Do you have to buy one already sbr'd from the factory or can I make one? Everyone I ask is kinda unsure on the subject. Cheers

Start reading

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_8_15/564148_Are_Form_1s_being_approved_for_WA__Yes__How_do_I_know__I_just_got_one_back_.html

In short, you can make or buy an SBR here. Making will be faster, but buying from the factory means not having to engrave it.

You can buy/assemble everything and either install a pistol brace if you have the extra cash, or have no stock it on until you get your tax stamp and have it engraved. That's what I'm doing.

Too much hearsay and rumor going around. I've asked a dozen different people and shops with none of the answers matching. Which, is alarming if people are out there spending money and potentially breaking the law.
The response is almost always the same: "do your own research/look it up on the internet" because it takes too long to explain. I have, multiple times and I still don't know what to make of it. Another response is "well, it could be subject to change so who knows." Yeah, I'd love to fork out a shitload of cash with a response like that.

I've love to ask legal advice (someone who understands and worked on the bill) but do not know who to call.

This is the whole point behind the bureaucracy of the NFA.  It's a hurdle designed to weed out those unwilling to run the gauntlet of crap for their toy.

I'm curious if anyone's taken their SBR to the range and been hassled or questioned about it yet?

I shot my form 4 SBR at the last LCR (no snow).  Nobody cared.

The NFA process isn't that bad once you figure it out.  Fill out the form, send in a check, and then forget about it.  4-12 months later, Christmas!

It may have morphed into that, but originally it was more of an anti-poor people strategy. I doubt the waiting time was very long in 1940...but who in the heck could afford to pay $200 extra on top of the price of the gun? Pretty much just rich people, hardly anyone else was gonna bother. According to the inflation calculator online, $200 in 1940 is equal to about $3381 today. So yeah, a bit of an obstacle to the working poor...or even the middle class. How many of us would SBR an AR if it cost $3400 to do it? Prolly not many...

Or log into eForms, upload your scanned trust, input your credit card, and wait 30 days...

The only confusion is surrounding the process of you submitting a NFA Form 1 and "creating" your own SBR.

What you can do right now and is not disputed one bit is go to your local Class III/NFA dealer.  Purchase a brand new "factory built SBR" from that dealer on a NFA Form 4, exact same process as buying a suppressor.  Wait 4-6 months on the Form 4 to come back and take the SBR home.

Or just submit form 1 and acquire your own sbr from acquired parts. To many people with reading comprehension disabilities pollute the forums with BS.

Then please educate us how doing a Form 1 to manufacture a SBR is clear based on the letter of the law.

No one, in any state, is authorized to manufacture an SBR via a Form 1. Let's start with comprehending that, then we can move on to the letter of the law. Some of us have no interest in buying pre-built SBRs. I've got 4 of them and made them all. I'm not paying someone else a crazy premium just to assemble something from parts. If there was machining or really complex metal working involved, OK...I could see it, otherwise I'd rather make the gun myself. As always, to each their own...some others would rather buy ALL their stuff premade. That's cool. Neither is manufacturing though...

Ok so you went on a nice rant about how you don't want to pay for someone to assemble your firearm. That's fine and dandy.  However you failed to address the letter of the law as stated you would.

No need for that until there's a realization that the original question is flawed. No one can manufacture an SBR via Form 1. I guess I presumed you'd restate the question... Because the law is 100% black and white on manufacturing... and it has nothing to do with form 1.

You guys just won't be happy until we "Sig Brace" ourselves right out of SBRs.

Actually with the proposed language changes to the SBR law there won't be any confusion.

So answer me this, if I disassemble my lower to paint it, do I have to have a SOT put it back together for me?

Negative.

Well I did efile my form 1 so we will see what happens. But still no clarity on the issue

Once you get your stamp you have 3 options in the face of uncertainty (if you have any):

1. submit / receive an approved 5320.20 to make your SBR in another state.

