Or does that action need to happen before completion?

I have an upper that I'm putting together for my wife, I was going to build it next weekend but I'll need to have a smith drill, pin, and weld the comp on the 14.5 inch barrel. Can I take the completed upper to him? Is that illegal? Although I don't have a BCG for it yet, not sure that matters.

Until it's put on a lower it is not a firearm.

You can take it to an smith no problem....putting it on a lower beforehand is no bueno.

Got it.

It's essentially a few pieces of steel until the lower meets the upper.

 

Yeah. Until the upper is pinned and welded, you technically have an SBR in your possession.

Do you have a SBR lower, a Pistol Lower, or stripped lower? If not it go get one and then assemble your upper I would not even have a short barrel in my possession until you had one of the lowers mentioned

Nonsense !!! You technically have a round steel tube, period.

If he is able to couple it on a complete lower that is in his possession he does.

Semantics, I know, but that's not how the ATF sees it.

As it sits right now, I have a complete lower (rifle, multi cal) and the parts to assemble an upper. The upper parts (upper reciver, 14.5 inch barrel, gas block, gas tube) are sitting in their packages and the rail will be here on Monday. I do not have an appropriate muzzle device as of yet.

My question was, if I assemble the upper when I have everything (and dont attach it to the lower), is that going to be ok till I get the muzzle device pinned into place?

To be on the safe side, should I just have a friend hold onto my lower till the muzzle device is pinned into place? That way it's not in my possession.

If said lower with stock is in his left hand and said barrel is in his right he may have a problem.

There is a world of difference between  a "SB" and a "SBR".

A steel tube shorter than 16" of itself does not constitute a felony. It's just a lowly part until installed into a complete package.
Who's to say it won't be mounted to a pistol lower or ever even installed onto a lower at all.

Has anyone ever been successfully prosecuted for constructive intent of an sbr?
Serious question.

You'll be fine. If it bothers you I would have the friend hold onto the upper since the lower has been transferred into your name at one time or another.
That round steel tube machine part was probably shipped directly to your house.

Waiting for the first response... constructive intent.

I've never heard of one, but since the term is a legit ATF thing I suppose they could if they were having a bad day.

My intent is to put it together, then run it up to American Spirit Arms and have them pin it and headspace it for me. Same day.

I'm also missing a BCG right now. I want the wife to pick out what she wants on the end, because her taste and mine are way different when it comes to muzzle devices.

Q: May a FFL or an individual legally possess the parts to manufacture an SBR or SBS as long as no firearms are actually assembled?

   A FFL (Type-7 or Type-10) who pays the Special Occupational Tax (SOT) may possess parts required to assemble NFA firearms. A non-licensee or FFL who has not paid the SOT is required to register any NFA firearm via an ATF Form 1 (5320.1) prior to acquisition of the parts required to assemble such firearm.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/national-firearms-act-short-barreled-rifles-shotguns.html#part-possession


Edit: If the ATF is looking at people close enough to prove "constructive intent" then you've already gotten on their radar somehow....

In Thompson/Center Arms Company v. U.S., 112 S.Ct. 2102, the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of the gun manufacturer, who had been ordered by the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives to pay a $200 tax on each ?Contender Carbine kit? it manufactured. The kit contained a 21 inch rifle barrel and a buttstock, and was made to be used in conjunction with the company?s ?Contender Pistol,? which contained a 10 inch barrel. The kit was intended to provide hunters with a versatile sporting firearm, which could be readily and easily converted from a pistol to a rifle and vise versa. The BATFE learned that Thompson/Center had distributed kits which contained both the pistol and the conversion parts and advised the company that the sale of both the Contender pistol and the carbine conversion kit could constitute the manufacture of a short barreled rifle. The BATFE pointed out that assembling the pistol?s receiver and 10 inch pistol barrel and the conversion kit?s buttstock would be a violation of the National Firearms Act. Thompson/Center stopped its production of the kit, paid a single $200 tax, and then filed a refund claim with the BATFE. Over 6 months elapsed without any action taken by the BATFE, and Thompson/Center invoked the Tucker Act, suing for a refund in the Claims Court. Thompson/Center Arms Co. argued that since its pistol and kit were not assembled into a short barreled rifle at the time of sale, the items had not been ?made? into a firearm as defined by the NFA, and thus the $200 tax did not apply. Thompson/Center pointed out that, at the suggestion of the BATFE, the kit had been distributed with warning labels advising consumers of the illegality of assembling the buttstock, receiver, and pistol barrel. The government argued that if a consumer only possessed 1 receiver but both the 10 inch and 21 inch barrels, the firearm was subject to the NFA. The BATFE stated that, in its opinion, two receivers needed to be possessed, one for the pistol and the other for the rifle. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court. The Court noted that the National firearms act defined both ?machine guns? and ?destructive devices? as either assembled weapons or unassembled parts, but failed to define ?short barreled rifles? in the same way. Thompson/Center argued that since the possession of unassembled parts was explicitly criminalized in the sections of the NFA concerning machineguns and destructive devices, but not in the section concerning short barreled rifles, Congress must have intended that the definition of a short barreled rifle not apply to the possession of unassembled parts. The Supreme Court conceded that the statute was ambiguous, and chose under the rule of lenity to decide the case in Thompson/Center?s favor as follows:
Accordingly, we conclude that the Contender pistol and carbine kit when packaged together by Thompson/Center have not been "made" into a short-barreled rifle for purposes of the NFA. [n. 10] The judgment of the Court of Appeals is therefore


