sbr upper legal without a tax stamp?

General » General Discussion

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - sbr upper legal without a tax stamp?

Posted: 8/18/2005 7:06:08 PM EDT

i want to know if a sbr upper is legal to own without a tax stamp

Posted: 8/18/2005 7:08:39 PM EDT

[#1]

possibly ......if you can prove you dont own any lowers that will fit it.

ETA... I believe owning a lower that fits a SBR (unregistered) upper will constitute a unregistered SBR which = an ass raping if you dont do it legally

probably a good idea to check the ATF website

Posted: 8/18/2005 7:10:36 PM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
possibly ......if you can prove you dont own any lowers that will fit it.

are those people that have AR pistols and AR rifles in trouble?

Posted: 8/18/2005 7:11:55 PM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
Quoted:
possibly ......if you can prove you dont own any lowers that will fit it.

are those people that have AR pistols and AR rifles in trouble?

good point

i was going under the same assumption the BATF makes with machinegun parts and possible host guns

Posted: 8/18/2005 7:12:40 PM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
Quoted:
possibly ......if you can prove you dont own any lowers that will fit it.

are those people that have AR pistols and AR rifles in trouble?

they walk a very fine line shrowded by grayness.

Posted: 8/18/2005 7:13:29 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
Quoted:
possibly ......if you can prove you dont own any lowers that will fit it.

are those people that have AR pistols and AR rifles in trouble?

Not sure how strenuously they pursue it, but I'm constantly hearing that if you have a lower that could fit the SBR upper, it could qualify as intent to build an unregistered SBR.

Posted: 8/18/2005 7:16:36 PM EDT

[#6]

Better safe than sorry, if you don't own an AR receiver registered as a pistol, I would just pay the $200 tax stamp. No better feeling than being in compliance with the law on a controversial item.

Posted: 8/18/2005 7:21:11 PM EDT

[#7]

Not really. To the above question about pistols and rifles.

A few years ago the ATF tried to prosecute a gun owner because he had a Thompson Center Contender pistol and bought a Contender carbine. Well same as ARs. There's nothing preventing the installation of the pistol barrel (upper) on the carbine lower. ATF went for "Constructive Intent."

The US Supreme Court dismissed the case. Or rather ruled against the ATF. In a case like this the ATF has to actually catch you with the shorter barrel (upper) on the carbine lower, thus making an unregistered SBR. Otherwise the gun owner gets the benefit of the doubt.

But if you own a rifle or carbine had don't have a pistol then ATF CAN get you for Constructive Intent.

But like said, if you own the short barreled upper but no lower receiver to attach it to then there's no crime. You've only got gun parts.

Posted: 8/18/2005 8:05:40 PM EDT

[#8]

I have an amd64 kit 14" barrel, and no reciever. I didnt have to send in any 200 bucks. It is not assembled, and when assembled it will be a pistol, or rifle, with barrel extension. I dont think I could be charged with any crimes. Basically the same as having an upper.

Posted: 8/18/2005 8:23:46 PM EDT

[#9]

There are also certain C & R guns that have barrels under 16 inches long that aren’t defined under NFA weapons.
I would have to look up exactly which ones they are, but they are out there.

Posted: 8/18/2005 8:45:12 PM EDT

[#10]

/snip/ETA... I believe owning a lower that fits a SBR (unregistered) upper will constitute a unregistered SBR/snip/

Dont forget guys that the lowers are the "registered" parts.

Posted: 8/18/2005 8:51:14 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
i want to know if a sbr upper is legal to own without a tax stamp

Yes. It is legal to own.

Posted: 8/18/2005 8:53:05 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
Not really. To the above question about pistols and rifles.

A few years ago the ATF tried to prosecute a gun owner because he had a Thompson Center Contender pistol and bought a Contender carbine. Well same as ARs. There's nothing preventing the installation of the pistol barrel (upper) on the carbine lower. ATF went for "Constructive Intent."

The US Supreme Court dismissed the case. Or rather ruled against the ATF. In a case like this the ATF has to actually catch you with the shorter barrel (upper) on the carbine lower, thus making an unregistered SBR.

Cite please.

Posted: 8/18/2005 10:05:13 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
Better safe than sorry, if you don't own an AR receiver registered as a pistol

And just how would one "register" thier receiver as a pistol? Last time I looked, we don't have Federal gun registration in this country.

Posted: 8/18/2005 10:08:39 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Not really. To the above question about pistols and rifles.

A few years ago the ATF tried to prosecute a gun owner because he had a Thompson Center Contender pistol and bought a Contender carbine. Well same as ARs. There's nothing preventing the installation of the pistol barrel (upper) on the carbine lower. ATF went for "Constructive Intent."

The US Supreme Court dismissed the case. Or rather ruled against the ATF. In a case like this the ATF has to actually catch you with the shorter barrel (upper) on the carbine lower, thus making an unregistered SBR.

Cite please.

While Bumblebee_Bob is a bit off on his details here is the cite.

