How does building ARs work

[Oolong]

I was reading up on building my own ar pistol and had seen somewhere that I shouldn't mix and match lowers across ar pistols and rifles as that could be seen as breaking the nfa?, is this true? Also does building piecemeal my own ar mean that I am the manufacturer? If so can I put a vertical grip on a pistol length ar and have it considered a firearm instead of a pistol?

 

[coloradokevin]

So, laws are convoluted on this subject, as you might imagine. Even as a career law enforcement officer myself, I sometimes shake my head while trying to figure this stuff out.

Here's how I believe I can answer your question (assuming I understood it correctly):

1) A virgin AR-15 lower can be built into a rifle or a pistol. If it's built into a rifle first, it can never be a pistol. However, if it's built as a pistol first, it can also be converted to rifle configuration. If you want to avoid violating NFA laws, your rifle needs to have a barrel over 16", and your pistol better not have a stock or a vertical foregrip.

2) You are the manufacturer, which should only become an issue if you later decide to file a Form 1, pay $200, and turn it into an SBR (in which case you can have any length barrel you want on the thing). In the mean time you aren't exempt from any NFA laws.

Here's how I did this on my SBR build:

I started with a virgin stripped lower receiver, and built the AR-15 into a pistol configuration using the same components I was going to use on the SBR (minus the stock and buffer tube — I used a pistol buffer tube in the build). I then sent my paperwork to the ATF with my $200 tax, so I could legally convert this pistol into a SBR. When the stamp came back I took the pistol buffer tube off of the rifle, and put a rifle buffer tube and stock on the now-legal SBR.

I built mine as a pistol not because I really wanted a pistol, but because I wanted a way to legally use this gun until I could legally turn it into an SBR. I also figured I'd avoid any question over whether I was building an illegal SBR (with all the parts on hand) before the ATF had cleared my tax stamp.

Obviously it's a complex quagmire of legal nonsense when we start talking about firearms laws, and this is especially true once you bring NFA issues into the conversation. So, please consult appropriate legal counsel if you are uncertain on anything (that's my "I'm not a lawyer" disclaimer).

 

[coloradokevin]

Oh, and here's someone else's article on the subject that I stumbled onto some time ago:

http://jerkingthetrigger.com/2013/11/20/ar-15-pistols-clearing-up-some-misconceptions/

I should say that one point of contention on this issue seems to concern whether or not you can turn a pistol into a rifle and then back into a pistol again. I was always told that this was legal (assuming that you started with a virgin receiver and built it into a pistol before turning it into a rifle), and the article I provided the link to also claims this is legal. But, I've read elsewhere that this is not a legal practice… the other camp on this legal argument says that once it is put into rifle configuration it must always be in rifle configuration.

Which is correct? To be honest, I'm not entirely positive on that issue, and you'd probably want to seek clarification from the ATF if you want to know the exact answer.

You're also probably wondering how anyone would really know what you had done with the virgin receiver you bought. Truth is, no one will probably have any idea if it was a rifle or pistol first, unless you tell them. But, the legal answer and the common sense answer aren't always found in the same sentence.

 

[Zoogster]

You need to start with a new lower or make one, or start with a pistol lower from a lower already sold as a pistol. You may not use a lower that was part of a rifle or sold as a rifle on a form. If you do then it was made from a rifle and becomes an NFA item even if it is identical to a non NFA AR pistol.

You may put a vertical fore grip only if the overall length is more than 26", which is why the Franklin Armory XO-26 is not an NFA firearm.
Less than 26" and it cannot have a vertical forward grip or its an NFA item.
You also may not conceal it on the person with a vertical forward grip, or the fact that it is over 26" ceases to matter and it becomes an NFA item.


You may not put a stock on it while it has a barrel of less than 16" on it or if it is under 26".

If made first as a pistol it may be turned into a legal rifle configuration (16"+ barrel, 26"++ overall length) and go back to pistol configuration, but if it starts as a rifle it must stay a rifle.

