Stripped lower --> rifle --> pistol ....legal?

Jlr2267 · Feb 27, 2015

If I have a new stripped lower, listed on 4473 as "other", is it legal for me to assemble it first as a rifle (not SBR), then later change out the buffer/stock and upper, converting it to a pistol?

I am only interested in Federal laws here as I know some states have registration which could greatly complicate things.

I have read on THR that:

lower --> pistol --> rifle (and back) is legal

while

lower --> rifle --> pistol is illegal

If true, seems it would be completely unenforceable...I mean, how would anyone besides the person building the firearm even know what sequence was used? Hell, even the person building it may forget after many years and many builds.

Am I missing something? I thought once " other" always "other" unless registered under either (which would only be required for an SBR or if living in a handful of unfriendly states).

skywalkrNCSU · Feb 27, 2015

No.

Once it becomes a rifle you cannot make it a pistol. That includes Stripped -> Pistol -> Rifle -> Pistol. The bold part is illegal.

Jlr2267 · Feb 27, 2015

skywalkrNCSU said:
No.

Once it becomes a rifle you cannot make it a pistol. That includes Stripped -> Pistol -> Rifle -> Pistol. The bold part is illegal.

How is that enforceable? I can't argue legality, but I cannot fathom a scenario where someone could be prosecuted.

How could the ATF prove your lower was once a rifle, since the 4473 would say "other" and there is no registration?

I'm genuinely interested in how this could be enforced...

skywalkrNCSU · Feb 27, 2015

I mean it can't really unless you take pictures or are seen by law enforcement switching it around. If you are in your garage and put a rifle stock on a pistol lower and then take it back off again no one would know but it is just a good idea to follow the rules and not have to worry.

Jlr2267 · Feb 27, 2015

skywalkrNCSU said:
I mean it can't really unless you take pictures or are seen by law enforcement switching it around. If you are in your garage and put a rifle stock on a pistol lower and then take it back off again no one would know but it is just a good idea to follow the rules and not have to worry.

But you *can* go pistol-rifle-pistol...so even seeing you "in the act" would not be sufficient to prosecute, because they still would not know how the firearm was *originally* configured.

https://www.atf.gov/files/regulations-rulings/rulings/atf-rulings/atf-ruling-2011-4.pdf

CLP · Feb 27, 2015

Can you go from AOW --> Pistol --> AOW? (supposing you had the proper paperwork for the AOW in the first place)

bearcreek · Feb 27, 2015

It's technically legal to use a rifle buffer tube on an AR pistol as long as the stock is not on it. With that in mind, as long as you put the upper on the lower before putting the stock on the buffer tube you've built a pistol first and then a rifle out of it and can switch back and forth at will. Just has to be assembled/disassembled in the right order. Pretty ridiculous, but nobody ever accused the ATF of making the most logical rules out there.

Jlr2267 · Feb 27, 2015

bearcreek said:
It's technically legal to use a rifle buffer tube on an AR pistol as long as the stock is not on it. With that in mind, as long as you put the upper on the lower before putting the stock on the buffer tube you've built a pistol first and then a rifle out of it and can switch back and forth at will. Just has to be assembled/disassembled in the right order. Pretty ridiculous, but nobody ever accused the ATF of making the most logical rules out there.

What is the significance of the original build? I can understand (even though it is silly) that if you weren't careful when changing a pistol to rifle or vice versa you could momentarily be in possession of an unregistered SBR and be a felon.

But why does it matter if a lower is first built into a rifle config then changed to pistol (illegal) vs originally building a pistol, then rifle, then pistol (legal)? This makes literally no sense and is so silly that its hard to believe an adult thought it up, much less that it is law.

How would any person other than the original owner know a lower's original build configuration (assuming purchased as "other")?

skywalkrNCSU · Feb 27, 2015

But you *can* go pistol-rifle-pistol...so even seeing you "in the act" would not be sufficient to prosecute, because they still would not know how the firearm was *originally* configured.

Not relevant. Once it is a rifle it can't be made a pistol regardless of how it is originally configured. You asked if it is legal or illegal not if you would get caught or if it should be illegal. If you want to take the risk it is up to you but most people around here would not suggest you break the law regardless of how silly you think it is.

Jlr2267 · Feb 27, 2015

skywalkrNCSU said:
Not relevant. Once it is a rifle it can't be made a pistol regardless of how it is originally configured.

The above statement is false. Read the link to the ATF ruling. If *originally* configured as a pistol, it can be converted to rifle and back to pistol again (legally).

So again, I ask, how is this enforceable?

Scenario: 2 guys at the range, guy1 has his AR rifle that was originally built as a pistol, while guy2 has his AR rifle that is still in its original configuration. Both remove their stocks/buffers, then uppers, then reassemble as pistols. ATF guy in the bushes sees everything...how does he know a law was broken?

