Reply from BATF regarding Thompson Encore question


PDA






<SLV>
March 14, 2008, 12:36 PM
I had submitted a question to the BATF regarding the legality of attaching a folding stock to a pistol with a 16" barrel. I had in mind a Thompson Encore 15" .30-06 w/permanently attached muzzle break (for 16" total). I thought the response was interesting and would be appreciated by the many Encore/Contender enthusiasts who have grappled with the legal ramifications of reconfiguration:

-------------------------------

Dear __________________:

This is in reply to your correspondence which was received by the Firearms Technology Branch, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), on January 30, 2008. In your letter you inquire about the attachment of a folding stock to a pistol having a barrel length of 16 inches or greater.

As background, 27 CFR Sec. 479.11 (Meaning of Terms) states, in part:

The overall length of a weapon made from a shotgun or rifle is the distance between the extreme ends of the weapon measured along a line parallel to the center line of the bore.

Based on this description of overall length and its correct measurement, ATF has taken the position that firearms having folding or collapsible stocks are properly measured for overall length with the stock fully extended.

In the situation you present, the attachment of a folding shoulder stock to a pistol having a barrel length of 16 inches or greater would be lawful as long as the overall length of the resulting firearm is at least 26 inches with the stock fully extended. We caution that, because the configuration you have specified results in the manufacture of a rifle, a subsequent reconfiguration of the firearm to a pistol configuration would result in a weapon made from a rifle, which is a weapon controlled by the National Firearms Act (NFA).

We thank you for your inquiry and trust that the foregoing has been responsive.

Sincerely yours,

John R. Spencer
Chief, Firearms Technology Branch

------------------------------------

I have heard T/C enthusiasts claim that if you purchase a pistol registered receiver that you could always attach a rifle stock and barrel to it. This is true, HOWEVER... according to this letter you could NEVER change it back because you had "manufactured" a rifle.

I was thinking about getting a single receiver to use as both, but now I think I will just get two receivers.

PS - It is ridiculous that they are so anal about the letter of the law even when it violates common sense.

If you enjoyed reading about "Reply from BATF regarding Thompson Encore question" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Grandpa Shooter
March 14, 2008, 01:43 PM
Badly
Against
Thinking
Freely

Grizzly Adams
March 14, 2008, 01:47 PM
I was always taught to listen to my Grandpa!

Ed Ames
March 14, 2008, 02:06 PM
I don't understand why this is a surprise to anyone.

The law says that pistols w/ shoulder stocks are NFA weapons which need a tax stamp.

An encore pistol w/ a shoulder stock is therefore an NFA weapon which needs a tax stamp.

The only misleading part of what they said was the part about guns made from rifles or shotguns being measured with the stock extended so it needed to be 26" overall. The measurement is true but not relevant because (at least as I understand it) a NFA pistol w/ shoulder stock does not need to meet the minimum overall length requirements of a rifle or shotgun.

Hkmp5sd
March 14, 2008, 02:07 PM
We caution that, because the configuration you have specified results in the manufacture of a rifle, a subsequent reconfiguration of the firearm to a pistol configuration would result in a weapon made from a rifle, which is a weapon controlled by the National Firearms Act (NFA).


You just cannot get consistant answers from ATF. They have previously stated that you CAN convert a pistol into a rifle and then back into a pistol.

For example: Glock pistol to rifle conversion.

http://www.mechtechsys.com/images/CCU%20-%20fixed%20removable%20stock%201.jpg

Hkmp5sd
March 14, 2008, 02:10 PM
I don't understand why this is a surprise to anyone.

The law says that pistols w/ shoulder stocks are NFA weapons which need a tax stamp.

An encore pistol w/ a shoulder stock is therefore an NFA weapon which needs a tax stamp.


Not what the letter stated. It stated you could convert the pistol to a rifle if it met the minimum requirements of barrel length and overall length. They stated that once you did this, if you wanted to convert it back into a pistol, you must register it as a SBR because it cannot ever be a pistol again.

Which they have stated the opposite of on other occassions.

barnetmill
March 14, 2008, 02:16 PM
A possible issue is that a contender with folding stock could be fired with the stock folded. Does it become a pistol when so used and have you manufactured a rifle in doing so?

