Converting AR Pisol to SBR

[Kind of Blued]

I've been wanting a 9mm SBR AR and am wondering if I may have found somewhat of a shortcut with the Rock River Arms LAR-9.

First, is it physically possible to install a buttstock, or is that "stick thing" permanent?

Second, would doing so only necessitate one $200 stamp? To register it as a SBR.

It seems that this might be a shortcut as the rail system, sights, etc. would already be setup for the short barrel.

Here is the 7" model I'm interested in on the left.

 

[rino451]

To your first question, yes you can remove that stick thing - aka receiver extension, aka buffer tube - and replace it with a carbine length or full stock length buffer tube tube.

With regards to your second, IANAL, but I've always hear that once a pistol, always a pistol, but that's been regarding non-NFA firearms. So, I really don't know because NFA stuff is usually in a league of its own.

 

[Omaha-BeenGlockin]

The buffer tube would make a decent enough stock as it is----I'm actually kind of surprised they are allowed to sell them like that.

 

[71Commander]

once a pistol, always a pistol.

 

[TexasRifleman]

The buffer tube would make a decent enough stock as it is----I'm actually kind of surprised they are allowed to sell them like that.

You can buy them like that but you are not supposed to USE it as a stock. More NFA silliness. Don't try to understand it, you will just get a headache

once a pistol, always a pistol.

Not true for NFA. If you want to make an AR pistol into an SBR you can do that on a Form 1. You simply replace the buffer tube with a full stock once you get the tax stamp back.

Problem is you can't go back to a Title 1 firearm again, it will always be an NFA weapon. Well I suppose you could, but not temporarily anyway. Removing something from the NFA registry is possible they claim.

And yes, it will cost you $200 plus the cost of engraving the receiver with your name and location since you "made" a new firearm.

The "once a pistol always a pistol" thing is for Title I firearms.
Once you "make" an NFA weapon it is no longer subject to those rules.

In a legal sense you are not really "converting", you are manufacturing a completely new weapon where none existed before. That's why you have to engrave it since YOU are now the gun maker.

 

[LiquidTension]

TexasRifleman nailed it. A local trophy shop may be willing to do the engraving for you. Otherwise, I hear good things about Orion Arms.

 

[ffxmike]

actually, once a pistol always a pistol isn't true at all.

Say I have an AR-15 pistol. I can make it a rifle, but I must FIRST put a barrel on that is 16" or longer. AT THAT POINT I can put a stock on the firearm. Returning to pistol is the opposite. You must remove the stock first, turning it into a pistol, THEN put the shorter barrel on.

That being said, once a rifle, always a rifle. Pistols can be switched out, rifles cannot (look at T/C setups). (link to wikipedia here, but I know no one will believe it since it's on wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Thompson-Center_Arms_Company)


If it were true that "once a pistol always a pistol" you wouldn't see things like the mechtech CCU conversions to turn your 1911 or Glock into a carbine.

So, to recap, you can make a pistol a rifle, you can turn a pistol or rifle into an SBR (as texasrifleman pointed out above) but a rifle can only ever be a rifle or an NFA SBR.

(edit: I'm no lawyer, I didn't sleep at holiday in express, and I don't own ar-15 pistols or a mechtech CCU kit)

 

[OMGWTFBBQ]

I you ought to be GTG for the conversion once you get the green light from the ATF. The ATF opinion saying once a pistol always a pistol(even though they have also said converting a contender to a rifle is OK, but you can't change it back) is in conflict with a SCOTUS decision to the contrary, and in any case, you're converting it into an NFA item, so even if you can't turn a pistol into a rifle without it being an NFA item... well... that's what you want.

 

[Blackbeard]

And yes, it will cost you $200 plus the cost of engraving the receiver with your name and location since you "made" a new firearm.

I thought they didn't accept new registrations.

 

[ffxmike]

they don't accept registrations on new machineguns...but SBR/SBS/AOW/suppressors are still allowed

 

[Kind of Blued]

Thanks for the help guys. As I assumed, however, I didn't know about the engraving part being necessary.

Still, that should be inexpensive, and this seems to be an easier route than buying a carbine, registering, removing barrel, having it chopped, rethreaded, new rail system, remount front sight. :banghead:

 

[Hkmp5sd]

Say I have an AR-15 pistol. I can make it a rifle, but I must FIRST put a barrel on that is 16" or longer. AT THAT POINT I can put a stock on the firearm. Returning to pistol is the opposite. You must remove the stock first, turning it into a pistol, THEN put the shorter barrel on.

That being said, once a rifle, always a rifle. Pistols can be switched out, rifles cannot (look at T/C setups). (link to wikipedia here, but I know no one will believe it since it's on wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...r_Arms_Company)


If it were true that "once a pistol always a pistol" you wouldn't see things like the mechtech CCU conversions to turn your 1911 or Glock into a carbine.

So, to recap, you can make a pistol a rifle, you can turn a pistol or rifle into an SBR (as texasrifleman pointed out above) but a rifle can only ever be a rifle or an NFA SBR.

