User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 2:31:38 PM EDT
[#1]
Quoted:
My friend, yes, my friend and not me, has had a .308 rifle for the past three years. He was sending me some pictures of it this morning while we were texting back and forth about a new rifle he wants to build and how he wanted it to look a certain way. I noticed that the barrel looked a little short. After a few questions about the pictured rifle, he said it was a 12.5" barrel. He sent me a link to a POF P308 12.5" SBR and said, "this is what it is". Now, I know this guy has not filled out any paperwork with the ATF and does not have any stamps. We talked about NFA and how he was illegally in possession of a SBR. He bought this rifle in Jan. of '13 from a co-worker. This co-worker received the rifle in lieu of payment for some electrical side work. So, at this point, we don't know who the original purchaser of said rifle is/was. So now there's been at least two transfers of this firearm without any paperwork. My friend is totally clueless when it comes to NFA. He claims he didn't know he needed anything special to own a SBR, or anything about the NFA process. My question is, legally, what can he do with this firearm? As of this morning, he has separated the upper and lower and has given the upper to another friend to store 'til he can figure out what to do with it. Can he even re-register the lower in his name? Why could he not register the lower? Or sell the upper and buy a 16" |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 2:34:12 PM EDT
[#2]
Your friend needs a lawyer familiar with firearms law, and ideally NFA law, ASAP.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 2:34:21 PM EDT
[#3]
Quoted:
My question is, legally, what can he do with this firearm? As of this morning, he has separated the upper and lower and has given the upper to another friend to store 'til he can figure out what to do with it. Can he even re-register the lower in his name? He can part it out, he buy a pistol lower, he can register it, he can put it through a chop saw and destroy it. About the only thing he cannot do is keep it as is. This is a very easy problem to solve quickly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 2:35:29 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why could he not register the lower? Or sell the upper and buy a 16" Because if it is what he says it is, the lower is a factory SBR, already registered, and originally transferred on a Form 4. At some point those formalities were dropped and felonies started to happen. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 2:39:39 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Because if it is what he says it is, the lower is a factory SBR, already registered, and originally transferred on a Form 4. At some point those formalities were dropped and felonies started to happen. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Why could he not register the lower? Or sell the upper and buy a 16" Because if it is what he says it is, the lower is a factory SBR, already registered, and originally transferred on a Form 4. At some point those formalities were dropped and felonies started to happen. Even if true, he can still register it as is and/or sell the upper and buy a 16". |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 2:49:59 PM EDT
[#6]
He can buy a long barrel upper for it, so long as he claims he received it in that condition. I was generally thinking of solutions which are fully legal.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 3:17:12 PM EDT
[#7]
Quoted:
Because if it is what he says it is, the lower is a factory SBR, already registered, and originally transferred on a Form 4. At some point those formalities were dropped and felonies started to happen. This is my concern. I'm not sure if he's able to just try to submit a form 4 for it, since it had to have been registered previously. I'm not familiar enough with NFA to speak intelligently with him. Right now, the rifle is in two pieces separated by about 30 miles. He may just end up putting a longer barrel on it and carry on, but that still doesn't address the issue with the once registered lower. I did already tell him a visit to an attorney may be in his near future. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 3:19:23 PM EDT
[#8]
Buy a new 16" barrel or pin and weld a muzzle extension, or what ever will make it over 16"
No need to make this complicated, he just has to make it not be configured as an SBR |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 3:20:06 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is my concern. I'm not sure if he's able to just try to submit a form 4 for it, since it had to have been registered previously. I'm not familiar enough with NFA to speak intelligently with him. He needs to file a Form 1 to make it into an SBR. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 3:21:43 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He can buy a long barrel upper for it, so long as he claims he received it in that condition. I was generally thinking of solutions which are fully legal. I think his only fully legal option is to turn it in. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 3:55:22 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He needs to file a Form 1 to make it into an SBR. It's a factory SBR that had to have been registered at one point when it was originally purchased. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 3:55:58 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think his only fully legal option is to turn it in. This is what I'm thinking, but, again, I don't know enough about this subject. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 4:01:44 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is what I'm thinking, but, again, I don't know enough about this subject. That option violates the mantra "don't invite the man into your life" so I would not advise. I would go with get legal now, and forgeddaboutit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 4:08:08 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's a factory SBR that had to have been registered at one point when it was originally purchased. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
