AK Sponsor
Posted: 9/29/2006 2:15:04 PM EDT
|
When you order a receiver through your FFL, he has to enter it in his books as either a "Rifle" or "Pistol" receiver. Would it be legal for me to buy it as a rifle receiver and then, later on, change my mind and use it for a pistol kit? Thanks. |
Yes, It was never built as a rifle, so it can be made into a pistol. The BATF rule is once a rifle always a rifle. But since it was never a rifle, you are fine. Just because the FFL marked it wrong doesn't mean your receiver must be made into a rifle. |
| The bad thing about trying to interpret what the ATF means is, from one moment to the next, they don't seem to know. The difference between the ruling on possesing full auto parts for an AK vs. an AR is a perfect example. For the longest time the consensus was absolutely no full auto parts in an AR. Then someone (from Colt I believe) wrote the technical bureau and their subsequent letter seemed to OK an FA bolt carrier in a semi-auto rifle. All I know about the pistol vs. rifle declaration (on ffl's end) is what I've heard from someone else. Already, here, we have two differing opinions. Before I put my Liberty at risk I would write the ATF Technical bureau a letter stating precisely what I wanted to know. (If you aren't very precise they will give you some copy/paste answer/non-answer) |
Definitions are Very Important.  IF you purchase a receiver from an FFL - OR if it has previously been transferred, The Feds will consider it one of three things (according to the paperwork ) 1. a pistol 2. a rifle 3. a STRIPPED RECEIVER THIS CAN NEVER EVER CHANGE ! If a stripped receiver is built into a rifle - it will ALWAYS be a rifle. Build a Pistol - it stays a pistol. ALSO , Don't forget that ALL STATE LAWS will apply to whatever you build. |
so where do your magical 3 option 4473s come from? |
NO! A pistol CAN be converted to rifle, and WILL be if a stock is EVER attached. At that point it never goes back. |
I would like to see a letter from the Alphabet folks, seems like this has come up time and time again on several different forums, always the two basic differering opinions. I asked this question to a dealer once and he said on the 4473 he said it is a virgin receiver and can be built either way. I was never comfortable with this answer. 
|
I guess if you ever go to trial over this issue, the whole thing will be an "interpretation" of law. If it can be interpreted one way today, and other way tomorrow, does that mean you can appeal until the interpretation changes again? The way I see it, we should be able to form our own interpretations . . . you know, like . . . My cup of McDonalds coffee was "too" hot when I tried to drink and drive. 
|
|
It doesnt matter what the FFL marks on the 4473. What matters is, is if a stock has ever been attached to it. If it is a bare, stripped receiver you can build it into whatever you want. If you build it as a rifle, then it must have the required US parts and barrel/ overall lengths. If you build it as a pistol, it can have no US parts and any barrel length; BUT cannot readily accept a stock. However, down the line you can switch it into a rifle by adding a minimum 16" barrel, a stock, and the required US parts. To switch it back to a pistol, it must not be able to readily accept a stock. However, if it is originally built as a rifle it can never be switched to a pistol since a stock was there originally. Ever seen those Glock/1911 Carbine conversions? It uses the frame of a Glock/1911 and has a stock and the 16" barrel as one attachment; thus making it a rifle very easily. Then, when you are tired of using it as a carbine/rifle, you can slide it off and slide back on the pistol frame. Markings such as pistol/rifle into the receiver are relative. Like during the AWB, the ATF ruled you could techinically own a AR15 lower receiver marked LEO/MIL as a non leo/mil as long as the lower receiver was compliant to the AWB itself. (ie no flash hider/ folding stock/ bayo lug) |
|
It's threads like these that show how retarded the NFA and gun laws are in general. You can't own a rifle with a barrel less than 16" because then it would be more easy to conceal. Yet, you can own a pistol and have a CCW permit. So what was the fucking point in creating the NFA and SBR designations in the first place? In all fairness, they did want to include pistols in the NFA but the congresscritters showed a tiny bit of backbone for a microsecond and pistols were removed before passing the NFA. I could easily see a receiver being transfered as a pistol that you eventually build into a rifle and have some retard BATF agent arrest you for some law that he 'made up' using the two neurons he rubs together and calls a brain.
|
AK Sponsor