There was a few years ago a supreme court case involving thompson contendors on a related issue.
"Respondent Thompson/Center Arms Company manufactures a single shot pistol called the "Contender," designed so that its handle and barrel can be removed from its "receiver," the metal frame housing the trigger, hammer and firing mechanism. See 27 CFR 179.11 (1991) (definition of frame or receiver). For a short time in 1985 Thompson/Center also manufactured a carbine conversion kit consisting of a 21 inch barrel, a rifle stock, and a wooden fore end. If one joins the receiver with the conversion kit's rifle stock, the 21 inch barrel, and the rifle fore end, the product is a carbine rifle with a 21 inch barrel. If, however, the shorter, pistol length barrel is not removed from the receiver when the rifle stock is added, one is left with a 10-inch or "short barreled" carbine rifle. The entire conversion, from pistol to long barreled rifle takes only a few minutes; conversion to a short barreled rifle takes even less time."
"..... It is proper, therefore, to apply the rule of lenity and resolve the ambiguity in Thompson/Center's favor. " Read website for details
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-0164.ZO.html

jerkface11
March 14, 2008, 02:17 PM
Ask them a couple more times till they give you the answer you want. Then keep that letter and discard the rest.

LB7_Driver
March 14, 2008, 02:18 PM
.....
Which they have stated the opposite of on other occassions.

Contradict themselves? Never!
:scrutiny:

DFW1911
March 14, 2008, 02:19 PM
They stated that once you did this, if you wanted to convert it back into a pistol, you must register it as a SBR because it cannot ever be a pistol again.

That's the way I'm reading it. Take it hunting, attach the stock, remove the stock when you're done and it's now a SBR.

Yep, makes perfect sense :rolleyes:

Thanks,
DFW1911

Gator
March 14, 2008, 03:52 PM
We caution that, because the configuration you have specified results in the manufacture of a rifle, a subsequent reconfiguration of the firearm to a pistol configuration would result in a weapon made from a rifle, which is a weapon controlled by the National Firearms Act (NFA).


This is why it is dangerous to ask the ATF questions they have answered before; you never know what they will come up with. I don't think TC owners will thank you for this.

alsaqr
March 14, 2008, 05:10 PM
"I don't think TC owners will thank you for this."



Bingo!!!!!

bogie
March 14, 2008, 05:21 PM
Yeah, but next week, it'll be different. Keep in mind that the induhvidual responding may have never seen a TC pistol or rifle...

IMHO, as long as you are not making a short barreled rifle (i.e., affix the 16+" barrel before you affix the shoulder stock), you should be good. But I'm not with F-Troop.

moosehunt
March 14, 2008, 05:24 PM
There is nothing new here. What they told you has been law for quite some time. The Contender and Encore present a rather unique situation. People make the changes back and forth regularly. There is no way to know that Encore pistol A has ever been a rifle or not. The ATF knows this, and basically said so if you carefully read the statement quoted already regarding the 1980's case. The smart thing to do, is don't rock the boat. If it becomes something of significance on the ATF radar, a bad result is all that can occur.

jrfoxx
March 14, 2008, 05:25 PM
They stated that once you did this, if you wanted to convert it back into a pistol, you must register it as a SBR because it cannot ever be a pistol again.
I agree that this seems to be a kind of odd opinion on their part, and they have stated just the opposite before.cant say I'm surprised by any of it though.Based on this letter though, seems like adding the folding stock to a T/C woud just be kinda pointless, as it would have to stay a rifle, which it seems kinda defeats the whole purpose here, as juts buying a regular rifle would be easier, leaglly safer, and probly cheaper, so they kind of make the whole thing pointless with this opnion.And it's a stupid opinion at that anyways. if it was OK as a pistol when you bought it, why does it beome an evil NFA weapon because you added a stock, whch was ok and then later take the stock off, making just like it was when it was bought as a title 1 frearm! why is it now an SBR? oh, thats right, beause they make up the rules as thy go along, and this deision creates crimnals out of law abiding people, so it gives them people thecan bust, fin, and confiscat property from, generates some $200 tax stamp sales, and crerates hassles for gun owners.NOW I can see why they said what they said....it's all win-win and $$ for them :rolleyes:


-sorry, the tinfoil got a little tight at the end there, but its REALLY hard to not dislike the BATFE and be REAL suspicious of ANYTHINY they do or say IMHO

Zoogster
March 14, 2008, 07:22 PM
This conflicts with previous statements given by them.