From the ATF:

" Therefore, so long as a parts kit or collection of parts is not used to make a firearm regulated under the NFA (e.g., a short-barreled rifle or “any other weapon” as defined by 26 U.S.C. 5845(e)), no NFA firearm is made when the same parts are assembled or re-assembled in a configuration not regulated under the NFA (e.g., a pistol, or a rifle with a barrel of 16 inches or more in length). Merely assembling and disassembling such a rifle does not result in the making of a new weapon; rather, it is the same rifle in a knockdown condition (i.e., complete as to all component parts). Likewise, because it is the same weapon when reconfigured as a pistol, no “weapon made from a rifle” subject to the NFA has been made."

Ibmikey · Feb 27, 2015

On my pistol 4473 it is marked as "other" when I assembled it as a pistol I stamped "pistol" on the interior flat and the last four of the S/N. On both uppers, 300 blackout and 5.56, I stamped the last four of the S/N on the lug. I did this simply to help any confused LE individual to understand that if it is either 8" barrel or 12.5" barrel it is still a pistol. this is not a mandated procedure I did it for my own satisfaction.

MistWolf · Feb 27, 2015

Jlr2267 said:
If I have a new stripped lower, listed on 4473 as "other", is it legal for me to assemble it first as a rifle (not SBR), then later change out the buffer/stock and upper, converting it to a pistol?

No

lower --> pistol --> rifle (and back) is legal

True

lower --> rifle --> pistol is illegal

True

If true, seems it would be completely unenforceable...I mean, how would anyone besides the person building the firearm even know what sequence was used? Hell, even the person building it may forget after many years and many builds.

Am I missing something? I thought once " other" always "other" unless registered under either (which would only be required for an SBR or if living in a handful of unfriendly states).

Is it worth the risk, especially with lowers being so cheap? Also, if you ever take a job that requires you to take a lie detector test (LE, some Fed jobs) they will ask you if you have ever committed a felony, whether you were arrested for it or not

skywalkrNCSU said:
No.

Once it becomes a rifle you cannot make it a pistol. That includes Stripped -> Pistol -> Rifle -> Pistol. The bold part is illegal.

False. This subject has been discussed and clarified many times on this and other forums. For more information, research the lawsuit Thompson Center brought against the BATF

Jlr2267 · Feb 27, 2015

MistWolf said:
Is it worth the risk, especially with lowers being so cheap?

I'm in no way advocating anyone do it. It just seems to me that an unenforceable law is not a law...it's just words on paper...

Like a law that makes certain thoughts illegal...unenforceable, thus useless.

By the way, what happens if you unknowingly buy a used pistol that was once a rifle? Are you now a felon?

bearcreek · Feb 27, 2015

Jlr2267 said:
This makes literally no sense and is so silly that its hard to believe an adult thought it up, much less that it is law.

You're making the mistake of trying to attribute logic to the ATF's rulings. I'm not just joking when I say that. I'm 100% serious. Their rulings have no basis in any kind of fact or logic. That's not the point. Their job is to infringe on the Constitutional rights of Americans in any way they can get away with it. That's it. No logic needed or wanted.

DeepSouth · Feb 27, 2015

How could the ATF prove your lower was once a rifle, since the 4473 would say "other" and there is no registration?

I'm genuinely interested in how this could be enforced...

You'd be amazed what people will put on YouTube and Facebook.
Confessions of felonies abound.

skywalkrNCSU · Feb 27, 2015

False. This subject has been discussed and clarified many times on this and other forums. For more information, research the lawsuit Thompson Center brought against the BATF

Well how about that, I learned something today. I still wouldn't risk it, I will keep my pistol lower just for my pistol build (until I finally get around to SBRing it of course).

strambo · Feb 28, 2015

"There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted-and you create a nation of lawbreakers-and then you cash in on guilt."-Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

MistWolf · Mar 1, 2015

skywalkrNCSU said:
Well how about that, I learned something today. I still wouldn't risk it, I will keep my pistol lower just for my pistol build (until I finally get around to SBRing it of course).

There is no risk. Check the court rulings from the case Thompson brought against the BATF

HKGuns · Mar 1, 2015

You have the correct answer and are now arguing enforceability. You can do whatever you like, risking 10 years in a Federally owned vacation paradise.

Jlr2267 · Mar 1, 2015

HKGuns said:
You have the correct answer and are now arguing enforceability. You can do whatever you like, risking 10 years in a Federally owned vacation paradise.

I am not arguing enforceability, I'm merely asking how it can be enforced (I cannot envision a scenario). Makes one wonder if "the answer" is correct when it's an absurd one...maybe I'm giving ATF too much credit...

Stripped lower --> rifle --> pistol ....legal?

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Random Guy

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads