I need proof that it's legal

[7.62X25mm]

Legal advice is worth what you pay for it.

I'd be particularly skeptical about "legal advice" with mis-spellings and faulty grammatical construction.

 

[chris in va]

Wish they made one for my Sig 220.

Doesn't matter anyway, I'm broke.

 

[ryanl]

Interesting. If this is the case, then why is it a felony to swap an AR15 receiver back and forth between pistol and rifle configuration without a tax stamp? Anyone?

 

[expvideo]

These are legal and always have been. They've been on the market for over a decade with no problems.

As long there is a 16"+ barrel, you can put a stock on a pistol. That is just the way that it is. Show me a law that says otherwise. You can't, because that law doesn't exist.

It is legal to convert a pistol to a rifle.

 

[ryanl]

In the ATF's opinion which has been verified in several letters from them. It is legal to convert a pistol to a rifle,What is illegal is to convert a rifle back into a pistol. without first getting a tax stamp. Otherwise you would be in possesion of an unregistered SBR. I dont know the specifics of this Mec TEC conversion you speak of, but I know what applies to AR receivers and I dont see much of a difference. A receiver is after all, a receiver. I have seen several written letters from the Chief of the Firearms Technology branch of the ATF verifying this. Does Mec Tec advise you to switch back and forth between rifle and pistol configuration. Perhaps you should contact the people who enforce the law and actually ask their opinion. After all thats the one that matters, right?

 

[ryanl]

Readers Digest Version

Pistol to rifle= Legal
Rifle back to pistol= Felony

Any questions?

 

[mbt2001]

You used to need proof that it was ILLEGAL or it was legal...

 

[ryanl]

Umm, the ATF stated so in the letter. They are the ones that govern NFA items, and the ones who decide if you would be charged or not. The Thompson case is only applicable to Thompson.

"whenever a 16-inch barrel and shoulder stock are attached to your pistol, it then becomes a rifle. In the absence of the appropriate authorization, returning it to the pistol configuration would constitute manufacturing a weapon made from a rifle and would be a violation of Federal Firarms Law"


Are you saying that unless the ATF catches you doing it, its not illegal? Kind of like murder is legal as long as no one has proof you did it? I hope I am misunderstanding you.

 

[7.62X25mm]

Ask an FFL. I asked about handguns with detached shoulder stocks, sold as handguns. These were popular in the 19th century, the "Buntline" being one of the models.

They're unlawful.

An FFL can fill you in.

 

[expvideo]

The receiver is either a rifle receiver or a pistol receiver. A pistol receiver can be converted to a rifle and back as much as you want. A rifle receiver can not.

 

[homebase.ning.com]

Have you checked your local library?

 

[ravonaf]

The receiver is either a rifle receiver or a pistol receiver. A pistol receiver can be converted to a rifle and back as much as you want. A rifle receiver can not.

Exactly as I see it. No matter how many times you convert a pistol back and forth it will ALWAYS have a serial number from the manufacturer that says it's a pistol.

 

[natman]

Not only is this letter inconsistent with ATFs definition of a pistol, but it also goes against ATFs long standing policy that once a receiver is classified as a certain type of weapon, it remains that type of weapon, even if it has been permanently modified. "Once a machine gun, always a machine gun".

The "logic" here is like saying that if a man puts on a dress he's a woman, and taking it off is a sex change operation.

I am also curious as to how the SCOTUS ruling can apply only to the Thompson Contender, but not anything else. Does each individual model of pistol have to be blessed by SCOTUS?