If constructive intent was a valid offense we'd all be in trouble for just having a hacksaw in the vicinity of your work bench.

I guess the other thing I could do is put the gas block on, then have the muzzle device pinned on, then assemble the rifle. Intent averted.

There is no such thing as "constructive intent."  The legal issue is "constructive possession."  If you have the parts to assemble an unregistered SBR by simply slapping an upper on your Title I (rifle) lower, AND you don't have a Title II or pistol lower, you essentially have an unregistered SBR.  Intent is not part of the equation, it's having possession of the requisite parts.

To be safe, what I would do in your situation would be to put the barrel nut and delta ring assembly, and the gas block on the barrel and hand it to your chosen gunsmith to pin/weld your muzzle device on.  Once it's done, the permanent length of the barrel will be at least 16" and you will no longer have possession of the parts to make an unregistered SBR.

From my perspective, the Thompson-Center case doesn't apply, since it was dealing with more than just having ONE Title I (rifle) lower and a less-than-16" barrel.

You will need the barrel nut to before you get it pinned or welded.

Just went through this process myself.  Mine for my wife is Silver Soldered/welded on.

Obligatory pic of said 16" OAL carbine.

That's the exact rail im putting on as well. A 13.5 inch diamondhead VRS-T rail. Barrel nut as well, got it.

Edit: to say, thank you everyone for the input. I don't believe there is a better source for information on the web for this stuff then ARFCOM.

Be sure to post pics when done!

This is a great site!  BRD is tough though.  Lol

Will do. Is that an extended A2 muzzle device on your wife's AR?

BRD?

Yes, extended A2 from the ARFCom store.  Works great.

BRD - Black Rifle Disease.  ;)

So are you saying that if the OP had an additional barrel over 16" in his possession he would fall under the Thompson Ruling ?

Ah, black rifle disease. Yes, it's hard on the wallet.

Interesting question.

I'm going to avoid it, by just putting on the barrel nut and gas block and then having it pinned, then assembling it.

Assuming your gas block is a .75" ID, you could also use a Voodoo Manimal flash hider (pinned & welded of course) which has a .74" OD...allowing for complete assembly/disassembly of said rifle for reconfiguration at any time.

No, it's a DD lightweight barrel. Gas block is a .625

I'm hoping this rifle will weigh in at around 6.5 lbs or so, being as its for the wife.

No, but if he had a Title II (SBR/machinegun) lower or a pistol lower, it would.  At least by my understanding of the T/C ruling.

 

I just built a lw rifle with the dd .75 lw barrel and it weighs less than 5 lbs. With aimpoint, sling, weapon light and a full 20 rnd magazine it weighs around 7lbs 6oz. Used thd vdi manimal for reasons listed above.

I've gone over this with the ATF. Possession of an AR-15 rifle with a 16" barrel, and possession if a less than 16" barrel is not illegal. I quote the ATF "Until the short barrel is connected to a receiver it is just a piece of metal. Once the short barrel is connected to a receiver it is readily useable, and you could be in possession of a SBR".  This is federal law, state law may be different. -W

"Receiver" ? As in "Lower Receiver".

An upper receiver is also just a piece of metal.

Wrong partner. If you own an AR15 rifle lower, and you have a <16" barrel connected to an upper receiver without an SBR stamp and get caught with them both get ready to call your bail bondsman. -W out

 

No, "technically" he is right.   "Technically" the law does not spell out the need that you imply.

"Technically", as long as he is within the letter of the law, he is obeying the law.

The problem is that, while the law isn't hard to read, it is implemented by ATF rules and regulations, and various "opinions" and "notes."  Saying "I was technically within the law" doesn't work when the way the law and regulations are interpreted legally is entirely up to the ATF.

Being safe and NOT having a set of parts that could only be seen as an unregistered SBR is the only guarantee of being "within the law."

Sounds like the easiest way around this, is to put the barrel nut and gas block on the barrel. Then take the barrel to smith for pinning, at which point it will be a 16 inch barrel and then assemble upper receiver.

I didn't realize what how big this thread would get. This is an interesting question for new builders.

Wow, that is light. Maybe I'm being to generous with that figure then. Sounds like I'll come in way under that.

