advertised NFA violations


PDA






D Boone
May 24, 2010, 10:14 AM
I took a look through my local bargain trader last week, and saw two ads that got my attention. One is for a AR-15 with 11.5" bbl. Don't get me wrong, this thing was not advertised as an NFA item, but just a "really" nice AR-15 made with high quality components. Another was a cobray that had three pictures, one as a pistol, one with a stock and screw on extension, and one with the stock and extension attached! I was shocked that people are that ignorant. Is this typical, does everyone see this or isolated event? I wouldn't even keep a spare AR stock in my house if I had an AR pistol laying around.

If you enjoyed reading about "advertised NFA violations" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
TexasRifleman
May 24, 2010, 10:33 AM
Is this typical, does everyone see this or isolated event?

Yeah seems to happen a few times a year where I'll notice some obviously illegal thing advertised.

I am always shocked too.

The real problem is of course the NFA laws themselves. Since they have no "common sense" attached, and the barrel lengths especially are seemingly random, it's not like one would ever think that a 17 inch shotgun barrel is a felony while an 18 inch shotgun barrel is perfectly fine.

I suspect that many people make the assumption that since you can buy stocks and short barrels etc through the mail then they must be perfectly legal to use as well.

Scary.

dogtown tom
May 24, 2010, 10:55 AM
Every month on GunBroker, Auction Arms or a gun forum WTS thread, I'll see at least one NFA firearm violation.

The most common ones I find (since I look for Hi Powers) is a Browning Hi Power with a wood stock holster attached. There are some HP's that are exempt from NFA as curios and relics and CAN have a stock attached without a tax stamp.

examples:
PreWar Hi Power with Inglis (wartime) wood stock (ATF says stock must be from the same period)
Inglis Hi Power (fixed sights) with Inglis wood stock (only Inglis HP's with tangent sights get the ATF pass)
T or C series Hi Power with Inglis or prewar flat board wood stock (unless specifically listed as a curio)

All of the above would be NFA violations unless the owner is in possession of a SBR tax stamp.

Zundfolge
May 24, 2010, 01:00 PM
I see NFA violations for sale on Gunbroker often.

The tin foil hat wearing part of me says they're ATF agents trying to sting people ... but Occam's razor states that most of them are likely just ignorant folk (easy to be ignorant of the complex rules though). I also see lots of 922r violations too.

Either ATF is lazy or they're just too busy with other stuff or I imagine they could assign an agent in each state to prowl the gun classified/auction sites 24/7 and probably more than make their quotas.

Prince Yamato
May 24, 2010, 02:25 PM
Gunbroker is replete with these. I think ATF doesn't go after them because what you'd end up with is a very public case of the government coming down on someone for doing what they wish with their private property. In other words. I think the ATF fears losing these cases and a precedent being set for gutting parts of the NFA.

Zoogster
May 24, 2010, 02:27 PM
Most people don't know any better.

A minority of them are likely stings. Most of them are ignorant people.

As TexasRifleman says:

The real problem is of course the NFA laws themselves. Since they have no "common sense" attached, and the barrel lengths especially are seemingly random, it's not like one would ever think that a 17 inch shotgun barrel is a felony while an 18 inch shotgun barrel is perfectly fine.

I suspect that many people make the assumption that since you can buy stocks and short barrels etc through the mail then they must be perfectly legal to use as well.



That is what I see as well.

The most common violation is 922r, and you cannot tell many of those from pictures. Even people that know the NFA restrictions violate 922r regularly.
Who would reasonably even think that identical aftermarket parts and identical firearm layouts are legal or illegal based on where the gun or part comes from?
Just buying a 922r compliant gun and putting a new detachable magazine in it can change 3 complaint parts, making it illegal. You could fire 10 magazines at the range and assemble an illegal firearm each time you insert a couple of those magazines because they come from another country. (And many of the best quality magazines or manufacturer magazines do come from another country.)
Someone could purchase a gun barely complaint by magazine, and purchase a few manufacturer magazines to go with it and be violating federal law.
Who would have known the 30 round American made magazine they purchased it with was legal in the firearm, but the 5 round magazine they picked up for hunting made by the manufacturer in a foreign nation makes the gun illegal? Or the handful of magazines they bought to go with the rifle after researching the best quality magazine are illegal to use in that gun because they come from Bulgaria?

