Permanently attached brake; Loctite OK?

[shades_of_grey 1,092]

Without me calling around or sending a ton of emails, has anyone posting here had this done? How much did it cost you? I'm interested in having my barrel chopped and my Krebs muzzled device permafixed to be just over 18".

 

Absofuckinlutely. My '08 S-12 was refined by Mike Rogers of Lone Star Arms, who's merely pointed out the damned laws throughout this thread, however fucked they may be.

 

Here's mine, (old school LSA ):

 

 

 

One of the first :

 

 

 

I love her just as much today as the first time I shot her... perfect function, low recoil, (that's a Tromix Monster Brake silver soldered on threads for an overall length of ~18.2"), and so easy to get, (and keep), on target...

Edited April 7, 2012 by post-apocalyptic

[shades_of_grey 1,092]

Without me calling around or sending a ton of emails, has anyone posting here had this done? How much did it cost you? I'm interested in having my barrel chopped and my Krebs muzzled device permafixed to be just over 18".

 

like mine?

 

Meh. S'ok. Top-notch work, obviously, but your choices of parts/accessories are.. sub-optimal..

 

Here's mine:

 

 

[timy 1,185]

Since we're on the subject, I was wondering if I can circumvent the law by cutting a slot down my barrel (to less than 18") cutting off half the barrel, cut the brake in half, solder it on the short side, then cut off the other half of the barrel and repeat the process? At that point all you need to do is weld the brake back together and you are golden since the gun was never less than the legal limit.

 

Other than being a major hassle and ending up with a crappy looking brake (and shotgun) would this work?

 

BTW, don't bother to tell me "no" because I'm pretty sure I know more than you do in the first place and am only looking for agreement on my idea.

[RED333 1,025]

I will agree with you Tim, to save the heated argument for someone else.

[XD45 7,124]

Since we're on the subject, I was wondering if I can circumvent the law by cutting a slot down my barrel (to less than 18") cutting off half the barrel, cut the brake in half, solder it on the short side, then cut off the other half of the barrel and repeat the process? At that point all you need to do is weld the brake back together and you are golden since the gun was never less than the legal limit.

 

Other than being a major hassle and ending up with a crappy looking brake (and shotgun) would this work?

 

BTW, don't bother to tell me "no" because I'm pretty sure I know more than you do in the first place and am only looking for agreement on my idea.

 

Rube Goldberg would be proud.

 

Logic says that you never had a barrel less than 18" so it would be legal. But logic doesn't drive the batfuckers, so I'd get a ruling ahead of time.

 

A few years back when the bullshit aw ban was in place I came up with a modification for a folding stock where it was pinned open but the pin was removable. The hinge pin had been removed so pulling the lock pin allowed the stock to come off. Then you could re-attach it in the closed position. So the stock definitely didn't "fold". The law said nothing about removable stocks. In fact all stocks are removable, with more or less effort.

 

The entire process of switching the stock took 3 or 4 seconds so it was a practical solution to the problem.

 

But I didn't trust the batfuckers to see the logic of it so I sent a letter asking for a ruling. After 6 months with no reply I sent a second letter. Still no reply.

 

Eventually the ban sunsetted so it wasn't important. I still have the prototype.

Edited April 7, 2012 by XD45

[timy 1,185]

I will agree with you Tim, to save the heated argument for someone else.

 

I appreciate that immensely! You have no idea how often I'm called an idiot just because I tend to think somewhat "differently". Since I can tell you're an expert because you agreed with me, here's another query. Would a rifle illegally converted to full auto still be illegal if you only loaded one bullet in the magazine at a time, or should you weld a plate over the mag opening and single load from the top just to be on the safe side?

 

I'm thinking it would be legal either way because my question is sorta like the old "If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a noise?" argument.

[poolingmyignorance 2,191]

So mere possesion of a sub 18" shot gun barrel is the crime. If you ordered a barrel cut it and had no receiver present, to attact it to, it would still be a crime, correct?

[timy 1,185]

Since we're on the subject, I was wondering if I can circumvent the law by cutting a slot down my barrel (to less than 18") cutting off half the barrel, cut the brake in half, solder it on the short side, then cut off the other half of the barrel and repeat the process? At that point all you need to do is weld the brake back together and you are golden since the gun was never less than the legal limit.

 

Other than being a major hassle and ending up with a crappy looking brake (and shotgun) would this work?

 

BTW, don't bother to tell me "no" because I'm pretty sure I know more than you do in the first place and am only looking for agreement on my idea.

