sarduy
Member
is it legal to adjust the Shockwave Brace like the picture bellow on a 10'' upper? i ask because i want to know if there is an overall length issue.
But, if you read between the lines, shouldering a bare buffer tube is likely the same thing in their eyes. A lot of the reason why I sold mine. Less worry about some 3-letter official or range guru trying to tell me why I should be in jail. If you like them, more power to you, but I prefer 5" more on the front and a third point of contact on the rear.I'm not interested in pushing up against the boundaries when it comes to federal firearm law.
I agree. All the more reason not to push the boundaries here.... if you read between the lines, shouldering a bare buffer tube is likely the same thing in their eyes.
To answer the original question: No there is no issue if you want to adjust the brace. As long as it is not used or intended to be used as a stock, aka "shouldering" the brace.
If used as a pistol brace and in the approved manner, there is no problem. There is also no length restrictions on overall length or barrel length.
Why do you think that's all that's necessary to make a handgun.If all that is required when you are building an AR is to have it assembled without the stock to qualify as a pistol, all you need to do would be to assemble everything but the stock....
...
Any firearm which has a short stock and is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand;....
It is necessary because one must start with a firearm which is clearly classified as a handgun in order to then be able to convert it to a rifle and back again. A receiver is neither a handgun nor a rifle. It will need to be built into either a handgun or a rifle to be useful.....That is if it is even really necessary since you started with a 'receiver' on the 4473 anyway.
...(d) 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;.....
Because a handgun doesn't have a maximum barrel length, it just does not have a shoulder stock. Which is what Another Pake was recommending.Why do you think that's all that's necessary to make a handgun.
If you say so. I have read so many different formulations of this question, and one that has come up several times is that a "receiver" is not a pistol or a rifle, and it never loses that status of neither/nor. I'm not arguing that, it is just one of the many approaches I've heard to the problem. If you have definitive information on that, it would be interesting to those worrying about how to do it. Though I think what Pake or I suggested covers the bases.It is necessary because one must start with a firearm which is clearly classified as a handgun in order to then be able to convert it to a rifle and back again. A receiver is neither a handgun nor a rifle. It will need to be built into either a handgun or a rifle to be useful.
... If you have definitive information ...
If you buy one as a stripped lower, new stock, then you can pretty much say you did whatever you want to say, first. It would be pretty complicated to prove otherwise.
The real rub, though -- if anyone was ever going to even attempt to enforce this -- would be what if you buy a stripped lower as used, from a dealer. When he takes this stripped lower in trade he's supposed to log it as an "other firearm" like any other lower. Outside of rather a lot of research, you the buyer would have no way to know whether it had ever been a rifle, or if it was ever FIRST a rifle.
Shotguns sold without a shoulder stock are legally pistols, even with their long barrels.