

Edited by expeditionx
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is one of those subjects that has been beat to death over the last few years on arfcom.

 

As far as stripped AR15 recievers go, I've seen more than one letter from the Tech branch stating that a stripped reciever becomes what ever it is first built into regardless of what the reciever has on the side of it. Although this was a couple of years ago. If it's built into a pistol initially, then that is what it has become. And a pistol can be converted into a rifle by attaching a rifle length barrel and then a buttstock. It can be converted back to a pistol at any time.

 

If the reciever originally was assembled with a buttstock it then became a rifle reciever and would not be legal to then convert to a pistol configuration.

If I remember correctly, those letters were signed by Sterling Nixon.

 

Editted to say, I was slow typing that last post. I quit following the subject a couple years ago.

Edited by cscharlie
Link to post
Share on other sites
Vultite had it right. To the ATF, the manufacturer serial number and long gun/ handgun

designation is what determines whether it is a long gun or hand gun. The FFL

background check(yellow form) does not make that determination. Manufacturers

report the serial number and type of gun to the ATF. The ATF can check their database

to determine either way.

If that is true, then manufacturers who only make receivers are committing some crime by not marking them "pistol" or "rifle" if they're factory designated as one or the other.

 

If they're just making receivers, they have no idea what they're gonna end up as - so how do they know what to mark them?

Link to post
Share on other sites
This is one of those subjects that has been beat to death over the last few years on arfcom.

 

As far as stripped AR15 recievers go, I've seen more than one letter from the Tech branch stating that a stripped reciever becomes what ever it is first built into regardless of what the reciever has on the side of it. Although this was a couple of years ago. If it's built into a pistol initially, then that is what it has become. And a pistol can be converted into a rifle by attaching a rifle length barrel and then a buttstock. It can be converted back to a pistol at any time.

 

If the reciever originally was assembled with a buttstock it then became a rifle reciever and would not be legal to then convert to a pistol configuration.

If I remeber correctly, those letters were signed by Sterling Nixon, top dog of the tech branch.

 

PS I know who, and how this BS about those recievers being marked as pistol was started. It originally was the big idea of some arfcomers to order some recievers and have them custom engraved with "pistol" on the side to save being hassled by Barney Fife at the range. It was not because it was required by law. Then the company that did the work started to make them a regular offering. As a result, everyone started the rumor that the reciever has to be marked as "pistol"ect... Maybe the BATF decided it was a good idea too...

 

A commercial gun manufacturer when asked by the Feds they legally have to

report the serial number and whether the gun is a long gun/hand gun.

Depending on its designation they go by that. If you custom make an

Global trades used to ask if you want it reported as pistol or rifle.

I know this from personal experience. Once they report it, its a done deal.

If you make your own homemade gun, well then, the ATF falls back to the

buttstock insertion rule, same goes with an AOW. The TC case in the Supreme

Court only argued whether a kit was a constructive violation. As of now, pistol

to rifle is ok, but you can not just make it a pistol again. Mech Tech is selling

carbine kits without briefing customers on the whole legal thing. They will not

get in trouble, but you can if you convert back to a pistol.

Edited by expeditionx
Link to post
Share on other sites
Global trades used to ask if you want it reported as pistol or rifle.

I know this from personal experience. Once they report it, its a done deal.

Global Trades manufactured both rifles and receivers.

 

What does a shop like Nodak Spud do? They only make receivers.

 

What about all those people who've built AK pistols on Nodak receivers?

 

 

 

 

 

I'm starting to smell something here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I called Nodak to verify this and asked.

They list theirs as receivers. Nodak also

confirmed the rule about once a buttstock

is inserted into one of their receivers it can

never again become a pistol without proper

NFA means.

 

My whole point was a gunstore dealer does not

designate pistol vs rifle and once a rifle always

a rifle, at least according to the ATF clan.

Link to post
Share on other sites
What about all those people who've built AK pistols on Nodak receivers?

 

I'm starting to smell something here.

 

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
So even if a virgin reciever was papered and then home built originally into a pistol, if changed to a rifle it can not be switched back to pistol.

 

I stand corrected.

 

 

So even if a virgin reciever was papered and then home built originally into a pistol, if changed to a rifle it can not be switched back to pistol.

 

I stand corrected.

 

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally i think this BS of changing interpretations is crap.

 

i'm also impressed that the ATF can't even sort out the question and the right regs.

 

the letter about converting an UZI pistol to a rifle and back, the ATF immediately goes off about SBRs and tax stamps. Never mind that there was never any intent to make an SBR...

 

It is frustrating as hell for us to try to be in compliance with vague regulations, and get conflicting rulings which it seems to me the supreme court has already trumped in the TC case.

 

I think it would be very hard to argue that a real honest to god registered with the government pistol, the maker declared it a pistol before it walked out the door pistol, could not be reconfigured with an accessory stock and 16+ inch barrel and then converted back to its original configuration. You have never created a SBR, you have not turned a pistol into a rifle as a "manufacture" process, it is still registered as a pistol, it violates no laws in the configuration.

 

All the wording in these letters talks about turning a rifle in to a pistol...my argument is that in the eyes of the government you do not need to re-register the gun as a rifle when you install a conversion kit, thus the gun is still a pistol, thus take the accessory kit back off simply returns it to its original state, which is still a pistol. Once a pistol, always a pistol (unless you want a stock and short barrel, in which case you apply for SBR stamp and re-define the gun). To change its designation away from pistol i would argue requires NFA paperwork. they don't require such paperwork to install a carbine kit, thus it is and always will be a pistol even if a legal stock and 16+ inch barrel is installed.

 

I don't have any of these types of guns or kits, but i've always wanted to do an AR pistol and be able to put a stock and 16+ inch barrel on it if i wanted to. This really fucks with my plans if the ATF is changing their minds again.

 

Asinine!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Chatbox

    Load More
    You don't have permission to chat.
×
×
  • Create New...