Never mind all the other parts.

Few people realize they have to buy the exact same parts they already have but made in a different country to legally install other parts that are legal on unrestricted guns they see for sale or owned all the time.
A legal 922r conversion can be visually identical to an illegal gun in every way.

Another common one is vertical grips on handguns. Take those AR and AK pistols, which often already have rails. Someone purchases an over the counter forward grip sold for AR rifles everywhere, slides it on the rail. They think they just purchased a simple convenient accessory with no legal implications, after all they see them on ARs at the range all the time.


Short barrels are less common. I think a lot more people realize there is restrictions on those in certain firearms. But there is still a percentage who don't realize. Or who install stocks on handguns, especially handguns based on traditional rifle receivers.

The assumption in a good percentage of the general public on many things is that if it is legally sold then it is legal.
If it was illegal they wouldn't be selling it.
They are not restricted parts, and can be purchased most places no questions asked.
They don't realize they become illegal when installed on their firearm, or even at purchase under constructive possession sometimes if they have no firearm that can legally use it.

Avenger29
May 24, 2010, 03:10 PM
There are some definite ATF stings out there. Cheap autosears? STING. Stuff like short barreled AR? See the above postings for the most likely explanation.

Hell, we have some people who get on this board, post under their real name, addy, phone number, email...that they had a problem with their gun, such as "My such and such suddenly started firing 3 rd bursts after I did a trigger job!" and then the person argues with you when you try to warn them that they have a legal problem on their hands...

TexasRifleman
May 24, 2010, 05:02 PM
Short barrels are less common. I think a lot more people realize there is restrictions on those in certain firearms.

Yeah but that one has it's own trap. I've been playing with NFA and other firearms for close to 20 years and it was literally more than a decade before I realized it was 18 for shotguns and 16 for rifles. I mean, should be the same right? Only a complete lunatic would define NFA laws for rifles/shotguns with different minimum lengths... Oh, nevermind.....

Blakenzy
May 24, 2010, 06:01 PM
The real problem is of course the NFA laws themselves. Since they have no "common sense" attached

A rifle is a pistol if, a pistol is a rifle if, too many foreign parts, constructive possession... very whimsical laws that anyone can easily trip on if they missed their morning coffee.

From what I have read and heard the BATFE only seems specially keen on actively hunting anything involving full auto; it's their pet peeve. For some of the other stuff it appears that people mostly get pinched when they happen to be caught for something else (e.g. bank robbery, drugs) AND get a illegal possession of an SBS piled on top for good measure. Still, not worth the risk to deliberately bypass the tax stamp. Not at all..

FIVETWOSEVEN
May 24, 2010, 06:15 PM
AOW are another thing, can't attach a foregrip to a pistol because it makes it NFA.

Zundfolge
May 24, 2010, 06:50 PM
And I've seen a couple different holster makers making gun wallets that would violate NFA (if you can fire the gun without removing it from the holster and it hides the slide its verboten).

John Parker
May 24, 2010, 07:24 PM
Gunbroker is replete with these. I think ATF doesn't go after them because what you'd end up with is a very public case of the government coming down on someone for doing what they wish with their private property. In other words. I think the ATF fears losing these cases and a precedent being set for gutting parts of the NFA.

This is the same ATF that siezes Airsoft guns and claims that 90% of Mexican drugs guns come from the US. I don't think they worry about their public image, because to the masses they come across as ninja heros.

CleverNickname
May 24, 2010, 09:02 PM
it was literally more than a decade before I realized it was 18 for shotguns and 16 for rifles. I mean, should be the same right?