A pistol could have a 16"+ barrel put on it, and then have a shoulder stock attached (totaling over 26" overall). It could then be disassembled removing the shoulder stock first to once again create a legal pistol.

This is a very new interpretation that once someone puts thier encore in carbine setup it can never be undone.

Nobody is going to thank you for this new interpretation. This interpretation would essentialy kill the carbine market where people enjoy converting pistols and carbines back and forth to suite different roles, such as the encore.

Wes Janson
March 14, 2008, 11:52 PM
I'm not surprised by this interpretation, because it falls in line with prior statements that define a rifle as a firearm that has ever had a stock placed on it. The catch is (and what I really want to know): if you take a 16" Contender pistol (PISTOL), add a stock (RIFLE), and then remove the stock ( ??? ) what does it become? It's not a pistol, it's (presumably) not an AOW, and it's not an SBR because the length is still 16". Title 1? And on a similar note, what happens if you buy an AR-15, and then throw away the collapsible stock and shoot it like an AR pistol?

Hkmp5sd
March 15, 2008, 01:01 AM
and it's not an SBR because the length is still 16". Title 1? And on a similar note, what happens if you buy an AR-15, and then throw away the collapsible stock and shoot it like an AR pistol?


You still have the overall length of 26" issue. If it falls below that, it is a SBR.

The problem with this interpretation is that ATF has prevoiusly stated you can go from a pistol to a rifle and back to a pistol. There are conversions on the market to convert both Glock and 1911 handguns into rifles where ATF has stated it is ok to go back to pistol mode.

Wes Janson
March 15, 2008, 09:53 AM
Ahh, SBR then, you're right.

But that still leaves the question...if I pull the stock off of an AR-15, and leave it off, haven't I illegally created an SBR (assuming overall length is under 26" with a 16" bbl)?

Hkmp5sd
March 15, 2008, 10:46 AM
Yep. ATF has always held that once a rifle, always a rifle. Once a shotgun, always a shotgun. Once a machinegun, always a machinegun. Once a pistol, always a pistol.

Now they say that a pistol can turn into a rifle and never go back.

<SLV>
March 15, 2008, 11:39 AM
Several posters have misunderstood my intentions -- I'm not looking for praise or thanks from T/C owners. I wasn't even asking a question of the BATF regarding converting from a pistol to a rifle. I was merely asking if it was legal to attach a folding stock to a pistol with a 16" barrel. The extra answer came without inquiry, and I do believe that when the DOJ issues a response it is of value to T/C owners.

The fact that it took @ 10 weeks for them to get back with me indicates that they didn't have a ready and clear answer.

bogie
March 15, 2008, 12:56 PM
Nope. It means it sat on someone's desk for 9.5 weeks while they went out and had their nails done.

Gator
March 15, 2008, 01:50 PM
I was merely asking if it was legal to attach a folding stock to a pistol with a 16" barrel.

The answer to that question is widely known and you could have easily found the answer without writing to the ATF. The point of many posts here is that the ATF should not be consulted without a good reason. They make up rules as they go along and constantly contradict themselves and/or the law; rarely with good results to gun owners.

Bad Voodoo
March 15, 2008, 02:44 PM
This conflicts with previous statements given by them.

Yeah, but this letter was signed by the Chief! :rolleyes:

Daryl Licht
March 15, 2008, 03:17 PM
I thought this was all settled in United States v. Thompson Center Arms. Halbrook's comments are at http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/tc.html. Does a SCOTUS decision not trump a bureaucrat's opinion?

OMGWTFBBQ
March 15, 2008, 03:32 PM
Does a SCOTUS decision not trump a bureaucrat's opinion?Bureaucrats have no problem ignoring the founding document of this country, what makes you think they'd have any qualms about ignoring a supreme court ruling?

Sure, you'd probably win in court, but it'd cost you alot of money, time, and a gigantic headache.

Onmilo
March 15, 2008, 04:14 PM
I think the BATFE letter is pretty clear.
You can install a sixteen inch or longer barrel on your pistol frame and then install a folding rifle type stock, effectively converting the pistol into a carbione length rifle.

You cannot install a barrel shorter than sixteen inches on the frame with the folding stock also in place as this turns the firearm into a short barrel rifle.

You may install a pistol grip and a barrel shorter or longer than 16 inches on the frame effective reconverting the weapon back to the original pistol specifications.