That is the federal restrictions.

 

[Tirod]

If you put a VFG on a pistol over 26" it becomes "not a pistol" and therefore may not be covered by the more lenient CCW laws of your state. That includes loaded transportation or use in a "pistol only" deer hunting season. This gets ignored a lot - you lose the pistol designation and it gets treated like a rifle.

I built mine under 26" and avoid possessing a VFG.

You may use any buffer tube you like but some prefer a "pistol" buffer tube which is oversized and cannot accept any of the available milspec or commercial stocks. That avoids any mixups. Another issue is transporting a rifle and pistol broken down in the same bag or case - if seized by the police there is a risk of illegal assembly. That case was a train wreck but the legal consequences were real. Therefore I transport the guns separately cased.

The main issue is that if you start with a stripped lower and first build a pistol, all is better. Until complete that lower will be not be considered a pistol or rifle regardless of whatever the FFL ignorantly checks on the 4473. His determination has no standing in law.

 

[Sam1911]

Which is correct? To be honest, I'm not entirely positive on that issue, and you'd probably want to seek clarification from the ATF if you want to know the exact answer.

They have established clearly that if you start with a pistol you CAN convert back and forth between rifle and pistol configurations without violating the NFA: https://www.atf.gov/file/55526/download

 

[danez71]

They have established clearly that if you start with a pistol you CAN convert back and forth between rifle and pistol configurations without violating the NFA: https://www.atf.gov/file/55526/download

That's true when "they" are the Feds.

I think this is a good time to point out that states could have laws that don't allow going from pistol to rifle and back to pistol.

I dont think Oolong lives in one of those state but I think it's worth pointing out for others that may read this and not know.

 

[Sam1911]

I think this is a good time to point out that states could have laws that don't allow going from pistol to rifle and back to pistol.

Do you know of any?

 

[danez71]

Do you know of any?

I'm pretty sure CA.

I've read it a few times on Calguns.n e t but I've never looked into it myself.

 

[Elkins45]

Just to be pedantic: you are the "maker" not the manufacturer. In the NFA world there is a difference.

 

[coloradokevin]

Just to be pedantic: you are the "maker" not the manufacturer. In the NFA world there is a difference.

Lol... thanks. If the legal consequences for mistakes wasn't so high with this stuff, it would all be funny. It's enough lunacy to make your head spin. Anyone who thinks our firearms laws are logical hasn't really been exposed to firearms enough. I'm a career law enforcement officer (halfway up the food chain in my agency), a lifelong shooter, and I have a business degree from a top university. Even I have to be cautious in my terminology on the subject, because little things make such a big difference. At least it sounds like I got the most relevant points correct

 

[Sam1911]

I'm pretty sure CA.

I've read it a few times on Calguns.n e t but I've never looked into it myself.

Ok, that seems likely. Of course, if you're in CA there's rather a lot you'd better look up before you start building an AR, I think.

 

[danez71]

I did some quick reading... it appears to be for reasons related to specific CA definitions,

Ok, that seems likely. Of course, if you're in CA there's rather a lot you'd better look up before you start building an AR, I think.

That's for sure.

I did a little more digging and didn't find a specific statute. It seems to be a result of some combination of CA definitions of pistol, rifle, SBR, CA AW laws, CA DROS and general legislative stupidity.

I'm about 99% sure that CA quagmire prevents it.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Just to be pedantic: you are the "maker" not the manufacturer. In the NFA world there is a difference.

You will not find "maker" describing a person who makes a gun for person use anywhere in the language of U.S. code for firearms laws.

The difference is that you are defined as a manufacturer if you produce for distribution, where you are simply a private individual manufacturing a firearm if it is for personal use. In the latter case, you are only defined as a person, not a "maker".

How's that for pedantry?

 

[Theohazard]

Just to be pedantic: you are the "maker" not the manufacturer. In the NFA world there is a difference.