Apparently the barrel length limits were the same in the NFA as originally passed, but then someone realized that some of the M1 carbines sold as surplus after WWII had barrels just under 18". Sometime in the early '50s (?) the law was amended to change the limit for rifles to 16".

springwalk
May 25, 2010, 01:00 AM
I think its pretty lousy for our supreme court to allow entrapment. There was a "youtube" video a while back showing one how to convert their glock to full auto. At the time I was new to NFA and thought by paying $200 to the ATF would get me a pass on converting my Glock. Fortunately I looked into it further to ensure I wasnt getting into dirty water by watching the video and I soon learned that unless I become a class 2 manufacturer I cant own an auto Glock. I didnt bother watching it as I assume clicking on it leaves my IP fingerprint number thereby giving access to jack booted thugs pointing full auto glocks at me! It was, I assume, a sting by our hard working tax dollars. Land of the free, home of the deceivers. I still dont know a better place to live than AMerica though.

mgregg85
May 25, 2010, 01:55 AM
I remember a gun show I went to a while ago, a guy was bragging about an ar-15 he built. The feature he talked about the most was it's 11.5" barrel. He also mentioned the collapsible stock. I told him that MI doesn't allow SBRs and that he might want to not tell anyone else and go home and take that thing apart immediately. He gave me a nasty look, basically told me to go to hell, and walked away.

mrnkc130
May 25, 2010, 03:20 AM
go on you tube and search "homemade silencer" last time i did that a year ago or so i got 15-20 people putting coke bottles and all sorts of stuff on their guns...

i'm convinced the ATF is looking that hard for violations..

i'm not going to test that theory though...

A and O
May 25, 2010, 04:35 AM
Simple me, I've not seen any of this going on.

PTK
May 25, 2010, 05:35 AM
I've reported people many times for NFA violations, etc. Police don't care unless the person is also committing other crimes, pretty much.

LiquidTension
May 26, 2010, 02:43 PM
I arrested a gang member and convicted felon in possession of a shotgun IN THE PRESENCE of an ATF agent and they wouldn't prosecute federally. Unless the person has multiple prior felonies involving drugs and weapons, they don't seem to care. I guess they're too busy doing...other things.

dogtown tom
May 26, 2010, 07:18 PM
LiquidTension I arrested a gang member and convicted felon in possession of a shotgun IN THE PRESENCE of an ATF agent and they wouldn't prosecute federally. Unless the person has multiple prior felonies involving drugs and weapons, they don't seem to care. I guess they're too busy doing...other things.

It's not the job of an ATF agent to prosecute a felon, that authority lies with the U.S. Attorney's Office. Blaming that ATF agent for failing to prosecute is like blaming a beat cop for not prosecuting every minor infraction he sees (ala Barney Fife).

As most state law mirrors federal law in regards to a felon in possession of a firearm why SHOULD he try to make a Federal case? I would rather see the US Attorney's Office concentrate on putting more of our elected officials behind bars- that seems to be a full time job here in Dallas.:D

v3r71g0
May 26, 2010, 10:42 PM
If you are talking about the 11.5" upper on KY Classifieds, you will notice that it was for the upper receiver only. It was attached to a pistol lower, which has been sold.

http://www.kyclassifieds.com/ad84288.htm

Davek1977
May 27, 2010, 05:18 AM
I think its pretty lousy for our supreme court to allow entrapment. There was a "youtube" video a while back showing one how to convert their glock to full auto. At the time I was new to NFA and thought by paying $200 to the ATF would get me a pass on converting my Glock. Fortunately I looked into it further to ensure I wasnt getting into dirty water by watching the video and I soon learned that unless I become a class 2 manufacturer I cant own an auto Glock. I didnt bother watching it as I assume clicking on it leaves my IP fingerprint number thereby giving access to jack booted thugs pointing full auto glocks at me! It was, I assume, a sting by our hard working tax dollars. Land of the free, home of the deceivers. I still dont know a better place to live than AMerica though.