If you T/C Encore was originally purchased as a carbine/rifle, and serial numbered as a carbine/rifle frame you may not convert the rifle to a pistol using a short barrel and a pistol grip as this violates the law concerning manufacture of a pistol from a rifle.

If your Encore frame was originally purchased as a pistol and serial numbered in a block as a pistol intended frame, you may convert it to rifle specifications.
There is no law preventing this.

Zoogster
March 15, 2008, 05:21 PM
I think the BATFE letter is pretty clear.
You can install a sixteen inch or longer barrel on your pistol frame and then install a folding rifle type stock, effectively converting the pistol into a carbione length rifle.

You cannot install a barrel shorter than sixteen inches on the frame with the folding stock also in place as this turns the firearm into a short barrel rifle.

You may install a pistol grip and a barrel shorter or longer than 16 inches on the frame effective reconverting the weapon back to the original pistol specifications.

If you T/C Encore was originally purchased as a carbine/rifle, and serial numbered as a carbine/rifle frame you may not convert the rifle to a pistol using a short barrel and a pistol grip as this violates the law concerning manufacture of a pistol from a rifle.

If your Encore frame was originally purchased as a pistol and serial numbered in a block as a pistol intended frame, you may convert it to rifle specifications.
There is no law preventing this.

Onmilo you must have just totaly missed the most important part of the letter:

In the situation you present, the attachment of a folding shoulder stock to a pistol having a barrel length of 16 inches or greater would be lawful as long as the overall length of the resulting firearm is at least 26 inches with the stock fully extended. We caution that, because the configuration you have specified results in the manufacture of a rifle, a subsequent reconfiguration of the firearm to a pistol configuration would result in a weapon made from a rifle, which is a weapon controlled by the National Firearms Act (NFA).

This letter clearly states it is in fact illegal to take your legal pistol, turn it legaly into a carbine, and then remove the parts that turned it into a carbine and make it a pistol once again.

This of course is merely this "John R. Spencer Chief, Firearms Technology Branch's" opinion, and may be trumped by a supreme court decision, but it is in fact the agency given the authority to interprete the law on firearms. So you can be more right and still wrong at the same time.
This interpretation is at odds with both the court case and previous statements by the ATF or BATFE.
However if it is an official letter by the people tasked with interpreting and applying the laws, you could still find yourself charged and arrested by enjoying multiple configurations, which are all themselves legal, but the conversion back from carbine to pistol of a firearm originaly a pistol being illegal.

According to this interpretation simply attaching the parts is manufacture of a rifle, turning the legal pistol into a rifle. You then legaly have a rifle which you manufactured, and can only legaly make things from it that are legal to make from a rifle. Since making a pistol from a rifle is illegal, that means you could not unconvert it.

So they are in fact saying it is legal in all forms. It is however only legal to convert one way. What that means to you as a gun owner is that if there is ever a picture (like the security footage at most ranges) or a witness that proves it was at any time made into a carbine, that documents it in carbine format, it will then be a felony for you to ever be seen or have it in pistol format from then on because that alone will prove you illegaly made an NFA weapon, subjecting you to prison time and felony charges.

Carl N. Brown
March 15, 2008, 09:22 PM
AS I read what ATF has said (and you can take my opinion with a cup of salt):

If you remove the folding stock with the "rifle" barrel still attached and put a pistol grip on it, you have made a under-26" rifle and that is NFA.

Remove the folding stock, remove the "RIFLE" barrel, attach a pistol barrel and a pistol stock and you have a pistol. Of course, that is me following the logic of the afore-mentioned Supreme Court ruling on the Thompson carbine kit. ATF opinions will vary in both directions.

Hkmp5sd
March 15, 2008, 09:42 PM
the "rifle" barrel still attached

1. The original question asked about a handgun with a permanently attached 16" barrel.

2. There is no maximum length for a handgun barrel. You can have a 100" barrel if you desire and it is still a handgun.

Carl N. Brown
March 15, 2008, 10:11 PM
The Thompson Encore is a pistol with a 15" removable barrel.
http://www.tcarms.com/firearms/encorePistols.php
The original poster said permanently attached muzzle break to make a 16" overall length barrel. The barrel would still be removable.

The original Thompson center pistol/carbine conversion that was the
object of a Supreme Court ruling consisted of a kit: rifle stock and
rifle barrel that swapped out the pistol grip and pistol barrel.