2. make it in WA

3. wait for either the current law to be amended or the AG to make some kind of proclamation about it and THEN make it in WA.

Personally, I used #1...but I live 10 minutes from Oregon and tend to be over-cautious. Many many many other people have used option 2 and simply aren't worried about it.

What is there to be worried about? Unless you literally put the parts together in front of a federal agent, nobody would have a leg to stand on against you, and you have a properly approved, stamped, and engraved SBR.

So when you fill out the 5320.20, do you put down that the reason for bringing the gun to OR is to "make" the SBR?

I interpret the 'acquire' part of the law to mean that 'making' an SBR is legal, because that's the "other" way that you acquire one relative to transferring, which is specifically mentioned in the law.  But there are some who don't believe that making is legal, because it isn't specifically listed in the "thing you can do" with an SBR that are legal. At any rate, under the "acquiring does not equal making" interpretation, if there is no 5320.20, then you either made the SBR in WA illegally (breaking state law) OR you made it in another state and illegally crossed state lines (breaking fed law). By going the 5320.20 route, you avoid being caught in that kind of legal crossfire. No fed agent has to be standing right there watching you do it...there's literally no legal way you COULD have done it. Again, I'm not saying that that is my interpretation...if you read through these threads you'll find many posts by me on this subject. The point is, the law is kinda murky and it's not outside the realm of possibility that the AG and a DA could prosecute someone for making an SBR if they interpret the law as above. They might lose in court, but I'd rather not be a test case. In fact, my career depends on it....so yeah, I'd rather FAX in a form, get it back, and then take a trip across the bridge so there's pretty much no way imaginable that I could find myself in legal hot water over this. Better safe than sorry when your job is on the line, no?

That's exactly what I did. I used the language from the NFA handbook and referenced the section # where it talks about the take-it-across-state-lines-to-make-it provision. I fully understand that the NFA handbook isn't law...but it is an established procedure none the less so I'm fine hanging my hat on it.

I said something along the lines of "Initial making, per section 6.4 of the NFA Handbook, and all other legal purposes"

I'm not a lawyer, it's just what seemed to make sense to me. They did get approved, and I did this for all four of my SBRs.

There's no way they're indicting on that, because there's no way they're getting a conviction on that. Prosecutors take cases they can win, and going after someone for having a signed, stamped, engraved SBR, i.e., complied with all Federal laws, is a loser.  There's no way it could ever even become an issue, because as soon as someone in authority sees you with an SBR, you show them your paperwork, and it's a moot point.

you are aware that something can be 100% legal at the federal level, and 100% illegal at the state level....right? If WA law says that making is illegal, it doesn't matter what fed law says. At all. Like MGs. Legal as hell at the fed level, completely illegal (unless grandfathered) at the WA state level. You telling me that if I am an oregonian and have a registered MG that I can move to WA and bring it with me? I got a stamp / signed form, right? Wrong.

No, Captain Strawman, I'm saying that an SBR registered in line with Federal Law, and as closely as possible with state law, isn't going to draw the attention of some omniscient, omnipresent state government agency. Who is going to know how it was built? Who is going to care, unless you do something blatantly illegal to draw attention to yourself? The only agencies with a vested interest in enforcing NFA is BATFE and the IRS, and if you're in line with them, what's the issue?  If you take it to an indoor range and can show them your stamp if they ask, what's the issue? Are you going to have someone take a video of you crossing into Oregon, holding up a newspaper with the date showing, and then assembling your upper and lower? How much is enough?

I try hard to be a law-abiding citizen, but at the point that you've obeyed as closely as possible the letter and spirit of both state and local law, in my non-lawyer opinion, anything more is just fruitless.

