AR Sponsor
Posted: 1/24/2009 10:53:48 PM EDT
|
Ok I buy a lower from a person who says it has never been built into a rifle..he has box showing it came from manufacture as a stripped lower..he doesn't know how it was transferred to him on form 4473 but i would guess as a rifle since he did not ask otherwise. He goes to gunshow has a LPK kit installed along with buffer tube only, no stock.
I buy it, it has still never been built into a rifle, and I have my ffl transfer it over as a pistol on my form 4473...am I OK to build a pistol. I have read that as long as it comes from manufacture as a stripped lower it does not matter what the form 4473 says, Right or Wrong? I have read that it can have a carbine buffer tube installed as long as it never had stock on it, Right or Wrong? Previous owner says it never been built into rifle, so I think it should be good to build into rifle but want some opinions. What if my FFL will not transfer as a pistol? Has anyone ever ran into this? She does not deal with AR's very much and may not be up to date on all of this. If she refuses to do so can I still use it as a pistol? |
|
Quoted:
I buy it, it has still never been built into a rifle, and I have my ffl transfer it over as a pistol on my form 4473...am I OK to build a pistol. Yes, build away––- but technically it should be transferred as a Lower... not a pistol... I have read that as long as it comes from manufacture as a stripped lower it does not matter what the form 4473 says, Right or Wrong? The new 4473 has a place for "receiver only"... I have read that it can have a carbine buffer tube installed as long as it never had stock on it, Right or Wrong? Not that it has never had a stock on it... but that there can't be a stock "readily attachable" so either pin that tube, or buy a pistol buffer... What if my FFL will not transfer as a pistol? She should transfer it as "receiver only" If she refuses to do so can I still use it as a pistol? Technically, no. If it's on the forms as a rifle, it's a rifle... |
|
A couple follow up questions:
How am I ever supposed to know if down the line its been built into a rifle, and how would anybody ever be able to proof that? I read on other threads that as long as it came from the factory as a "stripped" lower that is fine, as that is what the ATF would go find out anyways. They would not even look at the 4473 form. Is this a correct way of thinking? I will have the box it came in stating it is a stripped lower, my dealer putting on the 4473 pistol/other...I would think that is fine???? And the carbine buffer tube, I just read a letter from te ATF stating they are legal to use on pistol builds. Thanks guys for your help. |
|
Quoted:
A couple follow up questions: How am I ever supposed to know if down the line its been built into a rifle, and how would anybody ever be able to proof that? I read on other threads that as long as it came from the factory as a "stripped" lower that is fine, as that is what the ATF would go find out anyways. They would not even look at the 4473 form. Well that's the $64K question. There really is NO way to for the ATF to prove you stocked or anyone else stocked your weapon at any point in its life. (Unless someone had pcs showing the serial number.) It's more or less an unenforcible ruling. However, on your side you must make the effort to show all due diligence to comply with it. What does this mean? Dunno...guess it means if you don't think you'll get caught then make damn sure a picture was never takenand never speak of it again. Please understand however, that in doing so, you are in possession of an unregistered SBR. Just telling you what the law says. 
True, the ATF will go to the manufacturer to seehow it started its life. However the notion that if you're under investigation by the ATF and they wouldn't check the FFL is dead WRONG. There is a reason that they make the FFLs keep these records. Bottom line, the current law is what it is, it may be unenforcable 99% of the time, but we are required to KNOW the background of our weapon. A mistake will not be overlooked. Personally, I would only build from receivers that are brand new, and I prefer pistol marked receivers. Is this a correct way of thinking? I will have the box it came in stating it is a stripped lower, my dealer putting on the 4473 pistol/other...I would think that is fine????
Since this is not a brand new lower I can't say for sure. But assuming that the FFL marks it as "Other" you should be fine in that reguard. The only problem I see is if they dig deep enough to find out where it was orginally shipped to, what would the original 4473 say? And the carbine buffer tube, I just read a letter from te ATF stating they are legal to use on pistol builds.
The newest letter says "you should (nice grey area terminology) modify the reciever extention so it cannot easily accept a stock."  Whatever that means. Again yes you can use them, but it's better to use a pistol tube, just less reason for them to hassle you.
Thanks guys for your help.