He needs to file a Form 1 to make it into an SBR. It's a factory SBR that had to have been registered at one point when it was originally purchased. That doesn't change my answer. Doesn't matter if it was originally acquired via F1 or F4. It could've been sold in non-NFA configuration without any additional paperwork. To make it a legal SBR again, it needs to have a Form 1 filed, and the new Maker needs to engrave their info. And it needs to not be in an NFA configuration until that happens. It's that simple. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 4:18:28 PM EDT
[#15]
Has it proven to be a factory sbr and/or if it was a registered sbr? I'd start by calling the manufacturer with the serial number to find out. If it wasn't factory, I'd give a call to the ATF NFA branch and find out but just keep it vague. IMHO, if both of those are negative, I'd order a legal length barrel or upper.
I have a good feeling this is or will be a common issue with the abundance of AR's, the ease of being able to order short barrel uppers, and the common ignorance of the NFA laws. Instead of a sticky of "so you found a machine gun in the attack", it will be "so your friend has a questionable sbr". |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 4:44:11 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Has it proven to be a factory sbr and/or if it was a registered sbr? I'd start by calling the manufacturer with the serial number to find out. If it wasn't factory, I'd give a call to the ATF NFA branch and find out but just keep it vague. IMHO, if both of those are negative, I'd order a legal length barrel or upper. And if they are positive you just fucked yourself in the goat ass for no reason. Just skip this step and go straight to get legal now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 4:59:24 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
To make it a legal SBR again, it needs to have a Form 1 filed, and the new Maker needs to engrave their info. And it needs to not be in an NFA configuration until that happens. It's that simple. Is it though? File a form 1 on an already registered lower and the ATF is going to have questions, the truthful answers to which are not going to go well. Personally if I somehow found myself in a situation where'd I'd illegally acquired a regulated firearm I'd hacksaw that lower, never to be seen again. Buy a new AR10 lower if you want to form 1 an SBR. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 5:19:49 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Is it though? File a form 1 on an already registered lower and the ATF is going to have questions, the truthful answers to which are not going to go well. Personally if I somehow found myself in a situation where'd I'd illegally acquired a regulated firearm I'd hacksaw that lower, never to be seen again. Buy a new AR10 lower if you want to form 1 an SBR. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
To make it a legal SBR again, it needs to have a Form 1 filed, and the new Maker needs to engrave their info. And it needs to not be in an NFA configuration until that happens. It's that simple. Is it though? File a form 1 on an already registered lower and the ATF is going to have questions, the truthful answers to which are not going to go well. Personally if I somehow found myself in a situation where'd I'd illegally acquired a regulated firearm I'd hacksaw that lower, never to be seen again. Buy a new AR10 lower if you want to form 1 an SBR. Person A buys an SBR. Person A sells just the lower to person B. The lower is not in a Title II configuration, therefore it doesn't require a Form 4. Person B then files a Form 1 to make an SBR. Now the ATF has received a Form 1 to make an SBR with the same manufacturer and serial number as an SBR already in the registry, *but* with a new maker. This absolutely happens. It really is that simple. If the OP's friend has accidentally illegally acquired a firearm, and upon being informed that it was illegal he immediately returned it to a legal configuration? I'm sure things like that happen all the time. Or, believe it or not, people are never informed it's an illegal configuration and they live the rest of their lives with an unregistered SBR. Cutting the rifle into a million pieces doesn't change the fact that an unlawful transfer occurred - there's nothing that can be done about that. I think what's key is that the OP's friend is doing his absolute best to make everything legal straight away. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 6:27:05 PM EDT
[#19]
Thanks for the replies. Yes, it was a factory SBR as the model number is engraved/stamped on the side, and when we do a model number search it pops up with a picture of an identical rifle.