I'm pretty sure that "I was as close as possible to state law!" isn't an actual legal defense. Please keep in mind that I DO NOT INTERPRET THE LAW THAT WAY. All I am saying is that some people do, and it's possible that the state of WA could also. Maybe not likely, but possible. We live in a world in which they passed the mag capacity ban in NY with no exemption for LEOs and the state just decided to 'interpret and apply' it such that they were exempt. In 'that world' it's hardly outside the realm of possibility that WA state law could be interpreted in the most literal manner possible...and "make" isn't in section 2...and therefore making would be illegal. Again, I don't think that, I'm just saying that it's possible.

As far as the idea that 'no one will ever know', if you want to hang your hat on that feel free. It makes no difference to me. Since I don't have a crystal ball and have no idea who will/won't know things in the future, I'll continue to be cautious. I'm in a somewhat unique position with respect to my job. If I get charged with something like illegal weapons possession, my license gets suspended until it gets worked out. If I don't have a license, I can't work...and I will lose my job, regardless of the outcome of the legal case. So pardon me for being overly cautious and jumping through 1 extra hoop...it's only my entirely livelihood that's at stake, so clearly a quick drive across the river is too much effort to bother with.

If that information was posted earlier and I missed it, I apologize. I will never fault a person for being cautious to safeguard their livelihood. That being said.. this is a tempest in a teapot. I'm not really trying to convince anyone, I just think sometimes enough is enough.

What it really comes down to IMO is A) Did they get their $200 pound of flesh, and B) are you a fuckup that they can hang a gun beef on, to get a longer sentence for something else.

No problemo amigo. BTW, epic Sig...I love the last star fighter!

My problem with going to Oregon or Idaho is simple, unless like stated above how does anyone know where it was built? What is the exact difference between manufacture and making?

It's pretty easy for the feds to know where an nfa item was made. You either made it in the state you registered in, or you illegally crossed a state line with an SBR (unless you filed the paperwork to so do legally). So in a theoretical world in which the state of WA declared that making was illegal, the only people that would have legally made SBRs would be those with 5320.20s on record. Everyone else either made the thing in WA or illegally crossed the border.

As far as proof goes, you've got a paper trail and, hopefully, pics taken with geo-lication turned on...safe to say that's enough for reasonable doubt.

For anyone concerned about assembling their own via Form 1 but not liking the Form 4 wait...   My approved Form 4 came back yesterday. Filled it out October 6th, 2014. Four months from filling out the form to received by dealer.

Please share more details of the process you took.  Form 4 is not permission to create a SBR, instead it's transfer of an already built SBR from a dealer to a legal entity (i.e. trust).

so..... completely out of the blue but anyway......

If I remember correctly, when suppressors became legal in WA in order to get one you had to send/ have signed letter from CLEO with statement of why you want/need that suppressor. And some people had problems with their sheriffs signing those off.

Now is that the same case for SBR's?

if you want to obtain an NFA item as an individual, you need a signature from the sheriff, yes. You also need fingerprint cards and passport photos and you have to use paper forms. If you use a trust or LLC or whatever, then no, you don't need any of those....and if it's a form 1 you can submit via eForms, which is much faster. These rules apply to both cans and SBRs...

I was steering away from creating ones own SBR via Form 1, in particular using Efile, for the faster approval, toward purchasing a factory SBR via snail mail Form 4. Passing along that my approved Form 4 was back to my dealer 4 months from the date I signed it. October 6, 2014-February 6, 2015. Check cleared October 15.
So, if the wait is what is keeping some folks from buying a SBR, rather than creating it (good choice of wording), it ain't as bad as it was.

Got it. Thank you.

I know this doesn't address all of the possible questions, but ATF is very clear on what constitutes manufacturing and therefore requires a manufacturer's license versus what does not constitute manufacturing.  I haven't checked to see if the state relies on ATF's definitions or if WA publishes its separate definitions.


Take a look ate #7 in the Q&A posted on ATF's website as I think this is where ATF sees people applying to make an SBR via an F1 fall, and the reason why they are approving them.  Personal use versus for sale also seems to be a discriminator.  I wish it were more clear cut in the new WA law, but it is what we were given.
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/manufacturers.html


Q: May a person engage in gunsmithing under a dealer’s license (type 01), or do gunsmiths need to be licensed as "manufacturers” of firearms?


