[13xx]

i have 2 rifles with folding stocks. bought both of them that way (thats why i bought them mostly).

after looking around i am becoming a bit more afraid to take them to the range after seeing people getting the batf called on them for similar things.

now the question is both of them are over 26" completly folded up, since they are longer that the minimal length are they legal, or is the fact that they fold make them "scary"?

i rarely shoot them folded up but usually transport them folded just because they are easier that way and when i get to the range they are folded until the range is hot and i can pick them up.

any suggestions?

[Gewehr98]

Autoloading rifles? Do they have detachable magazines? Are they pre-ban or post-ban? If they're pre-ban, can you document it? There's a whole slew of conditions and rules, it's very easy to run afoul of the onerous laws and become an instant felon. All for the sake of bolting on a folding stock. I watched a gun dealer in Sacramento get taken down for just the same thing. :(

[Hkmp5sd]

Are the rifles semi-automatic and do they have detachable magazines? Is one of them an SKS? Were the rifles made in the US after 1994 or imported after 1989? Can the previous owner provide you with the original receipts for the rifles and folding stocks? Did you buy them from a licensed dealer and can he provide you with any documentation on their origins?



When do the Snowbirds go home? NEVER. :)

[benEzra]

If both rifles are U.S. made semi-autos and the folders were installed prior to the passage of the 1994 "Clinton Crime Bill" (a.k.a Pork 'n Bans), then you're legal, though it would be a VERY good idea to be able to document the purchase date of the folding stocks.

If both rifles are imported (SKS, AK clone), then the folders would have to have been installed prior to the 1989 Bush Sr. executive order that gave us the 922(r) rules we have today.

Note that a folding stock per se is not prohibited by the AWB; rather, a gun with two or more "evil" features as defined by the hoplophobes is prohibited unless it was in that configuration prior to the passage in 1994. The problem is, of course, that there are very few folding stocks that don't also have pistol grips.

[Kharn]

Just FYI, the ATF measures overall length with the stock extended/unfolded. (I think Kali measures it folded, but I'm not sure)

Kharn

[Hkmp5sd]

Just FYI, the ATF measures overall length with the stock extended/unfolded
With the provision the stock is not readily detachable and the firearm was designed to be fired from the shoulder.

[Kingcreek]

not trying to hijack a thread but...
Say I had a legally purchased (in the late 80s) folding stock that I wanted to take out of mothballs and sell. Is that a legal problem?
We might also say it is a rare and desirable military variant.

[4v50 Gary]

Kingcreek - possession alone is not illegal. Putting it on a gun post '89 is. You can sell it.

BTW, everybody, wait for the Fineswine/Shoe-merde ban to expire and then Happy Days Are Here Again!

[mattd]

And if it has the 10 parts or whatever then its legal if it was before 94?

[Hkmp5sd]

The 10 parts rule is for assembling firearms using some foreign parts which, once together makes a rifle that is not legal for importation. It is essentially a way around the import ban by "manufacturing" the rifle in the US. If the rifle was imported and had the folding stock installed prior to 1989, its legal. If the gun was US manufactured and had the folding stock attached prior to 1994, its legal. Regardless of when the firearm was made or imported, if the folding stock was not actually on the rifle on the corresponding date (1989 for imports, 1994 for homegrown), it cannot legally be installed on the rifle.

[SelfProclaimedExpert]

Just so we're all clear here, you can buy and install a folding stock today. You have to install it on a grandfathered assault weapon (preban rifle). It doesn't matter if the gun already had a folder or not, as long as it already had two or more military (non-sporting) features. Examples:

(a) A 1985 Colt SP-1. Gun came with a pistol grip (1), bayonet lug (2) and a flashhider (3), so it started off as an "assault rifle". That receiver will always be an assault rifle receiver, so putting an M4 top end and collapsing stock is legal. The gun can't become any more of an assault rifle.

(b) A 1993 M1A. Gun came with a flashhider (1) and bayonet lug (2), so it's also grandfathered. Want to add a pistol grip E2 stock (3) or a folding stock with pistol grip (3 and 4)? Go ahead.

(c) A 1992 Bushmaster Varmint Heavy barrel. The gun has a pistol grip, but no bayo lug or flashhider. While made before the ban, it meets the definition of a postban rifle, and can't go back.

On (c), if the gun had been built out of an SP-1, it may not look like an assault rifle in 1994, but it already was from back in 1985. Once a gun was legally made as an assault rifle, it always is. And that legal status is independant of subsequent changes.

[MagKnightX]

Can't you legally have all those features except normal-capacity (you know what I mean) magazines on a non-semi-automatic rifle, like a bolt-action?

[SelfProclaimedExpert]

Sure. All that stuff is predicated on the gun being able to accept detachable magazines and being a self loader.

Do whatever you want with your new "assault lever gun" or assault bolt action".:D

[Hkmp5sd]

On (c), if the gun had been built out of an SP-1, it may not look like an assault rifle in 1994, but it already was from back in 1985. Once a gun was legally made as an assault rifle, it always is. And that legal status is independant of subsequent changes.