For now, the halves are separated and he is actively looking for a 16 or 18 inch barrel to replace the 12.5. What I was mostly curious about is if he could/would still face legal issues just being in possession of a once registered lower, even though it wasn't in an SBR configuration. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 6:38:35 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What I was mostly curious about is if he could/would still face legal issues just being in possession of a once registered lower, even though it wasn't in an SBR configuration. No. Here's how you tell if the firearm falls under the purview of the NFA as an SBR: 1) is it a rifle (i.e. does/did it have a stock) and 2) does it have a short barrel attached to it right now? If the answer to 1 & 2 are "yes" then the answer to the SBR question is "yes". Otherwise it's just a lower. It's past is of no consequence. If he wants an SBR, file a F1 for it. If he just wants a rifle, put a 16.5+ upper on it and sell the upper or put it on a pistol lower. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 6:42:30 PM EDT
[#21]
This thread is full of AIDS.
OP the Model matches a photo on the internet, Holy fucking fuck case closed. Are you a cop? No? good.. I saw a photo of an alien on the internet one fucking time too. This means NOTHING but call the company and ASK them, do NOT ASSUME. Fuck. 2) call the ATF is dumb and will do not nothing, They will NOT answer your questions if you are not the owner. And if it is a SBR and you Joe are calling about it, guys in a Van will stop by your house/work. 3) solutions A) sell upper or barrel, and get new B) sell upper and then lower and walk away. C) form 1 the lower. Thats it pick A,B, or C |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 6:46:17 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What I was mostly curious about is if he could/would still face legal issues just being in possession of a once registered lower, even though it wasn't in an SBR configuration. Could he? Yes he could. He illegally had an xfer'd to him, and possessed an SBR that was not registered to him. Nothing he does can ever change that. Is it likely anything would happen? No it is not. Put it in legal configuration, move on with your life. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 7:21:01 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Is it though? File a form 1 on an already registered lower and the ATF is going to have questions, the truthful answers to which are not going to go well. Personally if I somehow found myself in a situation where'd I'd illegally acquired a regulated firearm I'd hacksaw that lower, never to be seen again. Buy a new AR10 lower if you want to form 1 an SBR. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
To make it a legal SBR again, it needs to have a Form 1 filed, and the new Maker needs to engrave their info. And it needs to not be in an NFA configuration until that happens. It's that simple. Is it though? File a form 1 on an already registered lower and the ATF is going to have questions, the truthful answers to which are not going to go well. Personally if I somehow found myself in a situation where'd I'd illegally acquired a regulated firearm I'd hacksaw that lower, never to be seen again. Buy a new AR10 lower if you want to form 1 an SBR. Yes...yes it is. Q: I possess a properly registered SBR or SBS. I intend to strip the receiver and remove the barrel prior to selling the receiver. Is the bare receiver still subject to regulation under the NFA as a SBR or SBS? A: A stripped receiver without a barrel does not meet the definition of a SBR or SBS under the NFA. Although the previously registered firearm would remain registered unless the possessor notified the NFA Branch of the change, there is no provision in statute or regulation requiring registration of a firearm without a barrel because its physical characteristics would make it only a GCA firearm pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(3)(B). If the subsequent owner buys the receiver as a GCA firearm and installs a barrel less than 16 inches in length (SBR) or 18 inches in length (SBS), the firearm would be subject to a $200 making tax and registration under the NFA by the manufacturer or maker of the SBR or SBS. Because registration depends upon the stated intent of the applicant, there is no provision to allow registration of a NFA firearm by anyone other than the maker or manufacturer. Same answer if you bought a registered lower with a 16" (or longer) barrel attached. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 7:26:05 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And if they are positive you just fucked yourself in the goat ass for no reason. Just skip this step and go straight to get legal now. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Has it proven to be a factory sbr and/or if it was a registered sbr? I'd start by calling the manufacturer with the serial number to find out. If it wasn't factory, I'd give a call to the ATF NFA branch and find out but just keep it vague. IMHO, if both of those are negative, I'd order a legal length barrel or upper. And if they are positive you just fucked yourself in the goat ass for no reason. Just skip this step and go straight to get legal now. I just did more research. I was under the impression that once a SBR, always a SBR, until the ATF was notified that it wasn't. I was likely wrong. It looks like it goes by the current configuration and can be sold as a normal firearm if it had a 16"+ barrel or no barrel, even if the ATF isn't notified of the change to non-SBR status. My advice will change. He may be able to form 1 the lower but my concern would be the ATF seeing it in the system under someone else, get curious, and start asking questions. As someone else mentioned, the transfer took place so the dirty deed is done. If it were me, I wouldn't muddy the waters even more by trying to form 1 the original lower. I would get a new stripped lower and form 1 that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 7:41:16 PM EDT
[#25]
BossMaverick, I was thinking the same thing about once a SBR, always a SBR.
Masfonos/BigWaylon, thanks for the explanations. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 7:53:34 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
BossMaverick, I was thinking the same thing about once a SBR, always a SBR. Masfonos/BigWaylon, thanks for the explanations. Though it may not matter, I think it'd still be illegal to turn it into a pistol. So throw a longer barrel on it, but don't swap to a pistol tube with the shorter barrel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 8:00:39 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Though it may not matter, I think it'd still be illegal to turn it into a pistol. So throw a longer barrel on it, but don't swap to a pistol tube with the shorter barrel. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
BossMaverick, I was thinking the same thing about once a SBR, always a SBR. Masfonos/BigWaylon, thanks for the explanations. Though it may not matter, I think it'd still be illegal to turn it into a pistol. So throw a longer barrel on it, but don't swap to a pistol tube with the shorter barrel. There's nothing illegal about putting a rifle into a pistol configuration. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 8:22:48 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There's nothing illegal about putting a rifle into a pistol configuration. You can make a rifle from a pistol, not the other way around. I would not risk the pistol route, longer barrel or form 1 it into an SBR |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 8:42:37 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There's nothing illegal about putting a rifle into a pistol configuration. There is if it started life in rifle configuration. You would then be making a firearm from a rifle, and it would be short-barreled. Hence, it would be a SBR, and unpapered if you don't have an approved F1 in hand. If it started life as a rifle it doesn't matter if it at some point later in life has the stock removed. It's always a rifle, or a firearm made from a rifle. You can go Pistol>Rifle>Pistol, but you can't go Rifle>Pistol>Rifle without a stamp. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 10:54:44 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There's nothing illegal about putting a rifle into a pistol configuration. ATF Ruling 2011-4 has the answers you seek - as other posters have mentioned, there certainly is in many cases. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2016 1:09:45 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
ATF Ruling 2011-4 has the answers you seek - as other posters have mentioned, there certainly is in many cases. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
There's nothing illegal about putting a rifle into a pistol configuration. ATF Ruling 2011-4 has the answers you seek - as other posters have mentioned, there certainly is in many cases. Fair enough, there are definitely cases where it's illegal. But it's not intrinsically illegal unto itself - it depends on the history of the firearm. Which is retarded. The solid way to configure something as you wish is if it's registered as an SBR. An SBR can be in a pistol configuration, rifle configuration, or SBR configuration. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2016 1:22:35 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Is it though? File a form 1 on an already registered lower and the ATF is going to have questions, the truthful answers to which are not going to go well. Personally if I somehow found myself in a situation where'd I'd illegally acquired a regulated firearm I'd hacksaw that lower, never to be seen again. Buy a new AR10 lower if you want to form 1 an SBR. This post bespeaks of a great deal of NFA ignorance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2016 1:52:19 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:This post bespeaks of a great deal of NFA ignorance. Others may hang their decision on what they believe they could pay a lawyer a million bucks to argue on their behalf while they wait years for exoneration. I would prefer the path that minimizes the likelihood of becoming ensnared in the legal process. The problem with starting at the point that one has already committed a felony, there isn't a lot of ethical or legal guidance on how to make it right apart from turning oneself in for a crime which hasn't been detected yet, so we're in the realm of opinion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2016 1:57:37 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thanks for the review. Others may hang their decision on what they believe they could pay a lawyer a million bucks to argue on their behalf while they wait years for exoneration. I would prefer the path that minimizes the likelihood of becoming ensnared in the legal process. The problem with starting at the point that one has already committed a felony, there isn't a lot of ethical or legal guidance on how to make it right apart from turning oneself in for a crime which hasn't been detected yet, so we're in the realm of opinion. Then why tell someone to "hacksaw a lower" When you need 3 torch cuts to demil a receiver? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2016 2:24:19 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Fair enough, there are definitely cases where it's illegal. But it's not intrinsically illegal unto itself - it depends on the history of the firearm. Which is retarded. The solid way to configure something as you wish is if it's registered as an SBR. An SBR can be in a pistol configuration, rifle configuration, or SBR configuration. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There's nothing illegal about putting a rifle into a pistol configuration. ATF Ruling 2011-4 has the answers you seek - as other posters have mentioned, there certainly is in many cases. Fair enough, there are definitely cases where it's illegal. But it's not intrinsically illegal unto itself - it depends on the history of the firearm. Which is retarded. The solid way to configure something as you wish is if it's registered as an SBR. An SBR can be in a pistol configuration, rifle configuration, or SBR configuration. "There's nothing illegal about putting a rifle into a pistol configuration." "there are definitely cases where it's illegal. But it's not intrinsically illegal unto itself" The above quotes are certainly not plain from the BATFE's ruling. The ruling points out a particular chain of events where it is legal - otherwise it is generally illegal. The wall of text in 2011-4 spells out how it is possible for a pistol to be disassembled, assembled into a rifle configuration, and legally returned to pistol configuration. It then reads: Nonetheless, if a handgun or other weapon with an overall length of less than 26 inches, or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length is assembled or otherwise produced from a weapon originally assembled or produced only as a rifle, such a weapon is a “weapon made from a rifle” as defined by 26 U.S.C. 5845(a)(4). Such a weapon would not be a “pistol” because the weapon was not originally designed, made, and intended to fire a projectile by one hand. According to the ATF "putting a rifle into a pistol configuration" certainly seems to be "intrinsically illegal unto itself." Parts kits, bare receivers, and pistol/rifle combos like the T/C are a separate matter - it is generally illegal to put a rifle into a pistol configuration, no? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2016 3:00:23 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thanks for the review. Others may hang their decision on what they believe they could pay a lawyer a million bucks to argue on their behalf while they wait years for exoneration. I would prefer the path that minimizes the likelihood of becoming ensnared in the legal process. The problem with starting at the point that one has already committed a felony, there isn't a lot of ethical or legal guidance on how to make it right apart from turning oneself in for a crime which hasn't been detected yet, so we're in the realm of opinion. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:This post bespeaks of a great deal of NFA ignorance. Others may hang their decision on what they believe they could pay a lawyer a million bucks to argue on their behalf while they wait years for exoneration. I would prefer the path that minimizes the likelihood of becoming ensnared in the legal process. The problem with starting at the point that one has already committed a felony, there isn't a lot of ethical or legal guidance on how to make it right apart from turning oneself in for a crime which hasn't been detected yet, so we're in the realm of opinion. Blah, blah, blah...fact of the matter is he can simply replace the short upper with a > 16" upper and have a perfectly legal, Title 1 weapon--a fact of which you were ignorant. No "hacksaw," no