Is this legal?

Status
Not open for further replies.
mesinge2

mesinge2

Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,231
Location
Central Florida
First let me explain my logic: Thompson makes a pistol designed after a 1927 Thompson. It is made legal by removal of the shoulder stock and shortened barrel. Kel-Tec makes a pistol based on an AR-15 also with a shortened barrel and removed shoulder stock.

So would it be illegal to take a 44.40 Winchester rifle and remove the shoulder stock, shorten the barrel, and replicate Steve McQueen's sawed-off 44-40 Winchester rifle?

If it is illegal, why?

If the others are not illegal then why is the winchester?
 
<Edited> I leave them as I buy them. As I recall, the BATFE web site has a lot of information on this topic in the question and answer portion of the website. Google is your friend.
 
Last edited:
Yes, it would be illegal without registering it as an SBR.

Once a pistol always a pistol and vice versa with a rifle. Rendering a rifle into a pistol would be converting it into a Class III weapon
Click to expand...

You can convert a handgun into a long gun. But a more recent decision by the ATF says that, unless it was bought as a "carbine kit", once you make it a rifle, you can't change it back.
 
As simple as I can make it.
If it's sold as a pistol, it can be converted to a rifle with the government's prior ok.

A rifle cannot be converted to a pistol without the government's $200 tax stamp of approval.


NCsmitty
 
I am not a NFA guy, but until somebody comes along with the details...

You would not be legal to cut down a rifle unless you registered it as a Short Barrelled Rifle.

The first examples you gave are legal because they were built as pistols from the start, even if on what looks like rifle actions.

There is an outfit building Mare's Legs on virgin actions that have never been assembled as rifles.
Hmm, looks like they are now coming direct from the factory that way:
http://maresleg.com/maresleg.htm
http://www.legacysports.com/products/puma/puma_bhunterm87shot.html
 
Those guns are manufactured as pistols. As stated above, you can convert a pistol to a rifle without government involvement. In this case, you could not convert it back to a rifle. You cannot convert a rifle to a pistol without an SBR stamp.

There are legal mare's legs on the market, get one. Though they're a novelty with no real practical purpose so I really question their very existence.
 
Once a pistol always a pistol and vice versa with a rifle.
Click to expand...
Not correct, see below.

Rendering a rifle into a pistol would be converting it into a Class III weapon.
Click to expand...
There are no "Class III" weapons. Special Occupational Tax Class 03 Federal Firearms License Holders are dealers who are licensed to sell "NFA Regulated" or "NFA Title II" firearms, like Short Barreled Rifles.


If it's sold as a pistol, it can be converted to a rifle with the government's prior ok.
Click to expand...
Actually, as CraigC points out, if it's sold as a pistol it can be converted to a rifle without asking anyone's approval. It's the trip back to a pistol that is illegal as others have pointed out.
 
Though they're a novelty with no real practical purpose so I really question their very existence
Click to expand...

I agree. At least as far as that LSI gun, being pistol caliber and still 24" longn (and expensive). But you could cut a .30-30 down to 16" and lob the stock to PGO. It'd still be 26" OAL, and so still a rifle by definition.

Personally, though, I'd rather just pack my SRH .454 for the purposes one might envision a mare's leg being useful for.
 
Sam1911 said:
Actually, as CraigC points out, if it's sold as a pistol it can be converted to a rifle without asking anyone's approval. It's the trip back to a pistol that is illegal as others have pointed out.
Click to expand...

If converting a pistol to a rifle, it had better have a 16"+ barrel, or else it will need a tax stamp as a SBR.
 
