Legal question regarding AR Pistols

Status
Not open for further replies.

Balrog

Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2008
Messages
3,211
I thought that the ATF would sometimes take action against people who owned the parts necessary to build a class III weapon, even if they hadn't built one.

So I was wondering, if you own an AR pistol with a short barreled upper, and you own an AR lower for a rifle, would the ATF have issue with that and claim you could make an unregistered SBR by putting the pistol upper on the rifle lower?
 
There's really no such thing as constructive possession when the parts you have can be assembled into a legal title I configuration. The onus would be on ATF to prove that you intend to (impossible absent an admission) or actually did configure an unregistered SBR.
 
Yea I guess u may be right or everyone who owns a shotgun and a hacksaw could be accused of constructive possession.
 
I wondered the same thing when I glanced over at an ad in the margin of this forum a day to 2 ago. It's the DPMS ad selling 10.5 inch barrels with 5.5 inch flash hiders. It adds up to a 16 inch barrel length but...

You know, we worry about so much hypothetical stuff. And the govt. agencies and legislators worry about so much hypothetical stuff.

I've never shot an SBR, but what (I think) I know about ARs informs me that the gas system (timing, reliability) works best in the original 20 inch barrel config. Shortening the barrel seems to invite malf issues. Seems like different weight recoil buffers and different buffer tubes (length and springs) are need to tune the SBR beast. But in my mind they are never as reliable as the original 20 inch barrel model.

So, its not as easy as just swapping a pistol upper to a rifle lower.
 
I wondered the same thing when I glanced over at an ad in the margin of this forum a day to 2 ago. It's the DPMS ad selling 10.5 inch barrels with 5.5 inch flash hiders. It adds up to a 16 inch barrel length but..

There is no "but"; anything permanently attached to the muzzle becomes part of the barrel for length measurements. Welded, silver soldered, brazed or blind pinned muzzle devices on <16" tubes to make the 16" title I length are 100% legal under federal law.

I've never shot an SBR, but what (I think) I know about ARs informs me that the gas system (timing, reliability) works best in the original 20 inch barrel config. Shortening the barrel seems to invite malf issues. Seems like different weight recoil buffers and different buffer tubes (length and springs) are need to tune the SBR beast. But in my mind they are never as reliable as the original 20 inch barrel model.

So, its not as easy as just swapping a pistol upper to a rifle lower.

The gas operated AR is not the same as dealing with a blowback or recoil operated system, which are more dependent on bolt/slide mass and recoil spring rates to cycle and feed properly. The smoothest cycling results from proper dwell time and port size combined with appropriate buffer weight, but it is easy to alter gas port size to compensate for shorter or longer dwell times, and play with bolt carrier/buffer weight to soften recoil impulse and slow down/speed up cycling.

There are also muzzle devices like the Noveske KX3 that increase back pressure; it was specifically designed to improve reliability of short barreled uppers by effectively increasing the dwell time, while also directing that horrendous blast down range. My 7.5" SBR with KX3 is just as reliable as any other AR I own or have played with, easily running even weak Tula .223 without a hiccup.

97793197-59b8-4e05-b785-33101ae97764_zpsu9pb1a6m.jpg
 
"So I was wondering, if you own an AR pistol with a short barreled upper, and you own an AR lower for a rifle, would the ATF have issue with that and claim you could make an unregistered SBR by putting the pistol upper on the rifle lower?"

Only if your parts cannot be configured into a legal format. If you only have a rifle lower and a pistol upper, the ATF could argue successfully that you intended to mate the two and form an unregistered SBR. If you have a pistol and rifle upper, a stock, and a pistol lower, then they must assume law-abiding intent up until you actually make the illegal configuration (assumption of law-abiding intent when both legal/illegal actions are possible; there's a latin term for it I forget)

"The gas operated AR is not the same as dealing with a blowback or recoil operated system, which are more dependent on bolt/slide mass and recoil spring rates to cycle and feed properly. The smoothest cycling results from proper dwell time and port size combined with appropriate buffer weight, but it is easy to alter gas port size to compensate for shorter or longer dwell times, and play with bolt carrier/buffer weight to soften recoil impulse and slow down/speed up cycling."
A friend is actually working on a 3-or-so inch AR pistol, that I can only guess uses some sort of gas-trap to deliver the needed back pressure from the muzzle itself. I understand it's glorious on the range, but doesn't cycle just yet.

TCB
 
A friend is actually working on a 3-or-so inch AR [strike]pistol[/strike] flame thrower, that I can only guess uses some sort of gas-trap to deliver the needed back pressure from the muzzle itself. I understand it's glorious on the range, but doesn't cycle just yet.

Fixed it ;)
 
barnbwt said:
So I was wondering, if you own an AR pistol with a short barreled upper, and you own an AR lower for a rifle, would the ATF have issue with that and claim you could make an unregistered SBR by putting the pistol upper on the rifle lower?
Only if your parts cannot be configured into a legal format. If you only have a rifle lower and a pistol upper, the ATF could argue successfully that you intended to mate the two and form an unregistered SBR. If you have a pistol and rifle upper, a stock, and a pistol lower, then they must assume law-abiding intent up until you actually make the illegal configuration (assumption of law-abiding intent when both legal/illegal actions are possible; there's a latin term for it I forget)
If memory serves, the Thompson Center case was precisely this issue. The ATF wanted require tax stamps for all of TC's rifle/pistol combo kits. SCOTUS told ATF that it couldn't do that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top