If you are going to accuse someone oif attempted entrapment, it would serve you well to have a working knowledge of the word's meaning. Entrapment is basically FORCING or pressuring someone to commit a crime they otherwise would not commit. Giving someone the knowledge needed to commit a crime IS NOT entrapment, nor is merely giving someone the opprotunity to commit a crime(think of reverse stings where drug buyers are busted when trying to buy off of undercover "dealers"). there is NO WAY a youtube video showing how to convert a weapon is itself entrapment in any concieveable way. No one is FORCING you to modify your Glock, or even suggesting that you do so. Knowing something CAN be done is far different than actually doing it. Someone telling me pointing a gun at someone and pulling its trigger can kill someone doesn't mean they are suggesting I do so, or advising me its a good idea. Yopu can buy any number of books, legally and without implication, describing how to convert many popular firearms. The books themselves are not illegal. If you actually complete the conversion though, you have violated the law in most circumstances. Its not entrapment in any way however, because no one forced or coerced you into doing the conversion. People accusing the government of entrapment, when they have no real world knowledge of the legal definition is annoying to me. I'm not saying the ATF has never entrapped anyone, but the example you used as entrapment is anything but accurate.

LiquidTension
May 27, 2010, 10:32 AM
It's not the job of an ATF agent to prosecute a felon, that authority lies with the U.S. Attorney's Office. Blaming that ATF agent for failing to prosecute is like blaming a beat cop for not prosecuting every minor infraction he sees (ala Barney Fife).

As most state law mirrors federal law in regards to a felon in possession of a firearm why SHOULD he try to make a Federal case? I would rather see the US Attorney's Office concentrate on putting more of our elected officials behind bars- that seems to be a full time job here in Dallas.

Around here the ATF is usually the agency that brings federal gun charges up to the AUSA's office. The only way my agency is even remotely allowed to bring such a case is if the person meets 2211 criteria - 2 violent crimes, 2 major drug offenses, or one of each. Even then, I have to call guess who...ATF. Also, there is no prohibition in SC regarding felons in possession of long guns, only hand guns. Therefore, if the feds don't take the case there is no case at all.

zoom6zoom
May 27, 2010, 10:46 AM
One thing to remember about online videos is that not all those people are in the USA... those things are perfectly legal to do in many other places.

Warhawk83
May 27, 2010, 11:52 AM
A guy that works at a giant sporting goods store where I live ( starts with an A) told me about his sawed off shotgun.

Worked at the gun counter,I was buying my 12 gauge Maverick. Started talking about SG's and he told me about the sawed off he keeps in his house, cut off basically to pistol length.

I advised him of the legal situation he was in and he said " If I have to use it, I'll deal with it then, probably throw it out before the cops get there."


:eek:

ny32182
May 27, 2010, 12:22 PM
I must not be looking hard enough, because I don't see a lot of NFA violations on GB, but unless someone is an enthusiast in-tune with the NFA it doesn't surprise me at all that lots of people would inadvertently build unregistered SBRs. All the parts are readily available with little or no warning that assembling them on an unregistered receiver is against the law. If no one ever told you about the NFA, how would you have a clue that these configurations are illegal? When laws don't make any sense, you can't expect the average joe will just intrinsicly know these things.

7.62 Nato
May 27, 2010, 12:56 PM
I've reported people many times for NFA violations, etc. Police don't care unless the person is also committing other crimes, pretty much.
Wow, that sounds almost like right (what they did, not what you did).

LiquidTension
May 27, 2010, 02:46 PM
IMO the best thing to do is politely advise people that are flaunting obviously illegal items as to the legality of whatever it is they have. If they don't listen, you've done your part to warn them. If they do, it could save them some jail time. If it's a sting...well, at least YOU were doing the right thing.

Zoogster
May 27, 2010, 05:26 PM
Someone selling such a firearm may also not choose to advertise the extra hassle of transfer up front, but be entirely ready to transfer it properly as an NFA firearm.


That may hurt the sale after the fact though, when someone is unwilling to go through the process for transfer.
It will probably cause more people to bid.

If you enjoyed reading about "advertised NFA violations" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!