Is putting a stock on a revolver making it a SBR?

S

skeetman02

Inactive
I'm just looking for something to make in the shop and one thing I've thought about is a stock for a revolver - SAA clone. Before I start this I'm assuming but not hoping that it would then be a SBR. Is this correct? I'm talking about creating something similar to the images shown.

WP0025.JPG

lf
 
Yes if the barrel is under 16". But those appear to be black powder so no IAW Federal Law. State laws vary.
 
Generally, if it is a (federally defined) firearm with a stock and barrel less than 16in, it is a NFA SBR (or 18in for SBS).

I'd have to do more research on older guns that are not legally firearms at the federal level and how the NFA/GCA deals with them.
 
I've always thought about doing that with an 1858 Remington clone. However it never did get high enough on the priority list to happen...

Tony
 
skeetman02 said:
I'm just looking for something to make in the shop and one thing I've thought about is a stock for a revolver - SAA clone. Before I start this I'm assuming but not hoping that it would then be a SBR. Is this correct? I'm talking about creating something similar to the images shown.
Click to expand...
As has been pointed out, neither of the images in your opening post shows a SAA. Both guns are cap-and-ball revolvers. The SAA, of course, is the Colt 1873 and was (is) a metallic cartridge firing revolver.

Please clarify -- is it your intent to add a shoulder stock to a cap-and-ball revolver, or does your question specifically refer to stocking a modern clone of a Colt 1873 SAA? Your answer to this will probably affect the legal issues pertaining to your potential project.
 
ATF has been very generous about allowing - how nice of them - stocks on historic autos like Lugers and Broomhandles; what do they say about revos?
 
ATF has been very generous about allowing - how nice of them - stocks on historic autos like Lugers and Broomhandles;
Click to expand...

I guess that depends on your definition of generous.

For a long time the answer to stock on a Luger or Broomhandle (or anything else) was a flat "no". Unless they BOTH qualified as Curio& Relic.

Then the ATF eased up, and allowed reproduction stocks on Lugers Broomhandles. Then a few years later they changed their minds again, and dis-allowed modern reproduction stocks, only "originals". Not certain what they rule today, as I wound up having to sell mine, when they changed their minds.

FYI, the "reproduction" stocks are like the originals, there are NO markings, no serial numbers, no date stamps and no way to tell them from originals, other than if they happen to look newer.

Putting a stock on a pistol, of any kind, is going to put you into territory where you need an ATF ruling. Not just to protect yourself from the ATF but every other LEO that ever sees your gun.

Good Luck
 
Putting a stock on a pistol, of any kind, is going to put you into territory where you need an ATF ruling. Not just to protect yourself from the ATF but every other LEO that ever sees your gun.
Click to expand...

Only if state or local laws prohibit such things. Local LEOs don't enforce Federal Law. Not saying they won't tell on you but if isn't against state law they probably won't care at all.
 
Only if state or local laws prohibit such things. Local LEOs don't enforce Federal Law. Not saying they won't tell on you but if isn't against state law they probably won't care at all.
Click to expand...

Or, if the local cop thinks there is a law, and most do know there are laws about "sawed off" rifles & shotguns.

I for one, would not care to spend my weekend in lockup, waiting to see the judge on Monday, so he can throw the charges out.

Even if you are calm, reasonable and rational sounding, the cop isn't going to listen to YOU. Having documentation from a recognized law enforcement agency (such as ATF) that your gun is legal in all ways, MIGHT be enough to convince the officer. If so, fine, if not, it hurts nothing to try...

A friend of mine has an antique motorcycle (1940 Indian, sweet bike), under the law of our state, as a registered antique (which it is) he is not required to wear a helmet when he rides it. He carries a notarized copy of the law with him when he rides without a helmet. Says that gets him out of getting a ticket about HALF the time. The rest of the time, the cop says "you may be right, if you are, the judge will throw it out, here's your ticket, have a nice day.."

To date, every one of those tickets has been thrown out, but he still has to challenge them in court.

So if you've got a gun that is legal but could be mistaken for an illegal one, best to have proof WITH YOU about its legal status. Might not keep you from being booked, but if it does, its well worth having it.
 