ATF has a rule that once a barrel has been installed on a rifle,
it cannot be used on a pistol. Somehow, installing the folding stock
on the 16" barreled Thompson Encore makes that barrel a rifle barrel
that cannot be used again on a pistol.

But following the logic of the SCOTUS ruling, the Thompson Encore
pistol frame without rifle stock or rifle barrel would become
a pistol with a pistol barrel and pistol grip installed.

The hookah smoking caterpillar is giving me a call . . . to follow
Alice and the White Rabbit. Trying to figure out what the ATF means
by its rules is mind-warping.

MachIVshooter
March 15, 2008, 11:00 PM
It has long been maintained that pistols can be converted back and forth. Mec-tec has made carbine kits for a long time, Beretta has (had?) the Neos Carbine kit, etc.

Onmillo had it right.

This is the first time any of us had heard this interpretation, and it is not in line with the NFA or SCOTUS rulings.

As has also been stated, it was silly to write ATF about this.

On that note, I just can't see ATF wasting time and resources chasing T/C contender owners on bogus manufacturing and constructive possession charges where it is their word against yours that the parts were ever installed in an illegal configuration. I could be wrong, though.

moosehunt
March 16, 2008, 08:53 PM
Again, let me suggest logic and common sense. There is absolutely no way that an ATF agent or anyone else can ever know if a Contender or Encore pistol has ever been a rifle or not, and the ATF well knows this. So, don't rock the boat by pestering the ATF over the matter. Only bad can come of it.

Crosshair
March 16, 2008, 08:57 PM
If your Encore frame was originally purchased as a pistol and serial numbered in a block as a pistol intended frame, you may convert it to rifle specifications.
There is no law preventing this.
This is exactly why I specifically bought an Encore PISTOL frame as I wanted the option to convert between both.

This issue was settled years ago in "United States v. Thompson/Center Arms Co." It was a 5-4 decision, but was in our favor.

As a CYA measure I intend to always have the pistol stock with the gun.

<SLV>
March 21, 2008, 12:52 PM
The reason this matters is that I was considering the purchase of one or two frames for my Encore set up. If I have one frame and all of the aperatus to configure it as a pistol or a rifle this would be construed as "intent", and the assumption would be that it had AT SOME POINT been "manufactured" as a rifle and subsequently reconfigured as a pistol. To be safe I believe it is best to have two receivers registered as a pistol and a rifle.

In light of some of the legal information posted here perhaps I should reply to Mr. Spencer and ask him to clarify his answer in light of the case law.

PS - I had sought an answer to this question here:http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=4065054#post4065054, and also the same subject is BANNED at SpecialtyPistols. That is why I finally wrote to the BATF.

expeditionx
August 3, 2008, 02:03 AM
http://www.bellmtcs.com/store/index.php?cid=239
http://www.bellmtcs.com/store/images/category239/BATFpg1.gif
http://www.bellmtcs.com/store/images/category239/BATFpg2.gif

savetheclaypigeons
August 3, 2008, 02:06 AM
I'm impressed they took the time to personally address your questions

Aguila Blanca
August 3, 2008, 03:46 AM
That response is inconsistent with previous BATFE rulings, specifically addressing Thompson Contender firearms. The basic rule, as I understand it, is that a firearm that began life as a rifle cannot be converted into a pistol without going through the paperwork to register it as a short-barreled rifle. However, a firearm that began life as a pistol can be converted into a rifle and then back with impunity. The "gotcha" is that, when attaching a shoulder stock, the barrel must be at least 16" and the overall length has to be __?__ in order to avoid having a short-barreled rifle.

The same situation attaches to those 16" barrels and detachable should stock kits for the 1911. As long as you use both together, you create a carbine. Attach just the shoulder stock with the standard 5" barrel and you have an NFA weapon. But once you use the kit, there's nothing that says you can't put the firearm back to the original, 5" 1911 configuration.

expeditionx
August 3, 2008, 04:18 AM
Thats not my letter it was posted on Mike Bellm's site.
I do not have a link to another letter that I have seen before
that states that once a buttstock is mated to a receiver
the ATF considers the receiver a rifle even if the receiver started out as a pistol:Therefore, making the receiver a rifle forever in their view. Untill the SCOTUS declares different, their policy stands as
crazy as it is. Your right, it does implicate pistol conversion kits
like mech tech, but its the end user that can get nailed not the kit seller

plexreticle
August 3, 2008, 05:21 AM
Badly
Against
Thinking
Freely

Bad
Americans
Taking
Firearms

22-rimfire
August 3, 2008, 10:13 AM
My read of Chief Spencer's letter is once a rifle always a rifle and if shortened it is a NFA issue. Once a pistol not always a pistol.... meaning if you convert a pistol to a rifle, you can not convert it back to a pistol.