Generally, a person engaged in gunsmithing requires only a dealer’s license (type 01). There are circumstances in which a gunsmith might require a manufacturing license. Generally, a person should obtain a license as a manufacturer of firearms if the person is: 1. performing operations which create firearms or alter firearms (in the case of alterations, the work is not being performed at the request of customers, rather the person who is altering the firearms is purchasing them, making the changes, and then reselling them), 2. is performing the operations as a regular course of business or trade, and 3. is performing the operations for the purpose of sale or distribution of the firearms.


Below are examples of operations performed on firearms and guidance as to whether or not such operations would be considered manufacturing under the Gun Control Act (GCA). These examples do not address the question of whether the operations are considered manufacturing for purposes of determining excise tax. Any questions concerning the payment of excise tax should be directed to the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, U.S. Department of the Treasury.


1.A company produces a quantity of firearm frames or receivers for sale to customers who will assemble firearms.
The company is engaged in the business of manufacturing firearms and should be licensed as a manufacturer of firearms.




2.A company produces frames or receivers for another company that assembles and sells the firearms.
Both companies are engaged in the business of manufacturing firearms and each should be licensed as a manufacturer of firearms.




3.A company provides frames to a subcontractor company that performs machining operations on the frames and returns the frames to the original company which assembles and sells the completed firearms.
Both companies are engaged in the business of manufacturing firearms and should be licensed as manufacturers of firearms.




4.A company produces barrels for firearms and sells the barrels to another company that assembles and sells complete firearms.
Because barrels are not firearms, the company that manufactures the barrels is not a manufacturer of firearms. The company that assembles and sells the firearms should be licensed as a manufacturer of firearms.




5.A company receives firearm frames from individual customers, attaches stocks and barrels and returns the firearms to the customers for the customers' personal use.
The operations performed on the firearms were not for the purpose of sale or distribution. The company should be licensed as a dealer or gunsmith, not as a manufacturer of firearms.




6.A company acquires one receiver, assembles one firearm, and sells the firearm.
The company is not manufacturing firearms as a regular course of trade or business and is not engaged in the business of manufacturing firearms. This company does not need to be licensed as a manufacturer.



7. An individual acquires frames or receivers and assembles firearms for his personal use, not for sale or distribution.
The individual is not manufacturing firearms for sale or distribution and is not required to be a licensed manufacturer.

8.A gunsmith regularly buys military type firearms, Mausers etc., and â??sporterizesâ? them for resale.
The gunsmith is in the business of manufacturing firearms and should be licensed as a manufacturer.




9.A gunsmith buys semiautomatic pistols or revolvers and modifies the slides to accept new Style f sights. The sights are not usually sold with these firearms and do not attach to the existing mounting openings.
The gunsmith offers these firearms for sale. This would be considered the manufacturing of firearms and the gunsmith should be licensed as a manufacturer.




10.A gunsmith buys government model pistols and installs â??drop-inâ? precision trigger parts or other â??drop-in partsâ? for the purpose of resale.
This would be considered the manufacturing of firearms, as the gunsmith is purchasing the firearms, modifying the firearms and selling them. The gunsmith should be licensed as a manufacturer.




11.A gunsmith buys surplus military rifles, bends the bolts to accept a scope, and then drills the receivers for a scope base. The gunsmith offers these firearms for sale.
This would be considered the manufacturing of firearms and the gunsmith should be licensed as a manufacturer.




12.A gunsmith buys surplus military rifles or pistols and removes the stocks, adds new stocks or pistol grips, cleans the firearms, then sends the firearms to a separate contractor for bluing. These firearms are then sold to the public.
This would be considered manufacturing of firearms and the gunsmith should be licensed as a manufacturer.




13.A company purchases surplus firearms, cleans the firearms then offers them for sale to the public.
The company does not need to be licensed as a manufacturer.