Bottom line, if the ATF is looking at you, chances are good you've already done something wrong. I've never heard of the ATF poping in at the range soley to "inspect guns." The most likely "headache"your likely to encounter is rookie LEOs or range officers who have never seen AR pistols before. I give the advise that I've given in the past (using pistol marked receivers and pistol buffer tubes) b/c it will make it that much easier to dispel any misunderstanings or myths about pistol builds. In any case, good luck with your build. |
|
Quoted:
I buy it, it has still never been built into a rifle, and I have my ffl transfer it over as a pistol on my form 4473...am I OK to build a pistol. Yes, build away––- but technically it should be transferred as a Lower... not a pistol... I have read that as long as it comes from manufacture as a stripped lower it does not matter what the form 4473 says, Right or Wrong? The new 4473 has a place for "receiver only"... I have read that it can have a carbine buffer tube installed as long as it never had stock on it, Right or Wrong? Not that it has never had a stock on it... but that there can't be a stock "readily attachable" so either pin that tube, or buy a pistol buffer... What if my FFL will not transfer as a pistol? She should transfer it as "receiver only" If she refuses to do so can I still use it as a pistol? Technically, no. If it's on the forms as a rifle, it's a rifle... Technically yes you can use a "rifle type" receiver to build a pistol so long as it was not first built into a complete rifle. That said, I still wouldn't do it that way but the rulings say you can. 
|
Well this might squash this argument or just add to it … I’m not sure 
We all know that the ATF states the following as shown on this page: With respect to buffer tubes, the use of either buffer tube you discribed is permissible. However, possessing a rifle buttstock that could readily be installed on your pistol could constitute possession of a short-barreled rifle.
OK ... so we need a little more clarification as to what that means so let's look at this ATF letter shown on this page. It states: Further, care must be taken in manufacturing to ensure that the completed pistol will not readily accept a AR-15/M16 shoulder stock. This will require modification of the receiver extension.
OK … that makes more sense, we have to modify the tube or we’re in deep $hit. So all we need to do is slap a foam cover over it and we’re good to go regardless which tube we use? Many here will say “doubtful”. I just want to say that regardless what you do to cover your ass you will be screwed if the ATF wants to crawl right up your ass. I’ll elaborate. Nothing illegal in this picture right? Everything look kosher? Couldn’t POSSIBLY get in any trouble here right? 
Well yes you could because you may be in possession of a stock or ANY weapon that has an AR-15/M16 stock. If you do then the all mighty ATF can say that you’re in possession of a SBR. What do you mean … I bought this pistol from one of the LARGEST AR manufacturers in the world … I couldn’t possibly get in trouble! 
Well any stock can easily be slid over top of many if not most pistol tubes: 
MANY manufacturers sell pistols and/or kits that come with a foam cover on the tube. Ahhhhhh! This MUST be what makes all the difference then. Surely all these multi-million dollar manufacturers have plenty of lawyers and know the laws better than everyone here. Surely they have submitted specifications and have received the ALL MIGHTY approval. Just food for thought … Spikes Tactical sells buffer tubes that look like this: _LRG.png)
|
| And that's exactally it Randy! We're at the whim of the ATF. What you'v just demonstrated is something I've feared since I first started thinking about pistols. "Just by having a stock body in you home, even with a receiver extension that wasn't designed to use one, could you be in violation?" To be honest, I DON'T want the ATF to clarify this...logic doesn't seem to come from their rulings. For abosolute (or as close as you can get in dealing with the ATF) use the Spikes with the "knob" on the back. |
|
Oh I undertand, but I have a few ARs in various stages of completion. By usings Spikes Pistol tubes which cannot accept standard stock bodies I feel I've CYA'd. If you think I'm going overboard that's fine.
To the poster that asked about numbers of uppers and lowers. You can have as many short uppers as you want provided you have at least one pistol or SBR lower. That said, don't have any "unassigned rifle lowers" in your home if you have and extra short uppers as this could get you slapped with a constructive intent charge. In other words... 3 rifle lowers, 3 rifle uppers, 1 pistol lower, 3 pistol/SBR uppers = OK 4 rifle lowers, 3 rifle uppers, 1 pistol lower, 3 pistol/SBR uppers = BAD Edit: I'm defining a rifle lower by the recent letter which says a lower the has or has ever at some point been stocked. |
| I would only buy a stripped lower directly from the maker to the FFL to me. Have the maker engrave Pistol on the lower or do it yourself in order to be extra careful. If there are questions @ the lower you now have, do not do it. The pistol AR is a range toy to begin with. |
|
I came here to ask a very similar question.
