Isn't a stripped AR15 lower receiver considered to be a pistol?
Multiple firearms purchases at one time, Pennsylvania
- Thread starter orpington
- Start date
- Status
Isn't a stripped AR15 lower receiver considered to be a pistol?
Theohazard
Member
No, it’s been around for quite a while, at least since 2012 when I started working at FFLs, but my guess is that it was around way before then.
It’s back-of-the-house paperwork that doesn’t involve the customer at all, which is why many don’t know about it.
No. A lower receiver — even a built one complete with a pistol brace or a rifle stock pre-installed — is always just sold as a receiver on the 4473. That’s because it doesn’t meet the federal definition of either a pistol or a rifle (both of which require a barrel, among other things). Any dealer who marks “pistol” or “rifle” on the 4473 is wrong and somehow missed the open letter the ATF sent to all FFLs back in 2009.
Last edited:
dogtown tom
Member
dogtown tom
Member
Never.
A firearm frame, receiver or AR lower is exactly that. It does not meet the definition of pistol, rifle or shotgun until assembled as such.
This is nothing new, the definitions have remained the same since 1968.
On the Form 4473 the dealer would mark "Other Firearm" since its not a Handgun or Long Gun. It doesn't matter if that frame or receiver can only be assembled as a handgun or long gun. The instructions on the Form 4473 have explained this since 2008.
Federal law prohibits dealers from transferring any firearm to those under age 21. It later was amended to allow the transfer of rifles and shotguns to those 18 or older. This means they cannot acquire an AR lower or Glock frame because they are not yet 21 and frames and receiver are not rifles or shotguns.
Just curious, but what's there to prevent someone like Laphroaig from purchasing three 1911' s, as he did, and having them all arrive at his FFL before Christmas, let's say on 01 Dec. The FFL holds all 3 and he completes the paperwork on 01 Dec to take home one, then returns a week later on 08 Dec and then a week later on 15 Dec and completes the FFL transfer. >5 days between purchases. No additional forms required, whether known to the purchaser or not. Since many don't know about this additional form or, if they do, they might just want to avoid the inconvenience. But, would this be possible or is there legal background that disallows staggered and planned FFL transfers?
jonnyc
Member
Why???
The purchaser isn't really affected in any meaningful way.
The purchaser isn't really affected in any meaningful way.
That's the conclusion I came to after reading the response to this thread. But it IS another means of tracking or registration or whatever you wish to call it.
Theohazard
Member
Nothing is preventing that, other than an annoyed FFL. As long as an FFL doesn’t transfer more than one handgun to a person within a 5 day period, that form doesn’t need to be fillled out.
dogtown tom
Member
No federal law prohibits a buyer from structuring his transactions to avoid the dealer submitting the multiple sale form. But want to REALLY get on ATF's radar? You sure as heck will if during a compliance inspection the IOI notices that three handguns were received by the dealer on December 1st and the buyer chose to acquire them on a manner designed to avoid the multiple sale report. The buyer and dealer aren't violating any law, but nothing prevents that IOI from photographing the buyers three Form 4473's.....effectively recording the multiple sale that the buyer wanted to avoid. It raises questions that you may not want ATF guessing.
dogtown tom
Member
It means that the dealer isn't required to report the multiple sale. Quite a few folks don't like the feds knowing their business.
dogtown tom
Member
This.
Lets see, three handguns on one 4473, one multiple sale report, one FBI NICS check.
vs
Three 4473's, three FBI NICS checks and three times the potential for an error, ommission or typo, not to mention the questions at your next compliance inspection.
That's a big nope from me.
Coyote3855
Member
I've only encountered this once. Had I not been already aware of the "multiple handgun transfers" requirement, I would have expected my FFL to tell me.
- Status
Similar threads
