922(r) Kit for SBR'd Scorpion

Your local FFL is wrong.

Good ol' 922r compliance. I don't think any individual has ever been prosecuted for not complying with 922r. They focus on the importers. That's not to say it doesn't apply to individuals, just kind of like the Sig brace touching your shoulder, it's not something they give a crap about. Especially where 922r compliance they have to prove that the parts in there are not US made if you state that it is compliant.

I actually did a search and came up with a very interesting older post from one of our own. The links still work to back up his claim. No 922r compliance when making an NFA item (such as an SBR) from an existing imported pistol.

The links are to ATF letters.

Arizona_Mike
April 4, 2014, 12:14 AM
There are two ATF letters and the details and context matter.

The 2009 letter you posted was in response to a question about assembling a NFA firearm from imported parts.

This 2006 letter was about making an NFA from a complete functioning imported firearm and the ATF said 922r does not apply (but they only explicitly said so for complete rifles and complete shotguns and did not specifically address pistols).

http://i881.photobucket.com/albums/ac20/mickeydown/34ero6e.jpg
http://i881.photobucket.com/albums/ac20/mickeydown/2qiu6f4.jpg

The question about making a rifle from a pistol by adding a stock has not been specifically addressed*, but between the Roni, KPOS, and Fab Defense Tactical Stocks for the Glock, there are a thousands of both Title I and Title II rifles out there with 100% Austrian and Israeli parts.

It was only after posting the question (thinking in terms of a SBR from an AK or VZ pistol) that it dawned on my how much a no-brainer my initial question was.

*--or has it been addressed indirectly? The 2011 ruling about going back and forth between rifle and pistol being OK said that such conversions do not constitute "making" a firearm and 922r is after-all a making/importing offense.

Mike

Click to expand...

So it appears your local FFL was correct.

Ive seen other ATF opinions that contradicted those letters but now that I have seen those I will act accordingly and continue to ignore 922r as much as I have been for the last 20 years..

Thats a relief .

yugorpk said:

Ive seen other ATF opinions that contradicted those letters but now that I have seen those I will act accordingly and continue to ignore 922r as much as I have been for the last 20 years..

Thats a relief .

Click to expand...

Haha exactly. I was trying not to say that outright in my first post since it's not very "High Road", but yeah.

Contradictory technical opinions from the BATF. Silly law. It was not hard to build my Krink AK to comply--the grip is the only thing I was not already changing.



Mike

I've always been of the belief that 922r only applied to "sporting" rifles ... NFA items are not sporting so 922r shouldn't apply.

That being said, CZ went to the BTAFE and asked if 922r would apply to anyone wanting to SBR the Scorpion and Bren 805 pistols

The BTAFE said YES 922r applies, so CZ has made the 922r parts available and at a very reasonable price ... People that were selling the stocks before the 922r kits were available were typically getting $500-$700 ... I've seen them go as high as $1,200 on Gunbroker ...

First; I bought the kits because it was the cheapest way to get the stock!

Second; I like to post pictures of my toys and I can't afford to be a test case.

Third; If I were to be a test case I'd have to sell all most of my toys to pay for my defense-and if I were to loose, chances are I'd loose my 2nd Amendment rights.

So in my mind, the price for the 922r compliance parts is not that high ... Heck, the having to submit to NFA requirements and buy the stamp is worse than 922r.

My little CZ family

I have a M92 PAP pistol converted to an SBR amd my dealer says I do not need to comply but the ATF said I do. I made it compliant just by my desired changes anyway SO LONG as I use US mags. Once I change the break I will be good.

He also says I do not need to engrave Form 1s and thr ATF said otherwise.

Id rather be safe about it and risk doing more than less.

Those opinion letters seemed to be pretty specific in stating that they only applied to imported rifles or shotguns that were having their barrels shortened... SBRing a scorpion is a little different in that you are buying a pistol and then adding parts to make it an SBR. I'm not sure I would count myself covered by those letters in this case, especially when CZ asked the question and got a different answer.

