10/22 Pistol. Legal to make? Anybody done it?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Badger Arms

Badger Arms

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2003
Messages
3,738
Location
Harnett County, NC
What I'd LIKE to do is take a Ruger 10/22 and attach a modified Butler Creek stock without the shoulder stock on it. I then will cut-down the stock and barrel to about 8-10" and put a pistol scope on it. Call it a subcompact rabbit gun.

Volquartsen markets a pistol they call the Cheetah. I don't really want to pay $900 for a custom whiz-bang gun that looks kinda weird. Here's an artist's conception of my gun along with Volquartsen's.

Mine:
attachment.php


Volquartsen's:
cheetah.gif
 

Attachments

  • folderif.jpg
    folderif.jpg
    2.9 KB · Views: 2,361
It's illegal to convert a rifle to a pistol without registering it with BATF, but it is done illegally--particularly with 10/22-type guns, as the barrels change out so easily. I myself I have not done so, mostly because I live in the suburbs and can only shoot at public gun ranges. If you do not have a lot of privacy to shoot the weapon (such as living in a rural area), then there's not a lot of point to making a gun you can't really use much.
~
 
If someone can make an AR pistol, there's no reason you shouldn't be able to make a 10/22 pistol; the only caveat I can think of is that you'd have to start with a receiver that's NEVER been assembled into a rifle, otherwise you'd be making a SBR, with all the hassle that goes along with it. I don't think Ruger will sell a true stand-alone 10/22 receiver, but there are a few manufacturers out there that might.
 
Legality

The legal issue is that the serial numbers come back to a rifle...No
pistol permit required to purchase a rifle. When it's turned into a
pistol, it then falls under the same regulations as a sawed-off shotgun.
It's like putting a rifle stock on a TC Contender with a 10 or 14-inch
barrel. Get caught plinking with it and you're jailhouse bound.

A rifle is defined illegal if:
The barrel is less than 16 inches, and the overall length is less than
26 inches. Shotguns are 18 and 28 respectively.


You can apply for a form to convert it to a pistol from the ATF, and at
that point, the reciever will be registered as a pistol. The cost involved
may make it less expensive to buy one of the above pistols and go
with a permit.

Cheers!
Tuner
 
That's an interesting concept Badger. If you go with the SBR, add a flip-down foregrip on it. That would look sharp. Of course, if you made it from a new receiver and registered it as a AOW, you could add a threaded barrel and suppressor. I wouldn't mind having one of those myself! :)


You can apply for a form to convert it to a pistol from the ATF, and at
Click to expand...

The stripped receivers are considered firearms themselves and have serial numbers just like everything else. You can make a newly manufactured stripped receiver into a pistol without ATF approval. Only using a receiver that was sold as part of a complete rifle has to go through ATF. Given the $200 transfer fee for a SBR plus the cost of the gun/receiver, it's cheaper to buy the new stripped receiver and go from there.
 
Do the Volquarsen receivers use the same barrel attatchment that Ruger does? Someone IRL (who may have been completely wrong) once told me that all of Volquartsen's guns were screw-in barrels--that was the whole point of Volquartsen making them custom....
-----
And if true, then you'd need the receiver, and you'd need to pay someone for a short screw-in barrel.
~
 
Well, that does it. I would love to have a gun like that and I'm not willing to pay for a new receiver like it seems I might have to to make SURE that I would be within the law. I'm going to write the BATFE -- again -- and see if they will give me a definitive answer on this one. I certainly think it might be legal and I was right about the 2-shot Mini-14 concept as you can examine in this thread: Ruger Mini-14 2-Shot Okay... BATF!

I'll post updates when I get them.
 
I thought that if a rifle purchased before the 94 AWB was converted into a pistol, it was legal.

However a post ban rifle cannot be converted into a pistol unless it’s registered as an AOW.

Is this correct?

Thanks, Dan
 
Ruger Mini-14 2-Shot Okay... BATF!
Click to expand...

