IF I BUILD GUN AS A PISTOL,THEN CONVERT AS A RIFLE

IF I BUILD GUN AS A PISTOL,THEN CONVERT AS A RIFLE DO I HAVE TO SILVER SOLDER BRAKE,OR CAN IT JUST BE ON THERE..................AND GO BACK AS A PISTOL..................BUILDING AMD 65

When it is in rifle configuration (stock attached) the bbl must be at least 16" long. The stock AMD65 brake is too short for this, you would have to silver solder on an extended brake or bbl extension to get the proper length. To count as a bbl extender it has to be "permanently attached" via silver solder, weld, etc.

can be made to switch visa versa.................i have to solder...........

Also when converting to a rifle, you have to add the proper number of 922r compliant parts. If left as a pistol, no compliance parts are needed.

OK THANKS

You're going to run into some legality issues with converting a rifle to a pistol, and/or back to a rifle, without the proper ATF forms...

You're going to run into some legality issues with converting a rifle to a pistol, and/or back to a rifle, without the proper ATF forms...
not necessarily its not like he wants a SBR from the sounds of it, the only concern i would have is that big brother would slap constructive intent on top of the charges, i have a mac-11 that i want to turn into a rifle, but the problem is ill have a spare upper that only has a 6" bbl if big brother came along and seen that i have a 16" upper attached to my mac and the 6" spare upper they would slap intent to construct on me in a heart beat just for having the parts to construct a sbr with out a tax stamp so all in all im staying away from this type of construction till i can afford the SBR stamp

You're going to run into some legality issues with converting a rifle to a pistol, and/or back to a rifle, without the proper ATF forms...There are no legality issues involved. No forms, either ( unless you are seeking to convert to an NFA weapon ).

You can convert a pistol into a rifle and back again, legally.


You cannot convert a rifle into a pistol, legally.

see the recent Feather convertibles, in which barrels may be quick changed by removal of barrel nut ala uzi. they come with pistol and rifle length barrels, and with two different kind of stocks in a carry case. intent is hard to prove if there is only one receiver. do some research on the thompson center case for a better answer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thompson_Center_Arms
ATF lost that one.

"This decision clarified the meaning of the term "make" in the National Firearms Act by stating that the pistol actually had to be assembled with a barrel less than 16 inches (410 mm) long with a stock directly attached to it to constitute a short-barrelled rifle under the National Firearms Act, and that the mere possession of components that theoretically could be assembled in an illegal configuration was not in itself a violation, as long as the components could also be assembled into legal configurations."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-0164.ZO.html

http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/tc.html

"The opinion concludes that the statute is ambiguous, and that the NFA has criminal penalties and no requirement of willfulness. Thus, the Court applies the rule of lenity,[6] i.e., that ambiguous criminal statutes are interpreted against the government and in favor of persons to whom they may apply, and concludes that the Contender pistol and carbine kit are not a short-barreled rifle.

All four dissenting Justices were well aware that even BATF regarded the Contender parts as not being an NFA firearm if two receivers were present, one for the pistol and one for the rifle. Yet this went unmentioned as the four opined that any parts that could be assembled into a short-barreled rifle are such a rifle."

All four dissenting Justices were well aware that even BATF regarded the Contender parts as not being an NFA firearm if two receivers were present, one for the pistol and one for the rifle. Yet this went unmentioned as the four opined that any parts that could be assembled into a short-barreled rifle are such a rifle."

A man was sent to prison for just merely having an AR pistol upper and a rifle lower in the same household. If you would like I can dig up the case for you...

A man was sent to prison for just merely having an AR pistol upper and a rifle lower in the same household. If you would like I can dig up the case for you...


I for one would like to read that

The following is a quote from the man himself. Please note that after the raid the ATF found a flash hider not permanently attached to a barrel that was just under 16" and charged him with a SBR violation on that as well. Please PM me in you want the full story on this, so I no longer hijack this thread.

"They are holding me currently on one charge of 26 USC SS 5861d (Possession of a firearm not registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record).

In other words, an undercover agent with the ATF bought an upper from me with an 11.5 inch barrel and a lower. The upper and lower were separated. I told him it was a pistol upper and a rifle lower and by law they could not be assembled. I was raided directly after he took possession of said weapon."

"This decision clarified the meaning of the term "make" in the National Firearms Act by stating that the pistol actually had to be assembled with a barrel less than 16 inches (410 mm) long with a stock directly attached to it to constitute a short-barrelled rifle under the National Firearms Act, and that the mere possession of components that theoretically could be assembled in an illegal configuration was not in itself a violation, as long as the components could also be assembled into legal configurations."





"They are holding me currently on one charge of 26 USC SS 5861d (Possession of a firearm not registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record).

In other words, an undercover agent with the ATF bought an upper from me with an 11.5 inch barrel and a lower. The upper and lower were separated. I told him it was a pistol upper and a rifle lower and by law they could not be assembled. I was raided directly after he took possession of said weapon."


It's pretty clear cut. If you can assemble the parts in a legal way, or an illegal way, the courts have ruled that legally they must assume the parts will be assembled in a legal way. Example, the Thompson Center case, described above. The parts could be assembled into a legal pistol, assembled into a legal rifle, or assembled into an illegal SBR. As state above, they court ruled that they must assume legal intent if the parts can be legally assembled. This ruling is now case law (the one I referred to earlier in this paragraph).

Now in the case quoted above, there is no legal way to assemble an 11.5" pistol upper with a rifle lower (without first going through the SBR paperwork, which this guy apparently did not do). Since THERE IS NO LEGAL WAY TO ASSEMBLE A PISTOL UPPER TO A RIFLE LOWER without filing for an SBR (which he did not), then his case it cut and dried, and he's screwed. Now, if he had also sold a pistol lower along with the other parts, then he'd have been OK, as it could be assembled into a legal configuration.

It's a shitty way to nail someone, and some might say it's a technicality, but he's busted, dead-to-rights, and it's because he did not understand the law. If he did understand the laws, he would never have sold a pistol upper together with a rifle lower.


Pistol/Rifle/SBR assembly Cliff's Notes:

1) Rifle Upper + Rifle lower = Legal Rifle

2) Pistol Upper + Pistol lower = Legal Pistol

3) Pistol Upper + Rifle Lower + Pistol Lower = Have to assume legal pistol assembly

4) Pistol upper + Rifle lower + No pistol lower = Constructive posession of SBR

The guy quoted above falls into category 4. Not because he intended to violate the law, but because he was stupid and should have known the laws better. And of course selling "constructive possession" parts to an undercover ATF agent gave them more than enough Probable Cause to get a warrant to search his home. That's how they also nailed him for the other SBR violation with not having the permanantly attached flash-hider on an unregistered SBR. Again, failure to know and follow the laws.


In any event, when you get into these pistol/carbine/SBR waters you are in sketchy territory. You might get arrested by an uneducated or overzealous LE officer, but case law will be on your side and you should win the court case. Then you can sue 'em for damages. :small_gri That's why anything I have that even comes close to sketchy territory, I keep copies of the actual legal text (printed from ATF.gov) and copies of case law decisions along with the gun in question. That way, if I am ever questioned, instead of saying something stupid like "well, Bubba has one too, and he said it's legal..." which would make me sound like an ass, instead I hand the officer a copy of the legal text, and ask him to show me what part I am in violation of. I'm always legal, and the legal text helps to affirm that.