Those firearms covered by the National Firearms Act's Title II are codified in the "definitions" section of the US Code, TITLE 26, Subtitle E, CHAPTER 53, Subchapter B, PART I, § 5845

§ 5845. Definitions

For the purpose of this chapter—
(a) Firearm
The term “firearm” means
(1) a shotgun having a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length;
(2) a weapon made from a shotgun if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length;
(3) a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length;
(4) a weapon made from a rifle if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length;
(5) any other weapon, as defined in subsection (e);
(6) a machinegun;
(7) any silencer (as defined in section 921 of title 18, United States Code); and
(8) a destructive device. The term “firearm” shall not include an antique firearm or any device (other than a machinegun or destructive device) which, although designed as a weapon, the Secretary finds by reason of the date of its manufacture, value, design, and other characteristics is primarily a collector’s item and is not likely to be used as a weapon.
Click to expand...

The original NFA was intended to prohibit through astronomical taxation ($200 was a WHALE of a lot of money in 1934) almost any firearm that wasn't a full-sized rifle or shotgun. Handguns were to be not commonly available to the common folks any more than machine guns would be. Viewed from that perspective the language about "made from a rifle" and SBR, SBS, etc. makes sense because the powers that were did not want folks to be able to simply cut down a rifle or shotgun to make a sort-of-kind-of handgun to get around the handgun restrictions.

When the final law was passed, the handguns provision was stripped out of it (thank God) which meant that the SBR, SBS, and "made from a rifle" or "made from a shotgun" language were pretty nonsensical. If handguns were commonly available (and legal) then who would bother cutting down a larger weapon? But the legislators at the time really didn't bother to clean it all up and make it make sense. Now, 80 years later, we still live with the absurd restriction that a big gun is ok and a small gun is ok but "in between" sized guns will get you 10 years in federal prison.

If that makes sense ... well ... you probably aught to reread it! :D
 
This is what I meant when I said:
If it's sold as a pistol, it can be converted to a rifle with the government's prior ok.
Click to expand...

This was the legal meaning when talking about rifle kits produced for converting a handgun to a rifle. It needs to be a legal handgun to start, in the government's eyes. The Scotus ruled in favor of Thompson Center and those producing like kits for conversion.

www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-0164.ZO.html



NCsmitty
 
As others have mentioned a pistol can be made into a rifle but once you do it can not be made back into a pistol without going through the SBR process.

I converted my AT-94P (MKE HK-94 clone) into a rifle because it was manufactured as a pistol but came with a 16in rifle length barrel. However now that I've converted it into a long gun it needs to have a stock on it and I can't shorten the barrel. As soon as I added a stock to it the gun became a rifle and unless I SBR it then that is the way it needs to stay.
 
You also have to remember that no matter what is written down for laws, the BATF can make up their own rules on the spot to fit how they see it.

That is why we have doors on our houses.
 
I agree. At least as far as that LSI gun, being pistol caliber and still 24" longn (and expensive). But you could cut a .30-30 down to 16" and lob the stock to PGO. It'd still be 26" OAL, and so still a rifle by definition.

Personally, though, I'd rather just pack my SRH .454 for the purposes one might envision a mare's leg being useful for.
Click to expand...
Agreed. A 16" 1892 carbine is a mighty handy little thing. A proper sixgun packs handily on the hip and can cover your posterior when a rifle is not practical. Don't see a real need for anything in between that is not fish nor fowl. Of course, I don't "need" two dozen single actions either. ;)
 
To further reiterate what's been stated already:

A pistol can be modified into a rifle, but a rifle cannot be legally modified into what is legally referred to as a pistol.

Do you have access to an 1892 with a 16" barrel? If so, take off the rear tang screw and remove the rear stock. With the stock off, hold the gun in your hand by the tang and decide if that feels small enough for you. If so, cut the rear stock down to a point that's Mare's Leggish, while still maintaining the legal overall length of a rifle.

I almost did that with my Trapper, but decided it wasn't worth it. Too flashy, and contained no practical purpose. Cool though. :cool:

I'll also add that I have seen some cowboy action shooters use a Mare's Leg in matches. Again, it looks cool, but is really rather impractical. Working the action while maintaining aim looks like it could be pretty akward due to the balance of the gun -- even with a slicked up action.

Still, when I am old and have cash to throw away (maybe), I am so getting one, lol.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top