Question about buying complete AR pistol lower

[Delkal]

I can't possibly explain how much I hate these discussions.

I agree. A little mental masturbation is good but stuff like this is a huge circle jerk. Instead of pointing out technicalities and what the though police would do if you swapped an upper in your basement we should back it up with real cases of what the BATF prosecuted. I doubt you will find anything (unless they wanted to get you for other stuff).

[Gun]

If I shoot my rifle with one hand, have I reconfigured it into a pistol, and do I now have to register it for future confiscation?

Shooting your rifle (AR or AK) one handed, would be stunning and brave.

[USMC3531]

If you have a registered SBR, and you take the stock off and put a pistol brace or bare buffer tube on it, you effectively have turned a RIFLE into a pistol which cannot be done without getting an approved Form 1. An SBR without a stock on it would be considered a pistol.

Once you have a registered SBR, you can add a VFG and not break any laws, because it is a rifle.

Again, if you replace the stock, making it into a pistol, you have to do a Form 1 and at the time you fill out the Form 1, you could describe what you are making as a pistol with a VFG.

My advice is to not try to wrap your head around all the different scenarios, it will drive you nuts. Just figure out what you want to do and then ask the question on how to do it legally.

You are wrong. A sbr does not have to have to have a stock. If I take a mauser and chop the barrel and stock to make an "obrez" it is still a sbr (technically "weapon made from rifle" but still falls under sbr) so once its registered as sbr you do whatever you want ie , stock, no stock, whatever barrel length, foregrip.

[markshere2]

Absolutely correct!



No sir, just enjoy your non-recorded firearm.

If you ever sell it in pistol configuration it must go through an FFL, if you were to strip it down or take the upper off I'm actually not sure if it would or would not require an FFL transfer...

?!?

It was recorded. It's number is in a book.

Just because .GOV is not in posession of that book yet does not mean it was not recorded.

The vagaries of BATFEIEIO rules will always be decided by fellow swamp dwellers, as the recent election lawsuits indicate.
Do you think they will decide in the favor of some scummy deplorable gun owner?

Trust NOT the current rules or officials.

[markshere2]

Yes it absolutely is, and the problem is that the hierarchy of the ATf, does NOTHING to clarify anything to their agents or anyone else.

Another tactic in their toolkit to wage lawfare against law abiding citizens.

They wil charge you at no personal cost and you will go bankrupt defending yourself.

See Kyle Rittenhouse...

[Royinmontco]

you could describe what you are making as a pistol with a VFG.

I don't think there is any such thing as "a pistol with a VFG". I think it must be classified as an AOW at that point, no?

[Xringshooter]

You are wrong. A sbr does not have to have to have a stock. If I take a mauser and chop the barrel and stock to make an "obrez" it is still a sbr (technically "weapon made from rifle" but still falls under sbr) so once its registered as sbr you do whatever you want ie , stock, no stock, whatever barrel length, foregrip.

I'm not going to argue with you, because this is not how it was explained to me when I talked to the NFA Division several years ago. They told me that if you remove the buttstock from an AR style SBR, since it now only has a pistol grip, you have effectively turned it into a pistol. Again, we were specifically discussing AR style SBR's and SBR's made as you described might be looked at completely different by the NFA Division.

This is the problem nowadays, there are too many varieties of things you can to with firearms that just can't be easily taken into account. If you could supply me with a citation about your example, I would love to have it to have it on file.

[Xringshooter]

I don't think there is any such thing as "a pistol with a VFG". I think it must be classified as an AOW at that point, no?

You are correct, it would be a AOW but you still have to do the Form 1 to convert a rifle into a pistol and on the form, in the description block, you have to tell them what you are making. The NFA Division would probably then classify it as an AOW.

[ExFlyinguy]

It 's a cluster fuck.

Here's how I like to remember things to keep it simple.

Machine Guns trump all
SBR/SBS trump AOW
NFA trumps pistol
Pistol trumps rifle

[buckengr]

You are correct, it would be a AOW but you still have to do the Form 1 to convert a rifle into a pistol and on the form, in the description block, you have to tell them what you are making. The NFA Division would probably then classify it as an AOW.

But even that would not necessarily be true. If a firearm has a rifled barrel shorter than 16", but still maintains an overall length of at least 26" and is not concealed, it can have a vertical foregrip as well, and would be classified as a title 1 "firearm" and not a title 2 AOW.

I don't believe ATF has offered consistent guidance on nearly any subject in the history of their unconstitutional existence. I understand you may have received different guidance which may or may not be binding for you.

My understanding has generally been that a firearm registered as a title 2 SBR without its stock attached and a short rifled barrel is considered... a disassembled SBR... at least from the standpoint of it being in a legal or illegal registration status, provided all parts are retained to reassemble it to the registered title 2 configuration.

Similarly, my understanding is that if it originally started as a pistol, was registered as an SBR, and is now temporarily configured with a pistol brace or bare buffer tube, and no stocks are transported with it, or it is configured with a rifle length upper, it can be transported across state lines without the 5320.20. Since AR lowers (in particular) are so cheap, I don't advocate doing this since the nuances are clear as mud and it's best to avoid undue headaches when possible, but that is my understanding of the situation.

Please, please for the love of God, no one write another letter.

Lastly, it goes without saying, but every word of these laws and "regulations" are bullshit unconstitutional infringements of our natural right to own the tools necessary to protect our right to life.