The interpretation of the Supreme Court decision on US vs Thompson Center Arms seems to indicate just the opposite. Once a pistol, always a pistol.

If it were me, I'd write another letter to BATF with very specific questions regarding the conversion and the parts issue. I would refer them to the Supreme Court decision so that the two are intertwined in their response (if possible).

The answers would be important to the AR15 machine pistol topic which I current go with "once a rifle, always a rifle" (if it is converted it is a NFA issue as I understand it) and "once a pistol, always a pistol" unless it is converted to a rifle or what?

There is also the issue of just bringing it up, you are rocking the boat and forcing an interpretation that may or may not be favorable to your perspective. I do believe that the BATF has better things to do than hanging out at ranges looking for a TC pistol converted to a rifle and observe it being reconfigured into a pistol for the sake of presecution of an otherwise honest law abiding citizen. I guess I still have the notion that the BATF tries to be fair.

This kind of thing really frightens me from a legal perspective. I would not want the aggrevation and hence have two; one rifle and one pistol.

butwhat
September 16, 2008, 11:37 PM
I have been told that it is illegal to use a pistol with a barrel length of over 16" in Illinois for deer hunting.

Is it illegal to have a pistol with a barrel length longer than 16" in Illinois?
Is it legal to hunt with a pistol with a barrel length longer than 16" in Illinois?

Could somebody clear this up for me once and fro all?
Thanks

Jim K
September 16, 2008, 11:49 PM
I have noticed a tendency by folks here to either misread BATFE information and letters or to read into them something they do not say, then castigate BATFE for supposed inconsistencies or errors.

In this case, the letter clearly says that it is OK to build a rifle with a folding stock, but a "SUBSEQUENT RECONFIGURATION" to convert it back to a pistol (barrel shortened or a short barrel installed), it becomes an NFA firearm. That is surely not new to anyone.

Maybe the words "subsequent reconfiguraton" are just too big. Maybe they should have used words of one syllable.

Jim

General Geoff
September 16, 2008, 11:56 PM
They really aught to just strike SBRs from the NFA and get rid of all this nonsense. But then they couldn't prosecute so many innocent folks for installing a shoulder stock before a longer barrel, and putting them away for 10 or more years in federal prison because of it.

JCMAG
September 17, 2008, 01:13 AM
Or, the not recommended route in any way as it could get you in a bad place, would be "what the BATFE doesn't know won't hurt them."

Could hurt you, though.

I wish it were that simple... *sigh*

I would recommend leaving the pistol/rifle/thing be and relieving yourself of this headache.

An encore pistol with a collapsible stock? Awesome!

But not worth all of the BS.

Find a non-BARFE related way of making a pistol-like rifle.

mp510
September 17, 2008, 01:35 AM
The fact that it took @ 10 weeks for them to get back with me indicates that they didn't have a ready and clear answer.
I had a recent tech branch letter take 8 months.:eek:

The response regarding it being an SBR if the stock is removed is not a new one. They have been providing it for sometime now. It makes sense- once a rifle, always a rifle.

WhisperFan
September 17, 2008, 01:40 AM
Here is a letter where the ATF says that the Supreme Court decision in Thompson applies only to the Thompson kits.

http://i281.photobucket.com/albums/kk219/WhisperFan/Convert1.jpg

http://i281.photobucket.com/albums/kk219/WhisperFan/Convert2.jpg

evan price
September 17, 2008, 01:48 AM
To muddy the waters further-
Given the BATFE's wide and broad interpretations of the law, if you had a Thompson-Center in pistol configuration, and another Thompson-Center in rifle configuration, plus a caliber conversion for the pistol (with short barrel), would it not be possibly constructive possession because you had a rifle receiver and a short barrel to fit that rifle receiver (even if not mounted) as they have already prosecuted people for in other variations?


G-D they make this s***(stuff) needlessly complicated...