 

Rube Goldberg would be proud.

 

Logic says that you never had a barrel less than 18" so it would be legal. But logic doesn't drive the batfuckers, so I'd get a ruling ahead of time.

 

A few years back when the bullshit aw ban was in place I came up with a modification for a folding stock where it was pinned open but the pin was removable. The hinge pin had been removed so pulling the lock pin allowed the stock to come off. Then you could re-attach it in the closed position. So the stock definitely didn't "fold". The law said nothing about removable stocks. In fact all stocks are removable, with more or less effort.

 

The entire process of switching the stock took 3 or 4 seconds so it was a practical solution to the problem.

 

But I didn't trust the batfuckers to see the logic of it so I sent a letter asking for a ruling. After 6 months with no reply I sent a second letter. Still no reply.

 

Eventually the ban sunsetted so it wasn't important. I still have the prototype.

 

As I'm sure you know, I was just poking a little fun at people who won't take "no" for an answer but your solution to the folder question sounds elegantly simple. The BATF probably didn't get back to you because they're still debating the legality of it. Maybe I should send them an inquiry about attaching a brake like I mentioned, just to give them something to do other than bother people.

[Lone Star Arms 2,047]

So mere possesion of a sub 18" shot gun barrel is the crime. If you ordered a barrel cut it and had no receiver present, to attact it to, it would still be a crime, correct?

 

That's actually an interesting question, and one the Investigator covered. It doesn't matter if the receiver is present or not (you pawned it, left it at dad's house, gave it to a friend to hold for you, buried it with fluffy in your back yard). He said it goes to intent. The receiver does not have to be present.

 

If you find you are splitting hairs to this extent to justify something you are contemplating - it's probably time to set that thought aside, and leave it where it lays.

[obiwanbonjovi 337]

[psl sniper 963]

Without me calling around or sending a ton of emails, has anyone posting here had this done? How much did it cost you? I'm interested in having my barrel chopped and my Krebs muzzled device permafixed to be just over 18".

 

like mine?

 

Meh. S'ok. Top-notch work, obviously, but your choices of parts/accessories are.. sub-optimal..

 

Here's mine:

 

 

 

really? i dunno. mike picked the parts. i didnt get to see the final product until after the fact. but

 

the adjustable magpul stock is perfect for myself and anyone else who wants to shoot it. (like the wifey) .

having tried out the hk sights and the krebs sights, i can honestly say i prefer the krebs , (way easy to get a fast sight picture)

 

other than that whats to compare?

 

p.s. im fully aware that your busting my chops. welcome back man!

[Lone Star Arms 2,047]

 

Yep. That image has been posted on several threads, and most likely on several forums. So far no one has been able post a complete verifiable document. Usually this shows up on one of these threads to promote the pressumption that an individual can do this, and that they are somehow absolved of any legal, or criminal liability because someone came along and posted this document.

 

You can find it here too: http://forum.saiga-1...__fromsearch__1 , and probably a dozen or so other places around the internet as well. Once again, the subject has been discussed ad-nauseum, the questions asked and answered, and in the case of the foregoing linked thread - it was locked down by the NFA moderator.

 

I think there's a fairly good chance that this thread will meet the same conclusion if the discussion continues to meander and dengenerate into endless "what if" scenarios.

[Mullet Man 2,114]

 

Are you the author of the questions and recipient of that written response, Mr. Bonesteel?

[Fallschirmjager667 729]

So mere possesion of a sub 18" shot gun barrel is the crime. If you ordered a barrel cut it and had no receiver present, to attact it to, it would still be a crime, correct?

 

that's all hearsay, if posession of a sub 18" barrel not attached to a receiver, even if you have the receiver is a crime then any sub 18" pipes you have that might be able to fit a 12ga shell in them are also unregistered sbs. but, you never know with the ATF so until i see a letter none of it means anything to me

[XD45 7,124]

 

Well nobody ever said the batfuckers are consistent. That's the fun part of complying with gun laws. You're always trying to hit a moving target.

[poolingmyignorance 2,191]

 

Yep. That image has been posted on several threads, and most likely on several forums. So far no one has been able post a complete verifiable document. Usually this shows up on one of these threads to promote the pressumption that an individual can do this, and that they are somehow absolved of any legal, or criminal liability because someone came along and posted this document.

 

You can find it here too: http://forum.saiga-1...__fromsearch__1 , and probably a dozen or so other places around the internet as well. Once again, the subject has been discussed ad-nauseum, the questions asked and answered, and in the case of the foregoing linked thread - it was locked down by the NFA moderator.

 

I think there's a fairly good chance that this thread will meet the same conclusion if the discussion continues to meander and dengenerate into endless "what if" scenarios.

And so begins THE FLAME WAR ROYALE, IN THIS VENDOR VS VENDOR , NO POST BARRED TEXT TO THE DEATH MATCH!!!

seriously though...I'd like to know, whats the definition of "expedient" per ATF response...1 hour, 30 min? 0.001 second?

 

So mere possesion of a sub 18" shot gun barrel is the crime. If you ordered a barrel cut it and had no receiver present, to attact it to, it would still be a crime, correct?

 

that's all hearsay, if posession of a sub 18" barrel not attached to a receiver, even if you have the receiver is a crime then any sub 18" pipes you have that might be able to fit a 12ga shell in them are also unregistered sbs. but, you never know with the ATF so until i see a letter none of it means anything to me.

Guess I can't be using anymore 3/4" hydraulic tubing on my skid packages anymore. I've bins FULL of SBS's out in the scrape heap, apparently, nice stainless ones at that.

[Lone Star Arms 2,047]

 

Yep. That image has been posted on several threads, and most likely on several forums. So far no one has been able post a complete verifiable document. Usually this shows up on one of these threads to promote the pressumption that an individual can do this, and that they are somehow absolved of any legal, or criminal liability because someone came along and posted this document.

 

You can find it here too: http://forum.saiga-1...__fromsearch__1 , and probably a dozen or so other places around the internet as well. Once again, the subject has been discussed ad-nauseum, the questions asked and answered, and in the case of the foregoing linked thread - it was locked down by the NFA moderator.

 

I think there's a fairly good chance that this thread will meet the same conclusion if the discussion continues to meander and dengenerate into endless "what if" scenarios.

And so begins THE FLAME WAR ROYALE, IN THIS VENDOR VS VENDOR , NO POST BARRED TEXT TO THE DEATH MATCH!!!

seriously though...I'd like to know, whats the definition of "expedient" per ATF response...1 hour, 30 min? 0.001 second?

 

So mere possesion of a sub 18" shot gun barrel is the crime. If you ordered a barrel cut it and had no receiver present, to attact it to, it would still be a crime, correct?

 

that's all hearsay, if posession of a sub 18" barrel not attached to a receiver, even if you have the receiver is a crime then any sub 18" pipes you have that might be able to fit a 12ga shell in them are also unregistered sbs. but, you never know with the ATF so until i see a letter none of it means anything to me.

Guess I can't be using anymore 3/4" hydraulic tubing on my skid packages anymore. I've bins FULL of SBS's out in the scrape heap, apparently, nice stainless ones at that.

 

LOL! Sorry to dissapoint.... But I'm not playing.

 

I do think it's unlikely that an agent is going to show up at your house with a pipe gauge to check your plumbing. But hey, if he shows up and you've got a 12" length of stainless pipe with a 12 gauge bore set up on a lathe next to your receiver, you're probably gonna have some 'splainin to do.

[RED333 1,025]

Damn that was close, I was thinking I would have to get rid of all the gas pipe I had laying around.

[obiwanbonjovi 337]

 

Are you the author of the questions and recipient of that written response, Mr. Bonesteel?

 

Yes I am in Fact the mr. Bonesteel that the letter was addressed to

[Reverendfranz 160]

With all due respect to Mike, i dont think he explained the law at all, just the questionable conversation he had with an eager to arrest ATF investigator. I dont see any reason any of the people asking this question over and over haven't already written to tech and asked this very question, getting the final (for now) word from the horses mouth, as Bonesteel did. This speculation seems pointless. Much of the logic applied in the inability to legally shorten a barrel would fundamentally outlaw home gunsmithing of all sorts, and regardless of what was said, I would think, regardless of what some (censored) agent said, would be an impossible standard to apply across the board, prosecutorally. Short shotgun and rifle barrels would be sold illegally all over the US, AMD kits would be illegal, changing the buttstock on your AK would be illegal, as would swapping the barrel on your 10-22. None of which goes to intent in the slightest, and none of which is the intent of the law. If this is really how ATF as a whole sees things, and i (hopefully) doubt it is, they should be legally challenged, and quickly, as every garage monkey-smith in the US is probably in grave danger.

Edited April 7, 2012 by Guest

[Lone Star Arms 2,047]

I completely agree with Franz's suggestion that anyone considering doing this themselves would be extremely well served to obtain their own clarification letter directly from ATF.

 

With regard to the letter posted - I have no doubt that the information presented is consistent with ATF guidelines for SOT licensed gunsmiths. I believe it would be a grave mistake to proceed on the assumption that the information contained in the document was directed to, or is in any way currently applicable to an unlicensed person.

Edited April 7, 2012 by Lone Star Arms

[The_Caged_Bird 474]

 

Are you the author of the questions and recipient of that written response, Mr. Bonesteel?

 

Yes I am in Fact the mr. Bonesteel that the letter was addressed to

 

Dude, your name is Bonesteel and you chose not to have THAT as a screen name? That's just a bad-ass name bro! If that were my name I'd name my first son Chuck Norris Bonesteel...

 

Well, shit, it's settled then, I'm cutting half my barrel lengthwise, down to 13"...

Edited April 7, 2012 by Caged

[obiwanbonjovi 337]

Mr. Bonesteel = me = unlicensed person.

 

 

I completely agree with Franz's suggestion that anyone considering doing this themselves would be extremely well served to obtain their own clarification letter directly from ATF.

 

With regard to the letter posted - I have no doubt that the information presented is consistent with ATF guidelines for SOT licensed gunsmiths. I believe it would be a grave mistake for anyone to proceed on the assumption that the information contained in the document was directed to, or is in any way currently applicable to an unlicensed person.

[Lone Star Arms 2,047]

Thank you for clarifying that . Would you be kind enough to post the complete letter?

[obiwanbonjovi 337]

sure, it'll take me a week or so to find time to dig it out, its somewhere in the file.

 

Thank you for clarifying that . Would you be kind enough to post the complete letter?

[Zombiehunter762 376]

NO says the BATF. Permanently attached means pinned and welded.

Unless you want the door kickers at your house.

Just sayin'.

[XD45 7,124]

NO says the BATF. Permanently attached means pinned and welded.

Unless you want the door kickers at your house.

Just sayin'.

 

I believe that ship has already sailed.

[nhresident 19]

Although I said I was done with this thread, it appears anew with non-confrontational discussion. For that reason, I'm breaking my rule.

 

http://www.atf.gov/p...8-chapter-2.pdf

 

Seems to corroborate the letter's contents, as well as validate that silver solder choice of attachment. However, I am going to agree with Mike @ Lone Star and say that you would be smart to get your own letter. The letter is now well outside of the reasonable period you could rely on it (maybe 12 months at best).

 

And in case future readers find that link un-workable:

 

The ATF procedure for measuring barrel length is to measure from the closed bolt (or breech-face) to

the furthermost end of the barrel or permanently attached muzzle device. Permanent methods of

attachment include full-fusion gas or electric steel-seam welding, high-temperature (1100°F) silver

soldering, or blind pinning with the pin head welded over. Barrels are measured by inserting a dowel rod

into the barrel until the rod stops against the bolt or breech-face. The rod is then marked at the

furthermost end of the barrel or permanently attached muzzle device, withdrawn from the barrel, and

measured

(Emphasis provided) Edited April 7, 2012 by nhresident

[Zombiehunter762 376]

NO says the BATF. Permanently attached means pinned and welded.

Unless you want the door kickers at your house.

Just sayin'.

 

I believe that ship has already sailed.

 

I'm sure it sailed along time ago. Not being a smart ass but permanent means permanent .

 

 

 

NO says the BATF. Permanently attached means pinned and welded.

Unless you want the door kickers at your house.

Just sayin'.

 

I believe that ship has already sailed.

[Mullet Man 2,114]

 

Are you the author of the questions and recipient of that written response, Mr. Bonesteel?

 

Yes I am in Fact the mr. Bonesteel that the letter was addressed to

 

I had a feeling you were, seeing as you offer some products under the Bonesteel moniiker.

 

I like the idea of this positive discussion and hate to see it go to waste. I too agree with Mike that in DIY work, CYA would be getting your own letter of legality. I think however if one were to write the ATF, a more specific set of questions should be asked, to render a more specific response. The above letter is a good start but it could definitely be more elaborate and much more specific in nature.

Something with specific info regarding a "non licensee" doing the work and how the work needs to be performed (barrel removal or not), Also who or how they define "expeditiously" in terms of an actual time frame etc. I'm sure theres a few other questions that can be answered with a decent, thought out inquiry.