AR pistol regulations

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Calengor

    wishes he were spike
    Apr 13, 2009
    2,158
    Frederick, MD
    Found the letter I was looking for:
     

    Attachments

    • 26635.JPG
      26635.JPG
      64.2 KB · Views: 161

    swinokur

    In a State of Bliss
    Patriot Picket
    Apr 15, 2009
    55,489
    Westminster USA
    And here is yet another letter that states if a lower starts out as a pistol, it can be converted to a rifle and then back to a pistol.
     

    Attachments

    • atf-ruling-ar kits-2011-4.pdf
      82.7 KB · Views: 77

    Pinecone

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 4, 2013
    28,175
    If that's the letter were discussing, there is no way I would say a completed Lower with a M4 stock attached is ok for a pistol build.

    The letter says a M4 receiver extension in itself is ok for a pistol build.

    As long as you don't have a stock. Or it COULD be construed as an unlicensed SBR.

    Would you trust the BATFE to give you a pass on that one? If so, I have some beach front property for sale, in Montana. :lol2:
     

    Pinecone

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 4, 2013
    28,175
    To be safe, I would not build a pistol from a rifle lower, just too many gray areas!

    I agree.

    Remember, you are dealing with the group that will take your firearm, mistreat it, modify it, and otherwise screw around with it, and if it doubles in their testing, charge you with having an unlicensed machine gun.
     

    Pinecone

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 4, 2013
    28,175
    Found the letter I was looking for:

    Yes, but read the letter in post #13.

    Barreled OR Stocked.

    The barrel most likely applies to most other firearms, where the barrel directly installs into the receiver/action. Unlike the AR, where the barrel attaches to the upper, which is NOT the serial numbered part.

    Also, what was the date of that letter?
     

    swinokur

    In a State of Bliss
    Patriot Picket
    Apr 15, 2009
    55,489
    Westminster USA
    And if a stock was available to you, you'd could be looking at constructive possession.

    Too many ways to get into trouble here.
     

    Calengor

    wishes he were spike
    Apr 13, 2009
    2,158
    Frederick, MD
    Yes, but read the letter in post #13.

    Barreled OR Stocked.

    The barrel most likely applies to most other firearms, where the barrel directly installs into the receiver/action. Unlike the AR, where the barrel attaches to the upper, which is NOT the serial numbered part.

    Also, what was the date of that letter?

    No idea on the date of the letter I posted, as I can't find the first page that goes with it.

    Here's a 2010 letter which mentions "barreled" only, not "stocked and/or barreled" and would seem to supplant the 2004 letter: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B0q...3NmMtZDRiNTMzNzdhMzUx/edit?ddrp=1&pli=1&hl=en
     

    TxAggie

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 25, 2012
    4,734
    Anne Arundel County, MD
    and the pdf i posted could superceds both of those.


    Yep, the pistol-rifle-pistol (ATF 2011-4) you posted is the latest clarification on pistol to non-sbr conversion and back to pistol.

    That was followed up this year with the ruling that firing a pistol from the shoulder did not make it something other than a pistol, and specifically a Sig Brace does not meet the requirements of a rifle stock.

    ImageUploadedByTapatalk1409863193.907346.jpg
     

    jkeys

    Active Member
    Jan 30, 2013
    668
    And if a stock was available to you, you'd could be looking at constructive possession.

    Too many ways to get into trouble here.

    The ATF has ruled that you can build a pistol into a rifle. Therefore, its legal to posses both a pistol and a stock. The ATF would have to prove in court that the stock could only have been used to make an illegal SBR and there was no other legal use for the stock. Any competent lawyer would get the charge dismissed.
     

    Pinecone

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 4, 2013
    28,175
    If you had only the pistol and a stock, you could ONLY assemble them into an unlicensed SBR.

    If you had a rifle upper, along with the pistol and stock, you could make the point of being able to go from pistol to rifle and back (as long as it was originally assembled as a pistol).

    But either way, how much is the lawyer going to cost you? How much is being arrested and charged going to cost you? How long will it take to get your confiscated firearms back? Is it worth it to you to push the limits?
     

    swinokur

    In a State of Bliss
    Patriot Picket
    Apr 15, 2009
    55,489
    Westminster USA
    If you didn't also possess a rifle upper, you could still be charged with constructive possession unless the pistol either has a dedicated pistol buffer tube which could not accept a stock or the buffer was modified so a stock could not be installed. If you had a carbine stock and a rifle upper and the lower started as a pistol, it could be legal.

    I don't want to find out what BATFE would decide to do. be our guest though.
     

    jkeys

    Active Member
    Jan 30, 2013
    668
    If you didn't also possess a rifle upper, you could still be charged with constructive possession unless the pistol either has a dedicated pistol buffer tube which could not accept a stock or the buffer was modified so a stock could not be installed. If you had a carbine stock and a rifle upper and the lower started as a pistol, it could be legal.

    I don't want to find out what BATFE would decide to do. be our guest though.

    Or just posses a second lower, hell, even an 80% lower that you can claim you were going to build into an HBAR. Or what's to say that you didn't plan to legally turn your pistol build into a registered SBR? Intent is pretty much impossible to prove without a journal of your thoughts or other written / spoken evidence.
     

    swinokur

    In a State of Bliss
    Patriot Picket
    Apr 15, 2009
    55,489
    Westminster USA
    I'm not gonna give the BATFE an opportunity to prove intent. Too much hassle involved for my taste.

    just easier to avoid the BS IMO
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,598
    Messages
    7,287,876
    Members
    33,482
    Latest member
    Claude

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom