Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Posted: 10/15/2008 3:57:29 PM EDT
A relative of mine showed me a Sportsman's Guide catalog with an "American made" conversion kit to convert a Ruger 10/22 rifle to a Charger pistol.

Last I knew, converting a rifle to a pistol was still a Federal CRIME.
Question is, did the Guide fail to include the info about conversions and permits, or ?????

The kit doesn't appear to be on their web site.
I told him NOT to buy one of these or convert his rifle.

Link Posted: 10/15/2008 4:15:10 PM EDT
This came up a couple weeks ago and they changed their site (which listed it at the time) to say "must follow all laws" or something.
Link Posted: 10/15/2008 4:31:34 PM EDT
Yes, once a rifle always a rifle.  I don't believe that SG sells those kits anymore.
Link Posted: 10/15/2008 5:07:29 PM EDT
Wouldn't it then be an SBR, and legal with the proper paperwork?
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 5:02:10 AM EDT
No.  SBR is for "short BARRELLED rifle" not "sans-buttstock rifle".  If the weapon starts life as a pistol, one can add a buttstock and "make" an SBR out of it or add a foregrip and make an AOW.  But if it starts its life as a rifle, it must remain a rifle.  One can cut the barrell down and make an SBR, but one cannot then remove the buttstock and make it into a pistol.
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 6:45:09 AM EDT

Originally Posted By darthvictor:
No.  SBR is for "short BARRELLED rifle" not "sans-buttstock rifle".  If the weapon starts life as a pistol, one can add a buttstock and "make" an SBR out of it or add a foregrip and make an AOW.  But if it starts its life as a rifle, it must remain a rifle.  One can cut the barrell down and make an SBR, but one cannot then remove the buttstock and make it into a pistol.


But how do they define that?  If its an SBR with a folding stock, whats the difference?  
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 10:42:55 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Sixpack595:

Originally Posted By darthvictor:
No.  SBR is for "short BARRELLED rifle" not "sans-buttstock rifle".  If the weapon starts life as a pistol, one can add a buttstock and "make" an SBR out of it or add a foregrip and make an AOW.  But if it starts its life as a rifle, it must remain a rifle.  One can cut the barrell down and make an SBR, but one cannot then remove the buttstock and make it into a pistol.


But how do they define that?  If its an SBR with a folding stock, whats the difference?  


You answered your own question in your question.  You said side folding stock .... that means it still has a stock on it .... its just folded to the side.

Link Posted: 10/16/2008 11:50:47 AM EDT
And a take down?  

I guess what I'm getting at is what is the legal definition of an SBR?


(8) The term ''short-barreled rifle'' means a rifle having one or more barrels less than sixteen inches in length and any weapon made from a rifle (whether by alteration, modification, or otherwise) if such weapon, as modified, has an overall length of less than twenty-six inches.


You're starting with a rifle, your reducing Bbl length, and overall length.  You can remove a stock from any rifle as long as it remains over 26", and the SBR allows for less.

What is the legal reasoning for it not being allowed?
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 4:24:26 PM EDT
Just NFA BS
Link Posted: 10/17/2008 5:00:43 AM EDT
I doesn't have to make sense, it's a law.  Sorry, I didn't write it nor did I vote for it.
Link Posted: 10/17/2008 3:42:29 PM EDT
But what law restricts it?

I get that its just some BS regulation, but its got to be written down somewhere...

I'm just trying to find that rule.
Link Posted: 10/18/2008 12:44:35 PM EDT
Understand that the NFA was written in the '30s when FDR and his social engineers were extremely active.  They even wanted to remove our Bill of Rights, and replace it with a new  one which was very communistic, right to employment, etc...

As such when the NFA was being developed, it was extremely restrictive.  It even included handguns, but they were removed as part of a deal with the Texas delegation (one thing Texans can REALLY be proud of).  Also, there were very few semi autos as we know them now.  You can be DAMN SURE that if weapons like our semis were available then, they'd be NFA too...

From a gun prohibitionist point of view, consider that handguns were originally written into the NFA when wondering about the measurement logic of SBRs, SBSs or AOWs.   They make no sense when hanguns are legal, but that wasn't what they originally wanted.
Link Posted: 10/18/2008 2:31:26 PM EDT
An SBR results when a legal rifle is altered to have a barrel less than 16" OR an overall length of less than 26".

The "Charger Kit", assembled onto a rifle receiver would be an SBR, and would be perfectly legal as long as you get a signed, stamped Form 1  BEFORE GETTING THE BARREL OR STOCK.

If you own a Charger receiver ( NOT a Ruger 10/22 Carbine/rifle receiver) or a clone sold as a pistol receiver and sold as such on the( crap, what's the number of what used to be the "yellow form"?), then you're OK.

But if you have only a 10/22, AND the short barrel or pistol stock, you can be considered to have "constructive intent" and are in legal jeopardy whether you have assembled the parts onto the receiver or not.

Now why any body would buy a $150 kit and pay ATF $200  plus whatever the host receiver cost when you can buy a complete Charger for ,what? $350?, I don't know.
Link Posted: 10/18/2008 3:09:50 PM EDT
Why anyone would want to buy a Charger in the first place is beyond me!  

Joking aside, I would guess people might want to make Chargers with aftermarket rifle receivers.

Link Posted: 10/18/2008 9:04:38 PM EDT
Then you're back ton $200 plus 6-8 weeks to ATF.
Link Posted: 10/19/2008 12:23:12 PM EDT
I looked through all my recent SG catalogs and can't find any conversion kit.  If you do a search with the oreder number from the catalog you should be able to find it online.

It would be nice to know what  SG catalog you saw it in.
Top Top