Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Transferring NFA items to different guns

Discussion in 'NFA Firearms and Accessories' started by eastwood44mag, Nov 7, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. eastwood44mag

    eastwood44mag Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    1,027
    One of the guys at work said that on your paperwork, you have to declare the gun that your item will be used for, and that it can only be used for that firearm (i.e. if you get a suppressor, it can only be affixed to one firearm; an upper can only be put on one lower, etc.). Is that correct, or since the NFA item is a separate entity, can you swap it out amongst various guns?

    Thanks, all.
     
  2. hirundo82

    hirundo82 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    998
    Location:
    The Deep South
    Depends on what is considered the gun for the purposes of the NFA. Silencers are considered a firearm on their own and can be put on whatever host you want. Same with some machineguns--a RDIAS is a gun for NFA purposes and can be used in multiple guns.

    With things like a SBR, whatever would be the gun in the Title I equivalent is still the gun (usually the receiver). So for a SBR AR15, the lower is the gun, and you can't swap the short-barreled upper to another rifle receiver without getting a stamp for the other receiver as well.
     
  3. medalguy

    medalguy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    3,207
    Location:
    New Mexico
    Here's a variant. I have a registered Colt M16 with standard length barrel. Could I change the upper out and put a short barreled upper on the registered lower?
     
  4. Ironman

    Ironman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2003
    Messages:
    580
    Location:
    Palm Harbor, Florida
    Medalguy...yes...registered machine guns are expempt from SBR rules. You can throw what ever length upper you want on that badboy. Any caliber too! ;)

    To the OP, your co-worker doesnt know what hes talking about. You can use a registered sear or silencer on any host that they will work with.
     
  5. MIgunguy

    MIgunguy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    308
    agreed
     
  6. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    18,302
    Location:
    Ft. Worth
    Pretty much.

    Suppressors with their own tax stamp (not integral to the barrel) can be moved from gun to gun with no problems.

    Machineguns are, by definition, NOT legal firearms under GCA but NFA, so they are not subject to any of the GCA rules, only NFA.

    In other words there is no such thing as an SBR'd machine-gun. GCA says a Title 1 rifle can't have a barrel under 16". OK that's fine, since a registered lower for example isn't a Title 1 firearm to begin with. So, it can have whatever barrel length you want.
     
  7. MasterSergeantA

    MasterSergeantA Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Messages:
    613
    Location:
    Arizona Territory
    Everything said above is correct and I am guessing that your question was more specifically related to suppressors than anything else. All I would add is that, in some cases (specifically the HK family), there are restrictions about what you can do with the sear because of the 'marriage' that has to occur between the sear and the gun itself. Another odd circumstance is using a 'Masterkey' type of system to put a short-barreled shotgun on an AR. You can do it with the SBS, but cannot with the same shotgun registered as an AOW. The AR becomes the "stock" when the AOW is attached.

    Isn't NFA fun?
     
  8. Quiet

    Quiet Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,062
    Location:
    bouncing between the 909 & the 702
    Recent BATFE NFA Branch letter says an AOW retains it's AOW status even when attached to a rifle. :evil:

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  9. Ironman

    Ironman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2003
    Messages:
    580
    Location:
    Palm Harbor, Florida
    ^
    Good to know!
     
  10. Jim K

    Jim K Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    17,631
    Just for clarification, the NFA is part of the GCA. In 1968, the old Federal Firearms Act (FFA) and the old National Firearms Act (NFA) became (with some changes) Titles 1 and 2 of the Gun Control Act, with the notation that those titles could be referred to under their old names for convenience.

    Jim
     
  11. MasterSergeantA

    MasterSergeantA Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Messages:
    613
    Location:
    Arizona Territory
    Quiet,

    Thanks...big time! That changes the ball game for me by a big margin. I think I will send my own letter to be safe, but it is a nice change of opinion (likely to change back, but who knows) and suits my needs just fine.
     
  12. Quiet

    Quiet Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,062
    Location:
    bouncing between the 909 & the 702
    The answer shouldn't change, because I believe Lage Mfg also got the same answer last year. They sought clarification on if the status of NFA firearms change when mounted/combined, prior to assembling the Lage Mfg MAX-41A (which had an AOW mounted on a MG).
     
  13. MasterSergeantA

    MasterSergeantA Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Messages:
    613
    Location:
    Arizona Territory
    One would certainly hope the answer wouldn't change. But I am reminded of the Akins Accelerator debacle. Figure it is nice to have my own letter in hand should someone not know the law. And if the winds shift, the worst I should have to contend with would likely be confiscation.

    I like Richard's MAX-41A a lot. I just wish he was planning to make more than a prototype. He isn't far from me and is a great guy, not to mention pretty much a genius.
     
  14. kimberkid

    kimberkid Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2010
    Messages:
    1,094
    The item Akins sent to our friends at the BTAFE and got approval for was not the same item he sold to consumers ...
    ... which was the reason for the retraction of approval.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page