Gtscotty said:

Those opinion letters seemed to be pretty specific in stating that they only applied to imported rifles or shotguns that were having their barrels shortened... SBRing a scorpion is a little different in that you are buying a pistol and then adding parts to make it an SBR. I'm not sure I would count myself covered by those letters in this case, especially when CZ asked the question and got a different answer.

Click to expand...

Well technically we are not 'covered' by any ATF letters. The letters/clarifications apply only to the people who submitted them, but we use them as a general rule of thumb when trying to tiptoe through the thousands of unconstitutional firearms related laws.

HRnightmare - yeah you definitely need to engrave it if it is a form 1. But if it is from an existing firearm you should only have to engrave your name (or Trust name) and the City & State.

Dont forget the caliber. It has to be somewhere on the gun. Many lowers are marked multi which doesnt work for the caliber . From an existing rifle if its on the barrel and you replace the barrel to make it an sbr then youv'e got to put it somewhere.

Don't most barrels have the caliber marked on them?

I have a M92 PAP pistol converted to an SBR amd my dealer says I do not need to comply but the ATF said I do.

Click to expand...

As always the case when there are (seemingly?) conflicting ATF statements and your local dealer, pal, cousin, mechanic, or police officer says "aaaahhh, don't worry about it!"

Ask him to sign something that says he'll be funding your defense attorney if they decide that you should have made a wiser choice.




As always, it is fine and dandy if YOU want to look at all the possible information and make an informed decision for YOU as to whether YOU will act in the more conservative or more liberal way based on whatever justification YOU have for choosing to believe this version over that one. But be exceptionally cautious about telling anyone else that they should follow your lead. Paddling your own canoe is fine. Paddling someone else's right into the rocks is poor form to say the least.

From Ryanxia: "Don't most barrels have the caliber marked on them?"

From ATF 479.102 (a) 2:
By engraving, casting, stamping (impressing), or otherwise conspicuously placing or causing to be engraved, cast, stamped (impressed), or placed on the frame, receiver, or barrel thereof certain additional information. This information must be placed in a manner not susceptible of being readily obliterated, altered or removed. For firearms manufactured, imported, or made on and after January 30, 2002, the engraving, casting, or stamping (impressing) of this information must be to a minimum depth of .003 inch. The additional information includes:
i.
The model, if such designation has been made;
ii.
The caliber or gauge;
iii.
Your name (or recognized abbreviation) and also, when applicable, the name of the foreign manufacturer or maker;

The problem with relying on the caliber designation stamped on the barrel is that you will probably obscure or completely cover the barrel stampings with a shroud or quad rail. Technically not comply with the directive to "conspicuously" place the marking.

It's 27 CFR 479.102, not ATF 479.102

Nothing says once it is conspicuously marked, it can't be covered with an easily removed accessory.

pjeski said:

It's 27 CFR 479.102, not ATF 479.102

Nothing says once it is conspicuously marked, it can't be covered with an easily removed accessory.

Click to expand...

The ATF requires the markings...all markings... to be visible when the rifle is assembled..

Do you have a cite for that?

I would also be interested if there's a cite for that.

Wouldn't that pretty much make bullpup kits illegal since don't they cover the markings of several firearms when assembled? (I'm asking because as a lefty I don't own bullpups). I'm talking the ones designed for AK's, Saiga12's, Mossberg/Remington pumps.

Conspicuously
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/27/478.92

I think if the ATF were interpreting it the same way as you are we would be hearing about it. There are many factory and custom guns that have a receiver marked multi and the caliber engraved on the barrel with a free float rail over it.

yugorpk said:

Conspicuously
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/27/478.92

Click to expand...