U.S. Supreme Court
UNITED STATES v. THOMPSON/CENTER ARMS CO., 504 U.S. 505 (1992)
504 U.S. 505

UNITED STATES, PETITIONER v. THOMPSON/CENTER ARMS COMPANY
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT
No. 91-164

Argued January 13, 1992
Decided June 8, 1992

Posted: 8/18/2005 10:15:14 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Better safe than sorry, if you don't own an AR receiver registered as a pistol

And just how would one "register" thier receiver as a pistol? Last time I looked, we don't have Federal gun registration in this country.

I think he meant to have the receiver listed on the 4473 as a "pistol" receiver, instead of a "rifle" receiver.

Posted: 8/18/2005 10:16:08 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Better safe than sorry, if you don't own an AR receiver registered as a pistol

And just how would one "register" thier receiver as a pistol? Last time I looked, we don't have Federal gun registration in this country.

what he means is, that you must buy the receiver stripped and that receiver must never have been assembled as a rifle, it must be a "virgin" reciever. When you buy it, you're also supposed to have the FFL put "pistol" on the 4473.

Posted: 8/19/2005 3:51:11 AM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Better safe than sorry, if you don't own an AR receiver registered as a pistol

And just how would one "register" thier receiver as a pistol? Last time I looked, we don't have Federal gun registration in this country.

I think he meant to have the receiver listed on the 4473 as a "pistol" receiver, instead of a "rifle" receiver.

Yes Correct. And you're naive to think that our 4473 data isn't being collected.

Posted: 8/19/2005 5:54:19 AM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
Not really. To the above question about pistols and rifles.

A few years ago the ATF tried to prosecute a gun owner because he had a Thompson Center Contender pistol and bought a Contender carbine. Well same as ARs. There's nothing preventing the installation of the pistol barrel (upper) on the carbine lower. ATF went for "Constructive Intent."

The US Supreme Court dismissed the case. Or rather ruled against the ATF. In a case like this the ATF has to actually catch you with the shorter barrel (upper) on the carbine lower, thus making an unregistered SBR. Otherwise the gun owner gets the benefit of the doubt.

But if you own a rifle or carbine had don't have a pistol then ATF CAN get you for Constructive Intent.

But like said, if you own the short barreled upper but no lower receiver to attach it to then there's no crime. You've only got gun parts.

But even though the gun owner may have won in court, he really still lost. He had to have paid out the ass in legal costs; costs that I'm sure the court didn't make ATF pay back.

Posted: 8/19/2005 6:13:05 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not really. To the above question about pistols and rifles.

A few years ago the ATF tried to prosecute a gun owner because he had a Thompson Center Contender pistol and bought a Contender carbine. Well same as ARs. There's nothing preventing the installation of the pistol barrel (upper) on the carbine lower. ATF went for "Constructive Intent."

The US Supreme Court dismissed the case. Or rather ruled against the ATF. In a case like this the ATF has to actually catch you with the shorter barrel (upper) on the carbine lower, thus making an unregistered SBR.

Cite please.

While Bumblebee_Bob is a bit off on his details here is the cite.

U.S. Supreme Court
UNITED STATES v. THOMPSON/CENTER ARMS CO., 504 U.S. 505 (1992)
504 U.S. 505

UNITED STATES, PETITIONER v. THOMPSON/CENTER ARMS COMPANY
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT
No. 91-164

Argued January 13, 1992
Decided June 8, 1992

Thanks for the back up Phil. I knew it was US vs Thompson Center, but didn't have the rest.

I'm also not too surprised I was a bit off, but knew I had the basics.

Posted: 8/19/2005 7:48:04 PM EDT

[#20]

Can you have multiple SBR uppers to swap on a single registered lower, and have other lowers and complete rifles around.

ie. two stripped lowers (rifle), two complete AR's, one registered lower and a SBR upper in .223 and a SBR upper in 9mm? (no AR pistols)

Posted: 8/20/2005 7:26:39 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
Can you have multiple SBR uppers to swap on a single registered lower, and have other lowers and complete rifles around.

ie. two stripped lowers (rifle), two complete AR's, one registered lower and a SBR upper in .223 and a SBR upper in 9mm? (no AR pistols)

Yes.

The key point in US v Thompson Center is that you must have a legal configuration. Your registered (SBR legal) receiver gives you that.

If you had the opposite situation a bunch of short barrel uppers and only "regular" lowers then you'd have a problem as the only possible configurations you could make would be illegal.

Posted: 8/20/2005 7:42:39 AM EDT

[#22]

I was looking for AWB violations on the net some time ago and found a case where a guy was being prosecuted for having an sbr upper in the same safe as his regular legal AR. His defense was that he was using it for parts. Don't know if he got convicted and can't remember where I got it from...

Posted: 8/20/2005 10:53:39 AM EDT

[#23]

Last time I bought receivers I bought one listed as a rifle and one as a pistol at time of purchase. I have a mad project planned but until then I have a pistol lower lying around with no-one to play with. I needed to do that because I can't collect the parts for a pistol upper without having the dubiosness of the rifle lower in proximity.

Here's one for the modular upper crowd. How about having a LMT or other modular quick change upper and having a shorter length barrel on hand that would only be legal on an SBR of NFA? Not even a completed upper, just the capability of putting a shorter than legal barrel onto the rifle lower.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - sbr upper legal without a tax stamp?

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us