The "Hellfire" trigger adapter for the Ruger 10/22 acts in a similar fashion, but not as effectively. It fires one round when the trigger is pulled and one round when the trigger is released. It essentially adds a trigger which is actuated by the back of the finger. So you end up with two triggers, one operating in the opposite direction.



However a post ban rifle cannot be converted into a pistol unless it’s registered as an AOW.
Click to expand...

You can make SBRs out of postban receivers provided they do not meet the definition of an AW. For an AR-15, for example, you have to keep the weight below 50 ounces. One company is making a clone of the HK SP89 (the semi-only pistol version of the MP5K submachinegun) and they remain legal because they weigh less than 50 oz. and they do not install the horizontal foregrip. If you use a preban, you can do whatever you want.
 
According to their law, any "Weapon made from a rifle with a barrel less than 16" or an overall length of less than 26"" requires the $200 tax and form 4. IIRC, it would be an SBR whether or not you put a shoulder stock on it. With a Shotgun, it would be an SBS if it's ever had a shoulder stock on it. So, my pet gun project would end-up being an SBR by the STRICT reading of the law. That was the essence of my letter.

My contention is that the section of the law which deals with a "Weapon made from a rifle," was nullified by the Supreme Court ruling re: Thompson Center. IIRC, you can convert a pistol into a rifle and back again so long as you do not configure said receiver with a barrel less than 16" and a pistol grip at any point. This ruling negates the law that would seem also to apply to my suggested pistol.
 
Try it and then have the ATF come and see it!:evil: No, any reciever serial numbered and registered with such number as a rifle cannot be made into a handgun/pistol without going through the class 3 paperwork/expense.
The Volquartsen frame uses a different bbl attatchment system than the factory 10/22 because the Ruger style can actually cant the bbl in the reciever if they are no cocentric to each other.
T/C's...are they acually registered as "rifle" recievers?
 
On the TC arms Contender, G2, Encore, etc. They are booked as whatever they leave the factory as. If they leave the factory as a component receiver, it says so. If they leave the factory as a rifle, they are a rifle. If they leave the factory as a pistol, they are a pistol. The question that TC had and EVERYBODY in the sane world agreed... How does the fact that the gun at one time had a shoulder stock materially change the gun? There is no logic to the 'once a rifle, always a rifle' party line that BATF had been fed by successive and more ominous interpretation of the applicable laws.

IF there is no illegal activity involved in converting a Thompson Center Contender from a rifle to a pistol and back, there can be no prohibition to doing what I suggest, BATF regulation interpretation aside. The BATF was interpreting the law wrong and they got their hands slapped by the Supreme Court when it came down to it. I think this decision also applies to making any pistol from a rifle so long as no other laws are violated in the process (such as assembling an SBR, manufacture by an individual under 21, making of an assault weapon under the AWB of 1994, etc.)

It is an absurd rule. The intent of the NFA was to prevent the common practice of manufacturing a 'whippit' gun or short-stocked, sawed off rifle or shotgun for concealability. These weapons were common for Bank Robbers, Mobsters, Bootleggers, etc. Hmmm, times MIGHT have changed a bit. When was the last time somebody sawed a 30/30 down and used it to make a mob hit? The intent of the law was not to ban the conversion of a Contender Carbine to a pistol or the banning of the XP-100 rifle. It was not to keep little-ole-me from making a tack-driving autoloading pistol.

STI, btw, sells component receivers as well which can be ordered with threaded or Ruger style barrel attachment. Price is about the same if BATF says no.
 
There you go again. You know that the ATF never applies logic to any decision.

While you are at it, how about getting them to drop the "once a machinegun, always a machinegun" ruling as well? Essentially the same thing. You might consider informing them they have ruled that "once a pre-ban assault weapon" does not mean always an AW. They claim it is possible for it to lose its pre-ban status. Why should they lose their previous status and other receivers do not?
 