Intent (criminal intent) is an absolutely essential element to committing a crime.   People with mental health issues get by with committing crimes every day because they cannot form criminal intent.  It appears to me the builder in this scenario "intends" to follow the law and get the flash hider pinned and welded as defined by law.  The only issue is the transitional period between building and welding it permanently in place. I'm not an attorney but it appears to me as long as the builder does not join the upper and the lower together before the flash hider is welded, he has NOT formed criminal intent or committed a defined criminal act.  I am a retired "peace officer" and if I saw a person driving to the welding shop or even possessing an upper with an unwelded 14.5 inch upper I would give him the benefit of any doubts because I have to prove he intended to use or possess the upper in an illegal manner.    Even if both parts are located in the same place.  (home, car, gunshop)

Now if the upper and lower were joined when the stop was made, I would say I had probable cause to file the complaint and seize the rifle for the BATF and it would be up to the builder to prove his intentions were legal in court.  My conclusion is if the upper and lower are not joined and the builder has put in motion his desire to weld the parts together legally, there is no chargeable crime because I don't have the criminal intent in place.  Does the BATF need criminal intent?  To get a conviction I would say yes.  I agree that does not stop them from seizing the upper but I fail to see how it's a crime and will get a criminal conviction without proving specific criminal intent.   The builder may have to spend thousands of $$ to convince the court his intentions were honorable and the LEO or BATF officer was overzealous in their duties.  

Show me the criminal intent when a person asks an open internet forum about what he needs to do to stay legal.  I'd say his intentions are honorable and he wants to stay out of the radar of the BATF by doing the right and legal thing.   As long as the builder puts a plan in place and completes the plan in a timely manner before final assembly, show me the criminal intent to violate federal law.  I don't believe you can.

Just an observation from an LEO point of view.

kwg

I used magnesium receivers, the kmr and a ton of v7 parts, but yeah lw builds are awesome.  Right now that upper is attached to a much heavier sbr lower because it's not pin and welded yet.

If you're going to have a bunch of sub 16" barreled uppers laying around it's not a bad idea to have a pistol lower as well.

ATF Q&A

Q: May a FFL or an individual legally possess the parts to manufacture an SBR or SBS as long as no firearms are actually assembled?
A FFL (Type-7 or Type-10) who pays the Special Occupational Tax (SOT) may possess parts required to assemble NFA firearms. A non-licensee or FFL who has not paid the SOT is required to register any NFA firearm via an ATF Form 1 (5320.1) prior to acquisition of the parts required to assemble such firearm.

Ben, have you ever put an upper on your "rifle lower"?  If you hadn't it's not a rifle lower yet, and if you were to remove the stock it would be considered a pistol if a short upper was the first upper placed on it.

So according to this, a rifle stock would be illegal. So is a BCG, and  just abut every part on an AR.

If barrels shorter than 16" were a problem before they are even assembled into a firearm we'd all be in jail.


ETA: I tend to agree with kwg020 that even with the ATF some common sense is required in rule interpretation.

What part of a rifle stock makes a standard rifle a short barreled rifle?
What part of a bolt carrier group makes a standard rifle a short barreled rifle?
What other parts on an AR-15 rifle would make a standard rifle a short barreled rifle? (other than the barrel itself, which is the topic of the conversation)

The key line is: "prior to acquisition of the parts required to assemble such firearm" Because if the ATF takes all your shit and assembles it (without tools) they will tell you exactly what you have if they can make it with your parts.

Yes, barrels less than 16" in length can be and are a problem if you don't own a pistol lower or have an SBR stamp. That's why you have to do the PITA pin and weld job to begin with, That's why they are NFA items. -W

They all can.

Can a 10" barrel be turned into a SBR? Yes, just as easily as an 18" barrel with a hacksaw.

That 10" barrel can also be turned into a pistol.

I have never put an upper (complete or otherwise) on the complete lower that I have. It just sits in the safe, waiting.........

In CA, when you purchase or transfer a lower receiver, it is transferred as a long gun, or a pistol. Lower receivers transferred as long guns may not be made into pistols. Only receivers transferred as pistols (and usually marked as such) may be used as pistols. Your state law may differ. I do believe the federal form has a type of firearm designation on it, IE: rifle, pistol or receiver. -W

Well if it has never had a rifle upper attached, then all you have is a lower with a butt stock on it.  If it was mine I'd remove the stock and use it as a pistol lower first and then at a later date you can add the rifle upper.

Just take the stock  body off (if this is a new lower) and pin your assembled upper on it then take a pic. Now you have a pistol and can make it a rifle by putting the stock back on when it's pinned and you'll have a lower that can always be used as a pistol to avoid such nonsense in the future. Give the stock to a buddy for the time being if your extra worried about someone busting in and arresting you for owning a stock, if you already have another ar disregard that, as extra parts for existing guns are ok.