What constitutes an NFA "firearm made from a rifle"?

[badkarmamib]

I cannot find a definitive answer anywhere, including on ATF's site. The two examples that come to my mind are AK47 and Crickett .22s. While disassembled for cleaning or replacing the stocks of these two firearms in particular, the OAL is less than 26". From the ATF's site,

"A firearm, as defined by 26 U.S.C. 5845(a)(4), is made when a handgun or other weapon with an overall length of less than 26 inches, or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length, is assembled or produced from a weapon originally assembled or produced only as a rifle."

So, my question is, how would one legally replace the stock on either of these? What am I missing?

 

[JeeperCreeper]

I'd have to read the full definitions to compare as it's been a while, but I'm guessing the key word will be "or" and not "and" in the definition.

Or maybe I'm missing what you're asking... A rifle barreled action is still a rifle... Unless used otherwise

 

[badkarmamib]

But, while the old stock is removed, before the new stock is installed, you are holding a "rifle" that has an OAL of less than 26 inches.

 

[MachIVshooter]

But, while the old stock is removed, before the new stock is installed, you are holding a "rifle" that has an OAL of less than 26 inches.

It's not an assembled weapon at that point:

A firearm, as defined by 26 U.S.C. 5845(a)(4), is made when a handgun or other weapon with an overall length of less than 26 inches, or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length, is assembled or produced from a weapon originally assembled or produced only as a rifle

I'd have to read the full definitions to compare as it's been a while, but I'm guessing the key word will be "or" and not "and" in the definition.

It's either. Whether the barrel is <16", OAL <26" or both, if it began life as a title I long gun, it is now a title II weapon. Weapon made from a rifle or weapon made from a shotgun generally fall into SBR or SBS, although they could become AOW.

 

[badkarmamib]

So it comes down to the intent to reinstall the stock, then? The law is based on the assumption that you are not removing parts to leave it in that configuration? I understand that the laws concerning NFA items are not always clear, but I am having a hard time correlating this with "constructive intent". I guess, also, don't have a spare rear trunion for an underfolder laying on the table while you are swapping the AK stock...

 

[RedlegRick]

You guys had me worried the ATF was coming for my little Crickett and how that story would have gone over at my club.

 

[CapnMac]

but I am having a hard time correlating this with "constructive intent".

That's because you are applying logic, and not regulatory construction.

So, if you had a disassembled AK and its receiver had been assembled as a rifle, and you had, oh, a full set of made-in-Bulgaria parts, or maybe a 10" barrel, then, by rule, you would have parts that might be constructed into a non Title ! arm. Which would be bad.

If the only parts you have are the ones belonging to to the legal Title I arm, then the only thing it can be assembled intp is the legal Title I arm.

Saw the stock tang off the rear trunion so that a legal stock cannot be installed--that could be a problem.

Unless the receiver had been been originally assembled to be a pistol.

Because, that's how the rules read, not how a person might rationalize them out.

 

[Elkins45]

I understand that the laws concerning NFA items are not always clear, but I am having a hard time correlating this with "constructive intent".

There’s no such thing as constructive intent. There is something called constructive possession. Say you are found to be in possession of an AR lower with a rifle stock and also with an upper having a 10” barrel, but they are not pinned together. It would be argued that even though you never put them together to make a functional SBR, you were in constructive possession of an illegal SBR because they can ONLY be assembled in such a way as to make an NFA item.

So in this case the only things you are in possession of are the parts to make a plain old rifle. If things were otherwise, the market is flooded with a whole bunch of guns we should all be afraid to take apart.

 

[pdsmith505]

There was a lady in CA last year who, in addition to other things that actually fit into the stupid games / stupid prizes category, was charged with an illegal SBR when she was found with a Ruger 10/22 without it's stock (keep in mind, CA has it's own SBR laws).

http://www.guns.com/2017/09/12/california-woman-charged-with-illegal-sbr-over-stock-less-1022/

But, to answer the original question, the ATF ruled in the whole Thompson Center thing something tangentially relevant... a disassembled rifle is just that, a disassembled rifle.

https://www.atf.gov/file/55526/download

Therefore, so long as a parts kit or collection of parts is not used to make a firearm regulated under the NFA (e.g., a short-barreled rifle or “any other weapon” as defined by 26 U.S.C. 5845(e)), no NFA firearm is made when the same parts are assembled or reassembled in a configuration not regulated under the NFA (e.g., a pistol, or a rifle with a barrel of 16 inches or more in length). Merely assembling and disassembling such a rifle does not result in the making of a new weapon; rather, it is the same rifle in a knockdown condition (i.e., complete as to all component parts). Likewise, because it is the same weapon when reconfigured as a pistol, no “weapon made from a rifle” subject to the NFA has been made.