torches, no million-dollar lawyers, no drama (queens)... |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2016 3:14:31 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Then why tell someone to "hacksaw a lower" When you need 3 torch cuts to demil a receiver? As for what I'm telling someone to do, I did that in second post of this thread and it's the same advice I'd give to anyone who committed a felony, inadvertent or not. Go talk to a lawyer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2016 3:29:01 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:Blah, blah, blah...fact of the matter is he can simply replace the short upper with a > 16" upper and have a perfectly legal, Title 1 weapon--a fact of which you were ignorant. No "hacksaw," no torches, no million-dollar lawyers, no drama (queens)... |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2016 3:39:18 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"There's nothing illegal about putting a rifle into a pistol configuration." "there are definitely cases where it's illegal. But it's not intrinsically illegal unto itself" The above quotes are certainly not plain from the BATFE's ruling. The ruling points out a particular chain of events where it is legal - otherwise it is generally illegal. The wall of text in 2011-4 spells out how it is possible for a pistol to be disassembled, assembled into a rifle configuration, and legally returned to pistol configuration. It then reads: According to the ATF "putting a rifle into a pistol configuration" certainly seems to be "intrinsically illegal unto itself." Parts kits, bare receivers, and pistol/rifle combos like the T/C are a separate matter - it is generally illegal to put a rifle into a pistol configuration, no? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There's nothing illegal about putting a rifle into a pistol configuration. ATF Ruling 2011-4 has the answers you seek - as other posters have mentioned, there certainly is in many cases. Fair enough, there are definitely cases where it's illegal. But it's not intrinsically illegal unto itself - it depends on the history of the firearm. Which is retarded. The solid way to configure something as you wish is if it's registered as an SBR. An SBR can be in a pistol configuration, rifle configuration, or SBR configuration. "There's nothing illegal about putting a rifle into a pistol configuration." "there are definitely cases where it's illegal. But it's not intrinsically illegal unto itself" The above quotes are certainly not plain from the BATFE's ruling. The ruling points out a particular chain of events where it is legal - otherwise it is generally illegal. The wall of text in 2011-4 spells out how it is possible for a pistol to be disassembled, assembled into a rifle configuration, and legally returned to pistol configuration. It then reads: Nonetheless, if a handgun or other weapon with an overall length of less than 26 inches, or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length is assembled or otherwise produced from a weapon originally assembled or produced only as a rifle, such a weapon is a “weapon made from a rifle” as defined by 26 U.S.C. 5845(a)(4). Such a weapon would not be a “pistol” because the weapon was not originally designed, made, and intended to fire a projectile by one hand. According to the ATF "putting a rifle into a pistol configuration" certainly seems to be "intrinsically illegal unto itself." Parts kits, bare receivers, and pistol/rifle combos like the T/C are a separate matter - it is generally illegal to put a rifle into a pistol configuration, no? Semantics. It's legal unless it's illegal, or it's illegal unless it's legal. However, in the U.S. we largely have laws of exclusion, not laws of inclusion. Therefore I subscribe to the mantra that it's legal unless it's illegal, which is based in legal practice. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2016 6:33:14 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Semantics. It's legal unless it's illegal, or it's illegal unless it's legal. However, in the U.S. we largely have laws of exclusion, not laws of inclusion. Therefore I subscribe to the mantra that it's legal unless it's illegal, which is based in legal practice. ...and putting a short barrel on a rifle makes it a....  short barreled rifle. Which is illegal to do without going through the usual NFA procedures.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2016 6:37:18 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why are demil requirements relevant? I wouldn't be trying to import it into the country, sell it for scrap metal, or transfer it to anyone in any way ever. As for what I'm telling someone to do, I did that in second post of this thread and it's the same advice I'd give to anyone who committed a felony, inadvertent or not. Go talk to a lawyer. That makes no sense. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2016 7:51:42 PM EDT
[#42]
Holy shit.
AIDS The end... |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