Not quite. Unlike the "always is" application with rifles, shotguns and machineguns, "semi-automatic assault weapons" do not keep their pre-ban status forever.

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO AND FIREARMS
WASHINGTON, DC 20226

NOV 1 6 2001

Dear Mr. XXXXXXXXXX:

This refers to your letter of March 19, 2001, in which you ask about
the status of certain semiautomatic assault weapons which have been
altered to another configuration.

As defined in section 921(a)(30), of Title 18, United States Code
(U.S.C, the term "semiautomatic assault weapon" includes certain
named weapons and certain semiautomatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns
that have a combination of enumerated features. Title 18 U.S.C.
section 922(v)(1) prohibits manufacture, transfer, and possession of
semiautomatic assault weapons; however, section 922(v)(2) provides
that any semiautomatic assault weapon that was lawfully possessed
under Federal law on September 13, 1994, is excluded from the
prohibition.

A frame or receiver of a semiautomatic assault weapon, meets the
definition of a "firearm" in 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(3); however, a
firearm frame or receiver alone, without the additional qualifying
features, does not meet the definition of a "semiautomatic assault
weapon" in section 921(a)(30). Therefore, a firearm frame or receiver
does not meet the exemption in section 922(v)(2).

We have also determined that a semiautomatic assault weapon in
knockdown (unassembled) condition consisting of a receiver and all
parts needed to assemble a complete semiautomatic assault weapon are
subject to regulation if the parts are segregated or packaged
together and held by a person as the parts for the assembly of a
particular firearm.

You describe an AR15 type rifle that met the definition of a
semiautomatic assault weapon and was lawfully possessed on September
13, 1994. At some subsequent time the rifle was temporarily
reassembled in a configuration such that it no longer had the
qualifying features of a semiautomatic assault weapon. You asked if
the original components could then be lawfully reinstalled on the
rifle.

Provided that the original components were held by the owner and
reinstalled on the rifle, it is our opinion that the rifle would
still qualify as an exempted semiautomatic assault weapon even though
it had been temporarily assembled in a different configuration. We
note, that mere disassembly of a semiautomatic weapon by an owner
would not remove the firearm from the definition of a semiautomatic
assault weapon nor would the reassembly constitute manufacture of a
prohibited semiautomatic assault weapon.

Your second question concerns a semiautomatic assault weapon that
also meets the exemption in section 922(v)(2). However, this firearm
was disassembled and the receiver, without other components, was
sold. Since the receiver is no longer possessed with all parts
necessary to assemble a complete semiautomatic assault weapon, it no
longer meets the definition of a semiautomatic assault weapon. The
receiver does not meet the exemption in section 922(v)(2) and
assembly of this firearm in the configuration of a semiautomatic
assault weapon would be prohibited under section 922(v)(1).

If you are interested in determining the status of a particular
receiver or semiautomatic assault weapon, you should contact the
manufacturer or importer and ask about the date that it was
manufactured and the configuration at the time of sale. It may also
be necessary to contact subsequent dealers and owners who possessed
the firearm.

We regret the delay in responding to your inquiry. If you have
further questions concerning this matter, please contact us.


Sincerely yours,

Curtis H.A. Bartlett
Chief, Firearms Technology Branch
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5570&highlight=BATF+opinion
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=6&t=74364&w=searchPop

[SelfProclaimedExpert]

Yeah, I've read this one before, and I'd like to see them make this one stick in court. But if that's the opinion, fine.

I imagine part of the goal with this opinion is to avoid the problematic trade in preban receivers. Since someone could sell any AR receiver and say it's "preban" without violating a law, it puts the assembler in the hot seat of actually being the one illegally assembling the illegal rifle. By putting this prohibition out, if forces the owner of a preban receiver to put his butt on the line and do the assembling, rather than passing a liability to the buyer.

[Hkmp5sd]

I've always wanted to see someone fight them over turning a "Colt AR-15" receiver into a preban. The way the statute reads, there are two ways a gun can be considered an AW. One is having the proper number of evil features. The second is a section which lists guns by NAME. Seems to me that a pre-1994 "Colt AR-15" receiver is a preban assault weapon automatically.

Hopefully, in a little over a year, this whole subject will go away.

[Futo Inu]

Now, to add to the above:

For post-ban (post 1994-manufacture) rifles with the appropriate number of U.S. parts, if there is NO pistol grip on the rifle at all - either the folding stock is a folding-AND-thumbhole-grip stock (if there even exists such a thing or you wanted to make one), or there just is NO grip at all on the rifle (just shoulder it and stick finger from free-floating hand into trigger guard - funny but possible), then you could put the folding stock on the detachable-mag, semi-auto rifle, provided there is no other evil feature (no flash-hider or bayonet lug), seem to me, no? Because you wouldn't be manufacturing an "assault weapon", correct? If this is not true, then what specific law would prohibit it?

[SelfProclaimedExpert]

Futo,

I think McMillan produced a traditional stock for bolt guns the folded for travel right behind the triggerguard. If used on a semiauto it should be legal, but the gun is useless folded.

The Keltec Sub2000 rifle is a pistol gripped auto that folds, but the stock isn't folding; the rifle is.