Yeah, while I'm at it... hehehe. I seriously don't think this one is going to fly. If if does, I'd be floored. The reality is that they can't regulate the Contender that way and therefore they cannot regulate the 10/22, Remington Model 7, or any other weapon that way. My intent if they disagree with my position is to LEGALLY apply to convert my rifle into a pistol by filing the Form 4 and paying the $200 fee. Once I get their approval, I will legally convert the rifle to a pistol and apply for a refund on the grounds that the law is unconstitutional. I certainly won't get the refund, but I can then file an appeal in Federal Court. I'm really steamed about this. It defies logic.
 
From the NFA FAQ:



"ATF takes the position that this definition includes any
combination of parts from which a short barreled rifle can be
assembled. And they said this included a set of parts with dual
uses. In the Supreme court case of U.S. v. Thompson/Center Arms
Co., 504 U.S. 505 (1992) ATF said a set consisting of a receiver,
a 16"+ barrel, a pistol grip stock, a shoulder stock, and a barrel
less than 16 inches long was a short barreled rifle. The idea of
the kit was that you needed only one receiver, and you could have
both a rifle and pistol in one gun. While making a pistol out of a
rifle is making a short rifle, ATF has approved of converting a
pistol into a rifle, and then converting it back into a pistol,
without "making" a short barreled rifle when it is converted back
into a pistol; that was not an issue. See, for example Revenue
Rulings 59-340, 59-341 and 61-203. T/C made one set on a Form 1,
then sued for a tax refund, claiming the set was not a SBR, unless
it actually was assembled with the shoulder stock, and short
barrel, something they instructed the purchaser of the set not to
do. The Supreme court disagreed with ATF, and agreed with
Thompson/Center.

The Court said that a set of parts was not a short barreled
rifle, unless the only way to assemble the parts was into a short
barreled rifle. As this set had a legitimate, legal, use for all
the parts it was OK. However they also approved of lower court
cases holding that the sale by one person, at the same place, of
all the parts to assemble an AR-15, with a short barrel, was sale
of a SBR, even if they weren't assembled together at the moment of
the bust, and had in fact never been assembled. See U.S. v.
Drasen, 845 F.2d 731 (7th Cir. 1988). This was because the only
use for the parts in that case was a SBR. If the person in that
case also had a registered M-16, then there would be a legitimate
use for the SMG barrel, and there shouldn't be a problem. And the
Court agreed, of course, that a fully assembled rifle with a barrel
less than 16", or an overall length of less than 26" was also
subject to registration. Although it was not addressed in the
case, the rule is that an otherwise short barreled rifle that is
very easily restored to firing condition (readily restorable);
e.g., one missing a firing pin, but for that pin one may substitute
a nail or other common object, is also subject to the law."

Dan
 
Badger,

Ever see these rulings?
Rev. Rul. 59-340, 1959-2 C.B. 375

The Internal Revenue Service has had the occasion to examine a weapon identified as the Unique, Model L, pistol and rifle attachment. The basic mechanism of the weapon is a .22 caliber, semiautomatic, clip fed pistol. The pistol barrel is readily removable, and with the barrel removed, the mechanism will not fire. With the pistol barrel removed, the basic mechanism can be inserted into a one piece rifle frame with a .22 caliber barrel having a length of over 16 inches.

Held, the Unique Model L, pistol and rifle attachment, a combination pistol and rifle, is not a firearm within the purview of the National Firearms Act (chapter 53 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954); however, it is subject to the Federal Firearms Act (15 U.S.C. 901).

http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/rr_59340.txt

Rev. Rul. 59-341, 1959-2 C.B. 376

The Internal Revenue Service has had the occasion to examine the Dardick Handgun, a double-action, semiautomatic, revolving cylinder weapon. This weapon is basically a .38 caliber handgun, employing a continuous feed system, and using a triangular shaped cartridge case, the .38 Dardick "Trounds." By means of an adapter and an interchangeable .22 caliber barrel, conventional .22 caliber ammunition can also be fired from the basic gun. Ammunition cannot be fired by the basic mechanism unless a barrel is attached. By inserting the basic mechanism into a one piece rifle unit, the gun becomes a .22 caliber rifle with a barrel length of over 16 inches.

Held, the Dardick Handgun is not a firearm within the purview of the National Firearms Act (chapter 53 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954); however, it is subject to the Federal Firearms Act (15 U.S.C. 901).

http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/rr_59341.txt
Click to expand...

Make yourself a convertible 10/22 Rifle/Pistol.
 
Yes, I read through those. They are old rulings, but basically are similar in one respect. The weapon was originally built, as was the Contender, as a pistol with the option of converting it into a rifle. There is nothing in the NFA which prohibits the conversion of a handgun into a rifle. There is, however, a prohibition against making a pistol from a rifle or:
a weapon made from a rifle if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length
Click to expand...
This seems to imply that once the owner of one of these convertible pistol/rifles must leave the weapon in rifle condition once he converts said rifle. That's absurd. By the BATFE reading of this law as it applies to my Contender, once I purchase the Carbine conversion, I must destroy the pistol grip and barrel for fear of having created an illegal weapon in the process. Again, absurd. I'm asking them to apply the same rules accross the board without each and every weapon having to be sent to them with a tax paid and evaluated.
 
So, how did you decide to go about making your pistol? Did you buy a virgin receiver or are you going to fight ATF using the T/C ruling?
 
Both. I've got a virgin receiver and I'm going to cannibalize another 10/22 for parts and then sell the receiver. I've got a choate pistol-gripped stock and I'm chopping the rear end off of it. I've got the barrel at the gunsmith right now being chopped to 5.25" or basically right behind the warning stamp on the top of the barrel. Once I get the barrel back, I'm going to bed the stock and cut it about 1.5" short of the muzzle. I'm going to install a sling swivel just behind the front of the stock and use the other one at the base of the pistol grip.

I 'Photoshop'd' a rendering seen below. Note that I've used my 'canibalized' gun installed into the stock and the virgin receiver below has NOT been installed and will not until the stock is properly chopped. The whole gun ends up being around 13" long and I'm guessing around 42 ounces based on my calculations. I'll have to weigh the finished product to keep it under the legal weight requirement. The barrel, when I get it back, should come to where the face of the "Force" receiver shown below goes, about 1.5" from the end of the stock in this shot.

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • choppy version 7.jpg
    choppy version 7.jpg
    87.4 KB · Views: 1,107
While you are at it, how about getting them to drop the "once a machinegun, always a machinegun" ruling as well? Essentially the same thing. You might consider informing them they have ruled that "once a pre-ban assault weapon" does not mean always an AW. They claim it is possible for it to lose its pre-ban status. Why should they lose their previous status and other receivers do not?
Click to expand...
WOW I just reread your post. That's the crux of the argument, isn't it? The fact that a rifle or pistol can lose it's status and become an SBR, machinegun, or AOW as that rule applies. A Grandfathered AW could lose its status by their definition. How then can a rifle not lose its rifle status and become a pistol? Making a pistol from a rifle and 'making a pistol' from a chunk of iron ore involves the same actions. The two are materially the same action. Weapons are allowed to have their status changed willy-nilly until such time as they disagree with the interpretations.
 
Yep. Regardless of common sense or reality and without any consistency between similar rulings, they always make the decision which is most restrictive and has the most negative impact on the gun owner.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
Are There Any 22WMR or 17HMR Pistols?
Replies
12
Views
17K
panoz77
P
V
  • Locked
Custom Ruger 10/22 Takedown shops?
Replies
4
Views
572
9mmepiphany
9mmepiphany
P
  • Locked
Ruger 10/22 Takedown or 10/22 w/ Butler Creek Folding Stock
Replies
20
Views
1K
Ascot500
Ascot500
D
  • Locked
Ruger 10/22 folding stocks
Replies
2
Views
448
KIMBER45TLE
K
C
  • Locked
Ruger 10/22 Target Barrels and Folding stock?
Replies
2
Views
584
cidirkona
C
Back
Top