I bought 6 stripped Essential lowers and stuck em in the safe a year and a half ago. I know the complete history of the lowers, I made the order with Essential, I was there when my FFL opened the box, and I filled out the 4473. I KNOW these are virgin lowers. As a plus, Essential doesn't sell complete rifles, or at least the don't seem to offer them to the public. I called my FFL and asked him if he would have transferred them to me as a "reciever" or a "long gun".....he said reciever. He understood what I asked and is an AR guy, he said I could build pistols if I wanted to. I didn't ask him, but do you think I could get a copy of the 4473 from him? darktide says.....The new 4473 has a place for "receiver only"... when did we start using the new form? Were we using the old form a 18 months ago? I haven't found a date yet. If these thing were transfereed to you as "recievers only" would you build one into a pistol? |
|
Quoted:
I came here to ask a very similar question. I bought 6 stripped Essential lowers and stuck em in the safe a year and a half ago. I know the complete history of the lowers, I made the order with Essential, I was there when my FFL opened the box, and I filled out the 4473. I KNOW these are virgin lowers. As a plus, Essential doesn't sell complete rifles, or at least the don't seem to offer them to the public. I called my FFL and asked him if he would have transferred them to me as a "reciever" or a "long gun".....he said reciever. He understood what I asked and is an AR guy, he said I could build pistols if I wanted to. I didn't ask him, but do you think I could get a copy of the 4473 from him? darktide says.....The new 4473 has a place for "receiver only"... when did we start using the new form? Were we using the old form a 18 months ago? I haven't found a date yet. If these thing were transfereed to you as "recievers only" would you build one into a pistol? The new forms were implemented in November 2008, they now have an option for, "Other". If they are "virgin" lowers, you an use them. You sound like you are in the clear, but there are many on here that are MUCH more knowledgeable about these things than me. Have fun! |
|
Quoted:
Pistol or Rifle. If it says rifle you can't do it. Most FFL's would not mind giving you a copy of the form. On the older forms, FFL's would write rifle down for lowers to avoid the need for a pistol permit unless you asked otherwise. pigmy, I would respectfully disagree with you. I would suggest reading the tacked letter above (last tacked thread, "ATF letter"). Even if it was transferred as a "rifle", as long as it was never built as such, you can still build it into a pistol. I have been given this opinion by the NFA, and the FTB, but don't take my word for it, read-up and educate yourself. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Pistol or Rifle. If it says rifle you can't do it. Most FFL's would not mind giving you a copy of the form. On the older forms, FFL's would write rifle down for lowers to avoid the need for a pistol permit unless you asked otherwise. pigmy, I would respectfully disagree with you. I would suggest reading the tacked letter above (last tacked thread, "ATF letter"). Even if it was transferred as a "rifle", as long as it was never built as such, you can still build it into a pistol. I have been given this opinion by the NFA, and the FTB, but don't take my word for it, read-up and educate yourself. I think you might be a little confused on this. If you read the wording of the new letter in context, it's speaking about the manufacturers side. It never mentioned the 4473 specifically and thus still requires that to be checked as "other". The context says that you can build a pistol from a rifle receiver so long as you get certification saying that it's a virgin receiver that has never been stocked. Personally I think that this is the most confusing part.) What constitutes proof? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Pistol or Rifle. If it says rifle you can't do it. Most FFL's would not mind giving you a copy of the form. On the older forms, FFL's would write rifle down for lowers to avoid the need for a pistol permit unless you asked otherwise. pigmy, I would respectfully disagree with you. I would suggest reading the tacked letter above (last tacked thread, "ATF letter"). Even if it was transferred as a "rifle", as long as it was never built as such, you can still build it into a pistol. I have been given this opinion by the NFA, and the FTB, but don't take my word for it, read-up and educate yourself. I think you might be a little confused on this. If you read the wording of the new letter in context, it's speaking about the manufacturers side. It never mentioned the 4473 specifically and thus still requires that to be checked as "other". The context says that you can build a pistol from a rifle receiver so long as you get certification saying that