Not a 100% fit to the question you are asking here, but close enough to answer it.

 

[tarosean]

There was a lady in CA last year who, in addition to other things that actually fit into the stupid games / stupid prizes category, was charged with an illegal SBR when she was found with a Ruger 10/22 without it's stock (keep in mind, CA has it's own SBR laws).

Begs the question if its more related to her toting it around? I would imagine a number of people on this board have barreled actions in safes for projects, etc.

 

[Elkins45]

Begs the question if its more related to her toting it around? I would imagine a number of people on this board have barreled actions in safes for projects, etc.

Also makes me wonder if there was a conviction or plea. Big difference between a charge and a conviction...although the charge alone might be enough to financially ruin you.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Begs the question if its more related to her toting it around? I would imagine a number of people on this board have barreled actions in safes for projects, etc.

I'd say so, along with many other aspects of the case. There's quite a difference between having a disassembled rifle you're working on and carrying one around while smoking dope and doing other nefarious things.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Crickett? I have owned a number of .22 rifles that, without stock, measured less than 26". Obvious commercial example is the AR-7 rifle introduced 1959. The barreled action is just over 21" without stock. I also owned a bolt action .22 rifle about the size of a Cricket with barreled action and stock just under 22" disassembled and 35" overall assembled for use. ATF knows it is usually not practical to use a barrelled action without a stock as a weapon, so that would not be an NFA offense to remove the stock from the gun in normal maintenance or take-down for transport.

You can clean an AK without removing the buttstock. But it is practical to fire an AK without a buttstock. About the only reason to remove the buttstock is repair or replace. Mine would not stay buttstockless for long and definitely would not leave the house without its butt.

 

[tarosean]

There's quite a difference between having a disassembled rifle you're working on and carrying one around while smoking dope and doing other nefarious things.

crap there goes my evening plans...

 

[tarosean]

Crickett?

Its a single shot youth rifle in 22LR. Not real sure of manufacture(?).
Its an itty bitty thing.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

The point is, would ATF consider a Crickett without a stock an SBR if disassembled for maintenance, cleaning, storage, or transportatiom?
Short answer: no.

If a person had a Crickett, AR-7, Ruger 10-22, without a stock, as a weapon of defense, without a Federal Form 1 for making a SBR, I am pretty darned sure that State of Tennessee would treat it as "going armed" with a "prohibited weapon".

You have to consider both federal and state law.

 

[Hunter86004]

Having a lower receiver for an AR assembled with a rifle butt stock and owning a pistol upper and not a rifle upper will get you in trouble even if it's not attached to the lower, but the question becomes one of who, but you, is going to know.
As an aside, as I'm writing this, I have a PSA complete lower receiver for a pistol sitting on my table. There is nothing indicating on it that it's for a rifle or pistol. I can put any length barrel on it and it's a legal pistol. Had it come with a rifle stock, legally, I need to assemble it with a rifle length upper although on the 4473, and I assume, PSA's records it's listed simply as a receiver. If this one had the rifle stock and I had a pistol upper stashed for a future project, the question becomes one of who would know what I have other than I have a lower receiver.

 

[dogtown tom]

…. I have a PSA complete lower receiver for a pistol sitting on my table. There is nothing indicating on it that it's for a rifle or pistol. I can put any length barrel on it and it's a legal pistol. Had it come with a rifle stock, legally, I need to assemble it with a rifle length upper although on the 4473, and I assume, PSA's records it's listed simply as a receiver....

Absolutely not true.
A complete lower with shoulder stock is just a receiver. It is perfectly legal to remove the shoulder stock and build that receiver into a pistol AR.

 

[Hunter86004]

Absolutely not true.
A complete lower with shoulder stock is just a receiver. It is perfectly legal to remove the shoulder stock and build that receiver into a pistol AR.

I guess I wasn't quite clear. If I leave the rifle stock on, I will need to put a rifle upper on it.

 

[CapnMac]

Wait, I thought that the aftermath of all the arm-brace brouhaha was that:

Receiver has no "identity" unless labeled by mfgr, until assembled first time, so:

Handgun Receiver + rifle buffer and stock = Pistol -> Rifle = legal
Rifle Receiver + pistol buffer w/ or w/o brace = Rifle -> Pistol = not legal

 

[dogtown tom]

Wait, I thought that the aftermath of all the arm-brace brouhaha was that::

The arm brace has nothing to do with whether a firearm is a handgun/long gun/other firearm. It's not a shoulder stock, so doesn't change anything regarding the definitions of handgun/long gun/other firearm in Federal law.