WhisperFan
September 17, 2008, 03:47 AM
I don't think you would be. If that were true, that would also mean that if you had an M-16 MG with a 14.5" barrel, a 10.5" upper for it, and a Title 1 AR-15, they could say that you were in constructive possession of an unregistered SBR.

I believe that you have to have a lawful method to assemble all your uppers and lowers, but no at the same time. In other words, if you have an AR-15 pistol and two short uppers for it, and you also own a full-size Title 1 AR-15, that is OK.

What is not OK is when you have a shorty upper, and no MG, no SBR, no Pistol, and no way to mount that upper, but you DO own an AR-15 with a rifle length barrel.

WhisperFan
September 17, 2008, 03:49 AM
You know ..... those ATF guys are smart !!!

http://i281.photobucket.com/albums/kk219/WhisperFan/ATF.jpg

RecoilRob
September 17, 2008, 08:13 AM
So, in the Big Scheme of Things, how does this really matter?

So long as you begin with a pistol, you can freely change it to a rifle...and back, so long as no inspection is made by any authority.

If you are found to be hunting, defending or whatever, with a pistol frame converted to a rifle configuration...no harm no foul. Once this discovery is made and documented, the pistol is now a rifle and cannot go back lest you get in trouble if inspected again.

So long as you don't run afoul of someone who 'cares', who is to know that you have ever changed it one way or the other?

I'd not worry too much as long as you are temporarily converting a pistol. Converting a rifle to pistol...if you are discovered, would be bad.

UhKlem
September 17, 2008, 10:49 AM
It's interesting that this letter considers the simple changing of furniture as 'manufacturing'. The Bureau of Alterations, Tales, Fabrications, and Everything recently put out an edict that refinishing is manufacturing. I guess if a manufacturer has a procedure for laborer nose picking, then nose picking is a manufacturing process, and nose picking within a 1000 feet of a gun will come under their auspices too.

They seem to be weaving a framework where anything done to a gun by an owner will require a license.

atblis
September 17, 2008, 04:18 PM
I've got a headache from reading this crap. This whole thing is beyond stupid.

recently put out an edict that refinishing is manufacturing.
That's a bit misleading. You have to be purchasing guns for the purpose of refinishing and then reselling.

They seem to be weaving a framework where anything done to a gun by an owner will require a license.
Yep, that's how the government works. Usually the "reasonable restrictions" line is thrown in there somewhere for good measure.

1KPerDay
September 17, 2008, 04:28 PM
What about BP revolvers with attachable/detachable shoulder stocks? Are they not technically firearms and therefore exempt from these stupid rules?

blkbrd666
September 17, 2008, 05:11 PM
So, you put the shoulder stock on the P08 Artillery...and you can never take it back off without going to jail.

mp510
September 17, 2008, 05:58 PM
So, you put the shoulder stock on the P08 Artillery...and you can never take it back off without going to jail.
Actually, many original artillery lugers and original shoulder stocks are exempt from NFA requirements.
http://atf.treas.gov/firearms/curios/sec3.htm
Luger, Artillery model, pistols having chamber dates of 1914 through 1918 or 1920, having German Weimar Navy markings consisting of the letter M over an anchor and a German Navy property number accompanied by original Artillery Luger flat board stocks, bearing German Weimar Navy markings of the letter M over an anchor with or without Navy property numbers.
Luger, the 1920 Commercial Artillery model, pistols as mfd. by DWM or Erfurt, having undated chambers, commercial proofmarks, and bearing the inscription Germany or Made in Germany on the receiver and accompanied by original, German mfd., artillery type, detachable wooden shoulder stocks.
Luger, DWM Pistol, model 1900, 1902, or 1906, in 7.65 Luger or 9mm parabellum cal., having the American Eagle chamber crest, and barrel lengths of either 4" or 4-3/4, with original detachable Ideal shoulder stocks and Ideal frame grips.
DWM Luger, Original models 1904, 1906, 1908, 1914 and 1920. Naval pistols in 9mm parabellum or 7.65mm cal., in both the Commercial and Naval military varieties; in both altered and unaltered barrel lengths in themodel 1904 and in both altered and unaltered safety markings in the model 1906; with original board-type detachable shoulder stocks bearing brass or iron discs, with or without markings, or, if without brass or iron discs, being of the Navy flat board-type. This exemption applies only to the listed Naval Luger pistols if mated to the Naval Luger stock and will not apply if theNaval Luger pistol is mated to the Artillery stock. The Naval stock has an overall dimension of 12-3/4", a rear width of 4-5/8", a front width of 1-1/2", a rear thickness of 9/16", and a front thickness of l-3/16".
Luger, DWM Stoeger model 1920 and 1923, semiautomatic pistols in 7.65mm or 9mm parabellum cal., in barrel lengths of 8, 10, 12, and 12-1/2", having either American Eagle chamber crests and/or Stoeger frame and/or upper receiver marks, having either standard, Navy or artillery rear sights, having extractors marked either "Loaded" or "Geladen" and having frame safety markings of either "Gesichert" or "Safe," together w/original commercial flat board stocks of the artillery type, which bear no S/Ns or military proof marks;may include a "Germany" marking.
Luger, DWM Pistol-Carbine, model 1920, 7.65mm or 9mm parabellum cal., with accompanying original commercial type shoulder stock, with or without forearm piece, having barrel lengths of 11-3/4" to less than 16".
Luger, German model 1914, Artillery model pistol, mfd. by DWM or Erfurt, having chambers dated 1914 - -1918, bearing Imperial German military proofmarks & accompanied by original, German mfd., artillery type, detachable wooden shoulder stocks.
Luger, model 1902, Pistol-Carbine, 7.65mm Luger with original commercial type shoulder stock and forearm and 11-3/4" barrel.
Luger, Persian (Iranian) Artillery model, pistols, as mfd. by Mauser prior to 1945, accompanied by the original artillery type, detachable wooden shoulder stock, bearing a S/N in Farsi characters stamped into the wood on the left side.
Luger, semiautomatic pistol, certain variations with Benke-Thiemann folding shoulder stock.