Maybe. Some LEOs are dumber than a bag of hammers. Not like; "Riding a motorcycle without a helmet dumb" but right up there. A citation summons for a traffic violation is a little different than a felony arrest though. Often times patrol officers are limited in what they can make arrests for by in house agency rules and they have to defer to someone more knowledgeable than themselves to go through with it because of their ignorance of the law.

A false arrest can expose the agency to liability. This is how lawsuits are made. I seem to recall a series of successful ones back before the police were more educated on open carry.

Me, I am too old to care. Make me a test case if they want, I will follow the law. If they overstep than they can get slapped with the ruler on the wrist. Everyone learns something.
 
I'd have to do more research on older guns that are not legally firearms at the federal level and how the NFA/GCA deals with them.
Click to expand...

As long as it's a cap and ball it's a non issue. They couldn't care less about what you do with a cap and ball. Put a conversion cylinder in it and that may be a different story. Do a gated conversion and it will be a different story.
 
As I understand it, generally speaking, if it is considered a modern firearm (firing cartridges, not muzzle loading) and you put a stock on it, while keeping the pistol length barrel, its not legal, without prior ATF approval.

If you put a stock on a modern pistol, AND a rifle length barrel (16"+) then it is legal and, you can also legally reverse the process, but only going "half way" is violating the law.

No stock and rifle length barrel = SBR. Rifle stock and pistol length barrel = SBR.

there are exceptions, the ones I can think of are in the Curio& Relic class.

There is more to it, of course, and the devil is in the details. Get COMPETENT legal advice before putting a stock on a pistol. Failure to do so might land you in jail.
 
MTT TL, Your opinion of law enforcement does not seem to rank very high but I can assure you as retired LE that being “dumb” or ignorant of specific laws is easily rectified by a trip to the patrol vehicle and reference material awaiting him. As to federal law even though he does not aggressively enforce same if a question arises a simple call to the local FBI office will get an answer or if necessary an agent within just a few minutes. The issue can then be evaluated and if necessary the officer can transport any in custody persons. L E officers are not normally as stupid as you categorize them. Members of our organization were never limited as to what laws were to be enforced and prior to an arrest being made a call to the supervisor to go over questionable issues can be conducted. Officers enforcing the law rarely considered “ false arrest” because they know the law or have immediate references to accompany their knowledge before advising a person they are under arrest.
 
MTT TL, Your opinion of law enforcement does not seem to rank very high
Click to expand...

I was not trying to offend or disparage your chosen profession. Note I said "some" not "all". Not everyone that works a job is competent at their job. Police included. The idea that everyone working at particular place or in a particular field is competent 100% of the time is ridiculous. Police do occasionally arrest people wrongly and then a lawsuit is often the result.

In this case the law is clear. It would take a novice error (or someone really dumb) to foul it up.
 
44 AMP said:
Or, if the local cop thinks there is a law, and most do know there are laws about "sawed off" rifles & shotguns.

I for one, would not care to spend my weekend in lockup, waiting to see the judge on Monday, so he can throw the charges out.

Even if you are calm, reasonable and rational sounding, the cop isn't going to listen to YOU. Having documentation from a recognized law enforcement agency (such as ATF) that your gun is legal in all ways, MIGHT be enough to convince the officer. If so, fine, if not, it hurts nothing to try...

A friend of mine has an antique motorcycle (1940 Indian, sweet bike), under the law of our state, as a registered antique (which it is) he is not required to wear a helmet when he rides it. He carries a notarized copy of the law with him when he rides without a helmet. Says that gets him out of getting a ticket about HALF the time. The rest of the time, the cop says "you may be right, if you are, the judge will throw it out, here's your ticket, have a nice day.."

To date, every one of those tickets has been thrown out, but he still has to challenge them in court.

So if you've got a gun that is legal but could be mistaken for an illegal one, best to have proof WITH YOU about its legal status. Might not keep you from being booked, but if it does, its well worth having it.
Click to expand...
Basically you're saying if there's an ignorant enough police officer who sees you with a Pedersoli Howdah or a Mossberg Shockwave, he can arrest you thinking it's a sawed off shotgun when it's legally not?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top