Receiver has no "identity" unless labeled by mfgr, until assembled first time, so

How a firearm is "labeled" is irrelevant. It either meets the definition of "rifle", "pistol" or "other firearm" or it doesn't.

Handgun Receiver + rifle buffer and stock = Pistol -> Rifle = legal
Rifle Receiver + pistol buffer w/ or w/o brace = Rifle -> Pistol = not legal

I have no idea what you are trying to describe. A firearm receiver is just that....a receiver. There is no such thing as a "rifle receiver" or "handgun receiver" until AFTER the firearm has been assembled......then you have either a rifle, handgun or other firearm. Disassemble the completed rifle/handgun/firearm and you still have a firearm receiver. The caveat is the receiver first built into a rifle can only be reassembled as a rifle from that point on. The receivers first built as handgun or other firearm can be built as rifles and subsequently reassembled as handguns or other firearms.

What kind of buffer tube is used has no bearing on what the firearm may be. It's perfectly possible and legal to build a rifle using a supposed pistol buffer tube as it is to build a pistol using a rifle buffer tube.

 

[1KPerDay]

There is no such thing as a "rifle receiver" or "handgun receiver" until AFTER the firearm has been assembled......then you have either a rifle, handgun or other firearm. Disassemble the completed rifle/handgun/firearm and you still have a firearm receiver. The caveat is the receiver first built into a rifle can only be reassembled as a rifle from that point on. The receivers first built as handgun or other firearm can be built as rifles and subsequently reassembled as handguns or other firearms.

but doesn't a lower receiver with a buttstock MAKE it a rifle?

 

[Carl N. Brown]

I have been told that, if I buy an AR lower that has never been assembled as either a rifle or pistol, I should have the FFL process the lower as a "handgun" on the background check call for the 4473. Then build it initially as a pistol, then acquire a rifle upper and shoulder stock.*

Quite frankly I am confused by the "stripped lower" name. All the lowers I have seen at local dealers are straight from the factory as unused lowers without parts and without stocks and have not been 'stripped' from either pistol or rifle configuration.

_______________________
*(State law can affect handgun ownership. Virgin receivers are listed on the 4473 as "other firearm" neither rifle not pistol; however, Tennessee replaced the old Application for Permission to Purchase a Handgun (with potential 15 day waiting period for local records check by county sheriff if in the county or chief of police if in the city) with a Tennessee Instant Check System in 1998 when the National Instant Check System was implemented for firearms purchase. The dealer calls the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation and tells them so-and-so is buying a handgun/rifle/shotgun; TBI does a state records check; if no state disqualifiers, they then call NICS. As I understand it, if I buy an AR receiver to build a pistol, I have to pass the TICS background check as not disqualified to buy and own a handgun.

 

[pjeski]

but doesn't a lower receiver with a buttstock MAKE it a rifle?

No,
18 USC 921 says:
"(7) The term “rifle” means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of an explosive to fire only a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of the trigger."

It can't meet that definition without a rifled bore. As Tom said, a receiver is just a receiver.

 

[dogtown tom]

I have been told that, if I buy an AR lower that has never been assembled as either a rifle or pistol, I should have the FFL process the lower as a "handgun" on the background check call for the 4473. Then build it initially as a pistol, then acquire a rifle upper and shoulder stock.*

YOU don't get to choose how the dealer records an AR lower.....ATF does And ATF says the dealer must record a firearm frame or receiver as "Other Firearm" on the 4473.
No matter what your state law says, under federal law it is neither handgun or long gun.

The background check is another matter. Some states have designated a state agency to serve as the point of contact for FBI NICS. That agency....NOT the FBI may ask that a lower be processed as a "handgun". Quite likely the reason is that lowers/frames/receivers are not handguns not long guns. Federal law prohibits the transfers of ANY firearm to someone under the age of 21...…….then they give an exemption for rifles and shotguns for those that are at least eighteen. (meaning someone under age 21 can not acquire a lower/frame/receiver from a licensed dealer until they are 21.

Quite frankly I am confused by the "stripped lower" name. All the lowers I have seen at local dealers are straight from the factory as unused lowers without parts and without stocks and have not been 'stripped' from either pistol or rifle configuration.

In common parlance a "stripped" lower is one that does not have any parts. A "complete" lower has all necessary parts and may also include a stock, buffer tube and pistol grip.