You will not find "maker" describing a person who makes a gun for person use anywhere in the language of U.S. code for firearms laws.

The difference is that you are defined as a manufacturer if you produce for distribution, where you are simply a private individual manufacturing a firearm if it is for personal use. In the latter case, you are only defined as a person, not a "maker".

How's that for pedantry?

The ATF uses the term "make" when describing an individual making an NFA firearm using a Form 1. Heck, the Form 1 is even titled, "Application to Make and Register a Firearm".

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/atf-national-firearms-act-handbook-chapter-6/download

CHAPTER 6. MAKING NFA FIREARMS BY NONLICENSEE

Section 6.1 Requirements for making NFA firearms. Persons not otherwise prohibited from possessing firearms may submit an application to make an NFA firearm, other than a machinegun.93 The application process requires submission of ATF Form 1, Application to Make and Register a Firearm, in duplicate, along with FBI FD-258, Fingerprint Card, in duplicate, and payment of the $200 making tax. Appendix C contains a copy of Form 1.

How's that for even more pedantry?

 

[MachIVshooter]

The ATF uses the term "make" when describing an individual making an NFA firearm using a Form 1. Heck, the Form 1 is even titled, "Application to Make and Register a Firearm".

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/atf-national-firearms-act-handbook-chapter-6/download



How's that for even more pedantry?

Verb vs. noun Matters tremendously in legalese.

 

[Theohazard]

Perhaps. But either way, Elkins45 was correct that in the NFA world the term "manufacturer" is usually used to describe actual manufacturers, and "maker" is usually used to describe a person making an NFA item using a Form 1.

The Form 1 makes this distinction using the word "manufacturer" to describe the original manufacturer of a firearm that's being made into an NFA item, and using the words "make" and "made" to describe the type of firearm being made by the person submitting the Form 1.

Maybe the law doesn't actually use the word "maker" (I don't know, I didn't actually check), but Elkins45 wasn't referring to the law, he was just referring the terms used by the ATF and others in the NFA world.

 

[Saddlebag Preacher]

I ran into this when I decided to build a varmint specific AR over the Christmas holidays buying on sale parts from different companies. I went to my local gun store and bought an Anderson lower for $55.00 and told them what I was doing with it. Then over two months I bought parts and built my rifle. When I went to get the serial number to add to my firearms insurance after it was completed, I saw in little letters under the ser # the word PISTOL. I thought uh-oh, and contacted Anderson who told me if it was marked PISTOL, I HAD to use it as a pistol and not a rifle. I went back to the gun store with the entire rifle thinking I had an illegal gun. I was told as long as I assembled it as a rifle and didn't go to a pistol later, I was fine. They even contacted one of the Feds that the owner deals with, and he said the same, can't turn it into a pistol now, but the word PISTOL on it doesn't matter legally.

 

[Sam1911]

Yeah, the words "pistol" or "rifle" or "banana" on it don't mean anything. What matters is its first complete configuration. Now there are some knotty questions about that if you dig deep enough into the matter, but you're absolutely fine.

 

[Cannibul]

I ran into this when I decided to build a varmint specific AR over the Christmas holidays buying on sale parts from different companies. I went to my local gun store and bought an Anderson lower for $55.00 and told them what I was doing with it. Then over two months I bought parts and built my rifle. When I went to get the serial number to add to my firearms insurance after it was completed, I saw in little letters under the ser # the word PISTOL. I thought uh-oh, and contacted Anderson who told me if it was marked PISTOL, I HAD to use it as a pistol and not a rifle. I went back to the gun store with the entire rifle thinking I had an illegal gun. I was told as long as I assembled it as a rifle and didn't go to a pistol later, I was fine. They even contacted one of the Feds that the owner deals with, and he said the same, can't turn it into a pistol now, but the word PISTOL on it doesn't matter legally.

If you're required to provide serial numbers to your insurance company you need to find a different company.