What you are quoting states that it must be marked conspicuously, which wasn't the issue:

(ii) By engraving, casting, stamping (impressing), or otherwise conspicuously placing or causing to be engraved, cast, stamped (impressed) or placed on the frame, receiver, or barrel thereof certain additional information. This information must be placed in a manner not susceptible of being readily obliterated, altered, or removed. For firearms manufactured or imported on and after January 30, 2002, the engraving, casting, or stamping (impressing) of this information must be to a minimum depth of .003 inch. The additional information includes:
(A) The model, if such designation has been made;
(B) The caliber or gauge;
(C) Your name (or recognized abbreviation) and also, when applicable, the name of the foreign manufacturer;
(D) In the case of a domestically made firearm, the city and State (or recognized abbreviation thereof) where you as the manufacturer maintain your place of business; and
(E) In the case of an imported firearm, the name of the country in which it was manufactured and the city and State (or recognized abbreviation thereof) where you as the importer maintain your place of business. For additional requirements relating to imported firearms, see Customs regulations at 19 CFR part 134.

Click to expand...

Yes, the information must be engraved conspicuously.

yugorpk said:

The ATF requires the markings...all markings... to be visible when the rifle is assembled..

Click to expand...

Can you provide a cite that supports your contention that the information that was conspicuously marked when the weapon was made may not be obstructed by removable accessories?

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/atf-national-firearms-act-handbook-chapter-7/download

Section 7.4 The identification of firearms.
7.4.1 Serial numbers. Each manufacturer of a firearm must legibly identify it by engraving, stamping
(impressing), or otherwise conspicuously placing on the firearm’s frame or receiver an individual serial
number not duplicating any serial number placed by the manufacturer on any other firearm.120 The
requirement that the marking be “conspicuously” placed on the firearm means that the marking must be
wholly unobstructed from plain view. For firearms manufactured on or after January 30, 2002, the serial
number must be to a minimum depth of .003 inch and in a print size no smaller than 1/16 inch.
7.4.1.1 What is an acceptable serial number? Alpha characters (letters), for example a name,
are not acceptable as a serial number. A proper serial number may contain such characters or
letters, but it must have at least one numeric character (number). ATF takes the view that
marking “legibly” means using exclusively Roman letters (A, B, C, and so forth) and Arabic
numerals (1, 2, 3, and so forth).121 Deviations from this requirement have been found to
seriously impair ATF’s ability to trace firearms involved in crime.
7.4.2 Additional information. Certain additional information must also be conspicuously placed on
the frame, receiver, or barrel of the firearm by engraving, casting, stamping (impressing), that is, they
must be placed in such a manner that they are wholly unobstructed from plain view. For firearms
manufactured on or after January 30, 2002, this information must be to a minimum depth of .003 inch.
The additional information includes:

118 27 CFR 479.91 119 27 CFR 479.84 120 27 CFR 479.102 121 ATF Ruling 2002-6
45
(1) The model, if such designation has been made;
(2) The caliber or gauge;
(3) The manufacturer’s name (or recognized abbreviation); and
(4) The city and State (or recognized abbreviation) where the manufacturer maintains its place
of business.122


Any more doubt about what conspicuous means?

That's a good cite Yugo. But I do still believe it is how the ATF interprets it that matters and items like bullpup kits that cover the markings or AR's sold with free float rails and a multi-caliber marking on the receiver would be getting whacked by them if they believed them to be illegal items.

I think they interpret what you linked as a requirement in the manufacturing process, and not being broken when an end user puts a temporary/removable accessory on the firearm. If that were not the case I would think (hope) that we would be hearing about prosecutions and the firearms community would be more aware of the danger in doing that and breaking a gun law.

yugorpk said:

BATFE's NFA Handbook, Rev. 0409, page 56:

7.4.2 Additional information. Certain additional information must also be conspicuously placed on
the frame, receiver, or barrel of the firearm by engraving, casting, stamping (impressing), that is, they
must be placed in such a manner that they are wholly unobstructed from plain view. For firearms
manufactured on or after January 30, 2002, this information must be to a minimum depth of .003 inch.
The additional information includes:

Click to expand...

The NFA handbook is written by NFATCA, and while it is a good reference, it is not law and it is full of errors and opinions.