As is typical, ATF has yet again reversed themselves on this issue. HERE is a recent letter from ATF stating that once you change a pistol into a rifle, it is forever a rifle and there is no going back.

In the situation you present, the attachment of a folding shoulder stock to a pistol having a barrel length of 16 inches or greater would be lawful as long as the overall length of the resulting firearm is at least 26 inches with the stock fully extended. We caution that, because the configuration you have specified results in the manufacture of a rifle, a subsequent reconfiguration of the firearm to a pistol configuration would result in a weapon made from a rifle, which is a weapon controlled by the National Firearms Act (NFA).

 

[DoubleTapDrew]

Still, that should be inexpensive, and this seems to be an easier route than buying a carbine, registering, removing barrel, having it chopped, rethreaded, new rail system, remount front sight.

Couldn't you just buy a RRA lower with buttstock, register it as a SBR and get that pistol upper for it instead of turning a pistol into a rifle? Most of the SBRs I've seen use dedicated shorty uppers (that came that way) rather than trying to chop down a 16" upper.

 

[Kharn]

MDeViney:
I'd go with DoubleTapDrew's suggestion of buying the lower first, registering, and then buying the upper. But if you really cant wait, buy the pistol and a 'rifle' AR15 lower, register the 'rifle' lower as an SBR and then when the form comes back transfer the upper from the pistol to the SBR.

Kharn

 

[TexasRifleman]

Buying the pistol is a nice way to go because you can actually shoot it before the tax stuff is done, just not with the stock.

Not a bad idea at all really, not sure why everyone wants to make it complicated.

 

[Kind of Blued]

Couldn't you just buy a RRA lower with buttstock, register it as a SBR and get that pistol upper for it instead of turning a pistol into a rifle? Most of the SBRs I've seen use dedicated shorty uppers (that came that way) rather than trying to chop down a 16" upper.

I'll look into how that would pan out price-wise.

One issue is that I have a specific collapsible stock that I would like on the thing that I can't get from RRA.

There is also something to be said for NFA stuff being unchanged should a ban come into effect, although the upper is not currently considered the gun. There is a level of security I would have in buying the pistol, the collapsible buttstock, and waiting until whenever is convenient for me to do the legal stuff necessary to marry them.

 

[Hkmp5sd]

There is a level of security I would have in buying the pistol, the collapsible buttstock, and waiting until whenever is convenient for me to do the legal stuff necessary to marry them.

There is a problem with that also. ATF has something called "constructive possession". It is their opinion that having the parts to assemble an illegal/unregistered weapon is the same as having that weapon completely assembled. They highly recommend not having those parts in your possession before you complete the registration process.

 

[TexasRifleman]

Yeah, though just owning the parts does not necessarily meet the requirements of "constructive intent" it's a gray enough area to steer clear of.

Buy the pistol and wait til you have the tax stamp before buying the stock.

 

[Kind of Blued]

Yeah, though just owning the parts does not necessarily meet the requirements of "constructive intent" it's a gray enough area to steer clear of.

Buy the pistol and wait til you have the tax stamp before buying the stock.

IS THERE NO WAY TO MAKE THESE PEOPLE HAPPY AND STILL OWN FUN STUFF!?!? :banghead:



Sigh... The more I learn about NFA stuff, the more that I realize I don't know. I may contact them and get some correspondance as evidence that, as far as they could tell me, I was following the law in my SBR project.

I'm pretty sure if half of the people in America dug through their garage and under the kitchen sink they would have all of the stuff needed to make crystal meth. The DEA had better get on that.

 

[NeoSpud]

So if I've got an AR in rifle configuration and want to slap a 10.5" barrel on it, I need to send 200 bucks plus a form 1 to the atf, then when approved have my receiver engraved with my name and location?

 

[Hkmp5sd]

Yep. Form 1 in duplicate and fingerprint cards.

 

[Hkmp5sd]

Doubletap again....system acting flaky.

 

[Hkmp5sd]

IS THERE NO WAY TO MAKE THESE PEOPLE HAPPY AND STILL OWN FUN STUFF!?!?

Don't forget, these are the same people that declared a piece of string was an unregistered machinegun.

 

[TexasRifleman]

Don't forget, these are the same people that declared a piece of string was an unregistered machinegun.

Oh they apologized remember? That made it all OK......


I remember reading somewhere that some guy was gonna send in a letter to ATF and ask if he needed to demill his finger since he knew how to bump fire

 

[Wes Janson]

There should be a law course offered for NFA matters.

Interestingly enough, I asked an agent the other day about the issue, and basically received Rifleman's answer in response. When I brought up the whole pistol-to-rifle-to-pistol issue, I was told that, while it wasn't an official answer, the personal opinion of the agent was that intent was the important factor. Realistically it seems hard to see a situation in which a prosecutor could make a solid case to prove beyond reasonable doubt that an unmodified handgun had once had a stock attached to it.