I use Eastern Historic Firearms Insurance. $135 for $40k in coverage. You don't need to provide serial numbers or appraisals on any firearm under either $5 or $10 in value. Call Jack. He'll set you up.

 

[Saddlebag Preacher]

I am not required to have serial numbers, but I carry an addition rider because of the $ value exceeds the regular homeowners. They do require proof of owning the guns if they are stolen or destroyed to receive a claim. So I have a list of the guns by make, model ser# and caliber. I update my list often and along with pictures. I keep the file in a separate place in case of fire or whatever. I don't give them the ser# list, but if they are stolen or destroyed they won't just take your word for it that you owned such and such gun and want some money for it.

 

[pjeski]

You need to start with a new lower or make one, or start with a pistol lower from a lower already sold as a pistol. You may not use a lower that was part of a rifle or sold as a rifle on a form. If you do then it was made from a rifle and becomes an NFA item even if it is identical to a non NFA AR pistol.

You may put a vertical fore grip only if the overall length is more than 26", which is why the Franklin Armory XO-26 is not an NFA firearm.
Less than 26" and it cannot have a vertical forward grip or its an NFA item.
You also may not conceal it on the person with a vertical forward grip, or the fact that it is over 26" ceases to matter and it becomes an NFA item.


You may not put a stock on it while it has a barrel of less than 16" on it or if it is under 26".

If made first as a pistol it may be turned into a legal rifle configuration (16"+ barrel, 26"++ overall length) and go back to pistol configuration, but if it starts as a rifle it must stay a rifle.

That is the federal restrictions.

This is not correct. The definition of an SBR includes a weapon "made from a rifle". The definition of a rifle does not include "a weapon transferred on a form as a rifle". While it may make it harder to argue that your pistol was built from a receiver that was never a rifle if it was transferred on the 4473 as one, it doesn't make it illegal to do so. Weapons aren't defined by paperwork, they are defined by their configuration and their history.

 

[mjsdwash]

some states may require you to list your intention when buying the lower, though I don't know any now that Wa stopped.

 

[Theohazard]

some states may require you to list your intention when buying the lower, though I don't know any now that Wa stopped.

Just to clarify, that intention wouldn't be listed on the 4473. The 4473 is a federal form, and as far as the feds are concerned there is no such thing as a "pistol lower" or a "rifle lower". Per federal law and federal regulations, a receiver can't be a pistol or a rifle until it's built into a pistol or a rifle.

Any state that required a receiver to be sold as a pistol or a rifle would have to use a separate state form, just like Washington did during the short time it required people to also complete a state pistol form when buying an AR-15 lower with intention of building it into a pistol.

 

[Zoogster]

The definition of a rifle does not include "a weapon transferred on a form as a rifle"

Okay, but if starting out fresh I would think less evidence that it was a rifle is in your favor.
A paper trail documenting it as a rifle would seem to be helpful in proving it was a weapon made from a rifle, whether true or not.

I can just see a jury trying to understand complex laws they know nothing about and a prosecutor showing proof that it was transferred as a rifle while drilling home the 'made from a rifle' being the only requirement to make it illegal to have made or possessed. If you were sold a rifle, and now its a pistol with the same serial number, something would seem fishy to a juror.
While it is technically correct that what was actually done with the 'firearm' (receiver) matters more than what paperwork says was done with it, I still think it prudent not to use a receiver transferred as a rifle if you can help it.
The 4473s were changed some years back and previously many bare receivers were transferred as long guns, and it was what some stores always transferred them as, especially since pistols had extra restrictions such as a higher age requirement or limit on number of handguns someone could buy in a time period or extra restrictions on buying handguns at the state level that long guns didn't have. So it became what a lot of employees of FFL stores got used to doing when transferring receivers. Some places wouldn't say it was a handgun even if you asked them to check that box, and others put it down as a long gun unless you specifically asked for them to check the other box. Now the forms are more extensive and let them put that it is in fact just a bare receiver and include a lot more and specific options of what it is.