it's a virgin receiver that has never been stocked. Personally I think that this is the most confusing part.) What constitutes proof? My quoted reply above was in response to the member who had lowers transferred to him that predate the new 4473's. I was saying, to the the member who has the older lowers (ones that predate the time when "other" was an option), that even if they were transferred to him as "rifle", as long as they were never built as such, he can build them into pistols. Further, I don't believe that the ATF requires you to get certification from the Mfg., they only suggest it. ETA:I just went back to read the latest letter on this subject, in it Mr Spencer says, "You should (emphasis added by me) obtain certification from the manufacturer of the receiver(s), verifying that it has never been completed in a rifle configuration." If it was required to obtain certification from the Mfg it would say, "Must", and not, "Should". The ATF is playing a game with the Legalities of Specifics, Mr. Spencer is the Chief of the FTB, and is well aware of the importance of language as it pertains to legalities. Just my observations, not legal advice. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Pistol or Rifle. If it says rifle you can't do it. Most FFL's would not mind giving you a copy of the form. On the older forms, FFL's would write rifle down for lowers to avoid the need for a pistol permit unless you asked otherwise. pigmy, I would respectfully disagree with you. I would suggest reading the tacked letter above (last tacked thread, "ATF letter"). Even if it was transferred as a "rifle", as long as it was never built as such, you can still build it into a pistol. I have been given this opinion by the NFA, and the FTB, but don't take my word for it, read-up and educate yourself. I think you might be a little confused on this. If you read the wording of the new letter in context, it's speaking about the manufacturers side. It never mentioned the 4473 specifically and thus still requires that to be checked as "other". The context says that you can build a pistol from a rifle receiver so long as you get certification saying that it's a virgin receiver that has never been stocked. Personally I think that this is the most confusing part.) What constitutes proof? My quoted reply above was in response to the member who had lowers transferred to him that predate the new 4473's. I was saying, to the the member who has the older lowers (ones that predate the time when "other" was an option), that even if they were transferred to him as "rifle", as long as they were never built as such, he can build them into pistols. Further, I don't believe that the ATF requires you to get certification from the Mfg., they only suggest it. ETA:I just went back to read the latest letter on this subject, in it Mr Spencer says, "You should (emphasis added by me) obtain certification from the manufacturer of the receiver(s), verifying that it has never been completed in a rifle configuration." If it was required to obtain certification from the Mfg it would say, "Must", and not, "Should". The ATF is playing a game with the Legalities of Specifics, Mr. Spencer is the Chief of the FTB, and is well aware of the importance of language as it pertains to legalities. Just my observations, not legal advice. I disagree with your interpritation of the old 4473. I say it needed to be transfered as a pistol, but then I'm not a lawyer. I do agree that the wording is flimsy with reference to "obtaining proof" however I feel the reason for that is that even they don't know what type of proof would be needed. This is why I've always said, just make a phone call. That said I still feel as long as we never give them a reason to question the history of our weapon, they never will. |
|
Quoted:
Oh I undertand, but I have a few ARs in various stages of completion. By usings Spikes Pistol tubes which cannot accept standard stock bodies I feel I've CYA'd. If you think I'm going overboard that's fine. To the poster that asked about numbers of uppers and lowers. You can have as many short uppers as you want provided you have at least one pistol or SBR lower. That said, don't have any "unassigned rifle lowers" in your home if you have and extra short uppers as this could get you slapped with a constructive intent charge. In other words... 3 rifle lowers, 3 rifle uppers, 1 pistol lower, 3 pistol/SBR uppers = OK 4 rifle lowers, 3 rifle uppers, 1 pistol lower, 3 pistol/SBR uppers = BAD Edit: I'm defining a rifle lower by the recent letter which says a lower the has or has ever at some point been stocked. This is actually a HUGE GREY AREA according to the ATF. They have told me on two occasions that if you have a registered SBR lower, you can have as many short uppers as you like. HOWEVER, they said that with a AR pistol, they would recommend only having ONE short upper to go with it. |
AR Sponsor