What about BP revolvers with attachable/detachable shoulder stocks? Are they not technically firearms and therefore exempt from these stupid rules?
Generally, BP firearms are exempt from NFA requirements. Hidden firearm blackpowder AOW's, however, must be registered.

1KPerDay
September 17, 2008, 06:39 PM
Hidden firearm blackpowder AOW's, however, must be registered.

Such as?

PTK
September 17, 2008, 06:46 PM
Hidden firearm blackpowder AOW's, however, must be registered.

I don't think so... I've seen MANY blackpowder muzzleloading devices that would be AOWs if they were using fixed ammo, but they aren't, so they aren't AOWs. At least, that's what the 1934NFA and 1968GCA say....

mp510
September 17, 2008, 11:41 PM
I don't think so... I've seen MANY blackpowder muzzleloading devices that would be AOWs if they were using fixed ammo, but they aren't, so they aren't AOWs. At least, that's what the 1934NFA and 1968GCA say....
Whether or not that may be true under the most technical interpretation of the law, ATF has- both in letters and in practice- determined that they are AOW's. With this circumstance, there are two options--> to risk free room and board with Bubba for a few years, or listen to what may or may not be the interpretation that a jury of your uninformed peers will hear spew from the lips of an AUSA and "expert" ATF FTB personnel. Well over 80% of federal cases end in conviction. I don't like those odds.

GarandOwner
September 18, 2008, 12:59 AM
You just cannot get consistant answers from ATF. They have previously stated that you CAN convert a pistol into a rifle and then back into a pistol.

For example: Glock pistol to rifle conversion.

Wrong, when you buy that conversion for a glock pistol to a rifle, the conversion is REGISTERED as another firearm (because it is a receiver), which is what the ATF said in their response. When you get one of those conversions, you have two guns registered to two different serial numbers, it just happens that your "glock rifle" uses your pistols frame, frames are not considered firearms and are not registered. Thats why you can order parts direct to your house, the receiver and slide are what ATF considers "Firearms" which must be shipped to FFL's

atblis
September 18, 2008, 01:25 AM
it just happens that your "glock rifle" uses your pistols frame, frames are not considered firearms and are not registered.
You better believe they are.

The frame is the serial numbered part of the Glock. Frames on pistols are generally the part you are filling the paper work out for. I've never seen a slide considered a gun. The closest thing I can think of to that would be the Ruger MKI/II/III series. I believe the upper part of the gun is considered the actual gun.

As far as I can tell, you do not need the services of an FFL to buy the MecTech kit. The Glock frame is the serial numbered part of the carbine and thus remains the "actual" gun.

If you enjoyed reading about "Reply from BATF regarding Thompson Encore question" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!