SBR Question

[ryknoll3]

Ok,
I know if you take a Title I pistol and build it into a rifle, it CAN NOT go back to a pistol.

I also know that you can build an SBR (use an AR for an example) and convert it back to Title I configuration temporarily, by say putting a longer upper on it. You can switch back and forth as you please. You can even go interstate with the firearm in the Title I configuration.

Here's my question:

I am interested in an MP5 clone. I HATE the look of the 16" barrel, so I was looking at buying a pistol and SBR'ing it. All I would have to do is take the endcap off and throw a stock on it. Much cheaper than chopping a 16" barrel down. Question is, can I take the stock off and temporarily return it to a Title I pistol allowing me to transport interstate (leaving the stock at home of course)? I shoot in IL a lot, and it would be great to be able to return it to Title I temporarily so I can shoot it as a pistol at our IL range, since SBR's aren't allowed. I have a feeling I can't because of the "once a rifle, always a rifle" rule, but I thought I'd check.

 

[indykid]

Not true anymore about once a rifle... For example, check the Beretta Neos/ carbine kit. There is an order to go through to avoid the NFA issue when going back from rifle to pistol.

In your case when you have a pistol, then get your tax stamp for the SBR build, you should be covered when you have the stock on the pistol by the stamp.

If you take the stock off, and install the pistol end cap, my 2 cents as not a lawyer is that it is no difference than me taking the carbine stock off the Neos then remove the 16 inch barrel before I reinstall the pistol barrel and pistol grip. I now have a legal pistol that only a few minutes ago was a rifle.

 

[samot]

Not true anymore about once a rifle...

 

[ssgjason]

There is validity to his statement.
We can look at the TC case which went through the judicial system.
We can look at the letter on AOWs being attached to rifles.
The ATF has issued opinions on the order of assembly affecting how the firearm is treated. Am I going to find out? No. But the ATF has issued some odd ruling lately. I would venture to say there maybe something to this..

 

[ryknoll3]

I could always write to Tech Branch, and ruin it for everyone!

 

[ssgjason]

I could always write to Tech Branch, and ruin it for everyone!

I thought the same thing.
Always a Catch 22...

 

[mms]

Not true anymore about once a rifle... For example, check the Beretta Neos/ carbine kit. There is an order to go through to avoid the NFA issue when going back from rifle to pistol.

Correct there has been an actuall ruleing from the courts TC case.
easy examples like the beretta neos and thompson center arms come to mind as factory offered pistol / carbine combos

 

[bstewrat3]

I do not have the specific ruling to cite but last I heard was it had been decided that if the receiver from a T/C left the factory as a pistol it can be legally converted to a rifle using a barrel 16" or longer and a buttstock, but if the receiver left as a rifle, making it a pistol is illegal. T/C no longer sells receivers undesignated because of this. Sequence of the change over is important especially if doing the conversion at the range because if you put that buttstock on before removing the pistol barrel you've got yourself an SBR. Most guys aren't worrying about the original designation of their receivers because unless you a doing something wrong it should never need to be tracked down and T/C is the only ones with the information.

 

[Gunruner]

I asked a similar question to BATF. The answer I got back was, that since it was on the NFA registry, no matter what configuration that it was in at the moment, it was still an SBR.

(I asked about a registered SBR and using a 16" barrel)

 

[ryknoll3]

The ATF is horse-crap. In fact this whole government bureaucracy thing is horse-crap. They just make up any rules they want, and hold people to them as law, and can change their mind and tell two different people two different things. I saw a letter (I think I have the scan somewhere) that clearly stated that you could put a 16"+ upper on a AR and it would be temporarily treated as a Title I weapon. I know letters are only good for their recipients, but this just adds to the confusion.

Here's the letter:

 

[ryknoll3]

Check out the last paragraph of the second page. This clearly contradicts what they told Gunruner.

 

[loony1]

There is validity to his statement.
We can look at the TC case which went through the judicial system.
We can look at the letter on AOWs being attached to rifles.
The ATF has issued opinions on the order of assembly affecting how the firearm is treated. Am I going to find out? No. But the ATF has issued some odd ruling lately. I would venture to say there maybe something to this..

some people are educated.....