Legality of a Removeable Rifle Stock on a Pistol?

According to ATF (I have seen recent letters), the convert pistol to rifle and back ONLY applies to the Thompson Contender, since that's what the courts ruled on. They specifically state so.

You CAN convert your GLOCK or 1911 to a carbine with a 16" barrel and a stock. It then becomes a rifle. If you then remove the stock and barrel and go back to pistol, you have created a weapon made from the RIFLE you converted it to. This is a felony. In other words, it's a one-time conversion to a rifle.

Please don't argue that this makes no sense. It is ATF policy.

I would gather that any stock that holds, grips, sticks into or around a grip would be "attached." If you hold it in hand, it would count like a monopod. The question is, can an ATF agent convince a jury that he knows more about the law than you do and what you did is illegal? Probably.

Write to them. Get a ruling. Laminate it. Scan it online. Carry it with you.
 
Before I bring down a poop storm on myself, let me say that I have no idea at all about this, just a little additional question.

I have an AK with a thumbhole stock and I am replacing it with a synthetic one, the website says that since it is a thumbhole stock is compliant.

http://www.ultimak.com/CHOS-B.htm <---according to this.

So if you were to put a thumbhole stock on a pistol, would it be legal?
 
BoB S,

Thanks for the mention of the T/C Contender. I am getting one of those soon, and it's good to know I'll definately need to do the NFA paperwork on it, as I do want to have the ability to use a stock on it. I was going to ask about that when I acutally get mine.
 
Pistol. A weapon originally designed, made, and intended to fire a projectile (bullet) from one or more barrels when held in one hand, and having (a) a chamber(s) as an integral part(s) of, or permanently aligned with, the bore(s); and (b) a short stock designed to be gripped by one hand and at an angle to and extending below the line of the bore(s).

Revolver. A projectile weapon, of the pistol type, having a breechloading chambered cylinder so arranged that the cocking of the hammer or movement of the trigger rotates it and brings the next cartridge in line with the barrel for firing
Click to expand...

Only a government agency could come to the conclusion that the Pfeifer Zeliska was intended to be fired one-handed.

Edit to add: forgot the discussion that had me interested in this thread in the first place. A couple of us were trying to decide the legality of getting a virgin (never stocked) barreled action for a .357 lever action carbine and either cutting down a stock (before mounting) or making a mare's leg stock from scratch. Thus, the gun would never have been a rifle, despite still having the full (carbine) length barrel, and therefore would be a pistol from time of "manufacture." The goal would be to make a very portable "brush gun" in a caliber that would easily take deer at the 100-150yd max range typically available around here, without so much recoil as to be unmanageable in the "long mare's leg" configuration.
 
Last edited:
It was in 1975

Totally pre-ban -- or at least that word hadn't popped up yet.
I was at a flea market in Elwood, Indiana. Didn't want any fleas, but had payday cash smoldering in my pocket. I saw a G-21, and the lump in my pants changed positions. Glocks were as new as a lightning-bolt. Even the local newspapers wer hollering about the "torture-test, won't ever rust, can't be seen on x-ray, etc." I saw one, last day of the sale, on a local gun-dealer's table, laying ontop of the ATF "yellow-pages." "$449.95" I still have it. Got a holster of some new space-age stuff called Kydex, $12. I also bought a brand new Israeli army contraption that plugged into the blank spot in the grip, making it a rifle. $30. I didn't know nutin'! I was carrying the setup one summer up on lake Michigan, showing it off. And the stock fell off into the lake, somewhere. But if I find it, is all I need to do is get the tax-stamp, and it's legal? Is the new under-rail magazine base-plate conversion for G-xs with light-mounts EVER able to be legal, tax-stamp or whatever?? Were the full-auto 9s ever sold in the U.S., or are all of them I see imports, or illegal conversions?
 
21CFA said:
It was in 1975
Totally pre-ban -- or at least that word hadn't popped up yet.
I was at a flea market in Elwood, Indiana. Didn't want any fleas, but had payday cash smoldering in my pocket. I saw a G-21, and the lump in my pants changed positions. Glocks were as new as a lightning-bolt.
Click to expand...

If you bought a Glock 21 in 1975, that thing's a real collector's item, since they weren't released on the market for another fifteen years... :confused:
 
Very early Glock

Let me check with the Fire Marshall. That flea market burned down the next year. I'll get the pricise year. But the pistol, holster and stock were definitely all offered together when the theoretical "transaction" took place. "21-"
 
21CFA said:
Let me check with the Fire Marshall. That flea market burned down the next year. I'll get the pricise year. But the pistol, holster and stock were definitely all offered together when the theoretical "transaction" took place. "21-"
Click to expand...

Well, the first 9mm Glock prototypes appeared in the Austrian army pistol trials of 1982, and the first .45ACP Model 21s appeared at SHOT Show '91 in Dallas.
 
I could be wrong (and it has happed before)...

But I believe that each manufacturer registers the frame as either a rifle or a handgun, during the mfg. process. And from that point on, it is legally one, or the other. It does not get changed.

The practical side of this is clear with the TC Contender. You may add a rifle length barrel and a buttstock to a "handgun" registered frame. You have not legally made a rifle, you have just added a rifle length barrel and stock to a handgun, and my switch it back, at will.

If you add an under 16" barrel and stock to the handgun frame, you have not made a SBR, you have made a stocked pistol (also regulated). If you put a short barrel on a rifle registered frame, you have made a SBR, whether it has a buttstock or not.

The intent is that if it has a buttstock, it must have a barrel 16" or longer. Anything else is a regulated weapon, and a federal felony if you make one before getting govt approval. It may technically be a stocked pistol, or it may be a SBR, depending on how the frame was registered during the manufacturing process.

This is my understanding, and may not be fully correct. The ultimate arbiter of the laws in question is the ATF, and the courts.

Also, devices that are not physically attached to the pistol are considered braces, not stocks. You can hold the handgun against the brace with your hand, and it is legal. If there is any mechanical attachment between the handgun and the brace, then it becomes a stock, and is regulated under law.
At least, that's my understanding.
 
Reading threads like this led me to obtain a C96 with stock... I should get it this week by mail (hooray for C&R!)

boloc96forcain.jpg



Thanks, I really didn't need the money, or time, or guns that I'm trading for this.... :p
 
Not quite to the letter of the OP, but here's another question about the 1911 16" barrel/shoulder stock combos:

IF you have the stock itself, and you have one or more 1911's around, but DON'T have the 16" barrel and also DON"T have the slotted mainspring housing required to attach it to the pistol, are you then still in violation of the law?
 
44 AMP, that is not correct. The manufacturer must record the type of firearm and these are the accepted nomenclature:

rifle
pistol
revolver
frame
receiver
machine gun
short barreled rifle
short barreled shotgun
silencer (also accepts "muffler" and "suppressor")
destructive device
any other weapon

There is no pistol/rifle receiver listing. If the manufacturers do it in their log book, that's their deal and it doesn't make a difference to the ATF. They see it as "frame or receiver".

Another interesting thing I've been reading. In order for a rifle to be a rifle it must have a shoulder stock and be capable of firing fixed ammunition through a rifled bore.

478.11

Rifle. 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 the explosive in a fixed metallic cartridge to fire only a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of the trigger.

So in order for a firearm to be a rifle it must have or previously had simultaneously:
  • shoulder stock creating intention to fire from shoulder
  • use the energy of a metallic cartridge to propel a single projectile with a single manipulation of a trigger/firing mechanism
  • have a rifled bore

This was brought out by the AR lower with a stock is a rifle sold to 18-20yo. ATF says no it's not a rifle because it has no rifled barrel. It is simply a receiver with a shoulder stock, is classified as an other firearm, must be 21yo to purchase as it is neither a rifle or shotgun.

So you can take an AR lower with no barrel attached and can swap out a pistol buffer and shoulder stock to your heart's content without ever making a rifle, since there is no rifled barrel.

Finally an answer.:eek:
 
to all,

fyi, i've recently been through this with the BATFE.
(i'm planning to build a Remington 870, 4 shot, PISTOL from an "old stock"/UNUSED receiver. it will have a 10" barrel.)

turns out that:
1. a pistol REMAINS a PISTOL, if so registered at the time of assembly/construction/first transfer, regardless of size/configuration.
2. IF you buy a receiver (for example a new M-16 stripped receiver) & register it as a PISTOL receiver, you may switch it back & forth to a rifle at your option, provided that you NEVER have the short barrel on at the same time as you have the shoulder stock mounted.
3. my proposed "pickup truck monster" is NOT a "weapon made from a rifle or shotgun" & it must have a 5.oo tax stamp as an "any other weapon". - it is NOT a "sawed-off shotgun" & once "taxed" is as PERFECTLY legal to own/carry (at least in MY state = check YOUR state out before making an "any other weapon"), concealed or openly as any other PISTOL is. = i'm having a "bountyhunter" holster & gunbelt made for it.
4. PISTOLS do NOT have to abide by the "not more than ten imported parts" rule. - this means that you can MAKE yourself a lawful "AK-style" pistol with a "80% completed receiver flat", a Krinkov kit & be perfectly lawful IF you NEVER assemble it with a shoulder stock.
(don't forget to put a "serial number" on your "homemade weapon". police are NERVOUS about weapons that don't have "markings". = my 7.62x39 AK-47 pistol has my driver's license number as it's "serial number".)

yours, PG
 
5.oo tax stamp as an "any other weapon"
Click to expand...
It transfers on $5 It will cost $200 to make on form 1

perfectly lawful IF you NEVER assemble it with a shoulder stock.
Click to expand...
And remember to never put a stock on that AOW or you will have unlawfully constructed a short barreled shotgun.

(don't forget to put a "serial number" on your "homemade weapon". police are NERVOUS about weapons that don't have "markings".
Click to expand...
Forget about "nervous," the ATF requires a SN engraved on the gun that matches what is on the form1. Failure to do so is what we scientists call "illegal"
 
Last edited:
willie lowman,

oddly enough, the BATFE letter says that AOW "manufacturers" (in this case, that's me.) pay 5.oo per AOW. = they are charging me 5.oo to make "the pickup monster" - i'm awaiting my tax stamp.
(i was told that IF i decided to "make" more than one AOW per year, that i would have to be licensed as a FIREARMS MANUFACTURER, which is 150.00 for 3 years. ====> presuming that i can get some more "old stock" stripped 870 receivers, i'm "considering" doing that, as i know several LEOs locally, who have heard about my "little friend" & want one too.)

further, individually made weapons (which are otherwise lawful) are NOT required to be serial numbered, according to the technical branch of BATFE. -
the "techie" that i talked to tells me that the fact that numerous firearms were manufacturered "in the old days" (Sears was still selling single barrel shotguns & 22 rifles W/O serial numbers in the 1960s.) without serial numbers, so that it is still "lawful" BUT "not a good plan".

regardless of what is/is not "technically lawful", i (as a retired LEO) most heartily agree with him. = had i run into a "modern weapon" being carried "on the street" (when i was a marshal) that was NOT serial numbered, i would have immediately thought: STOLEN GUN.
i would think that nobody needs that particuliar "hassle" with a LEO, just to keep from having to have a trophy shop (the local trophy-shop guy is going to charge me "about 5 or 6 bucks" to do mine.), or another similar place, engrave a serial number on your AOW/AK pistol/etc.

my proposed "pickup monster" would be REALLY hard to put a shoulder stock on, as the handgrip will be attached with a heavy "through-bolt" & the hole will be filled with a "glued in" plug. = for those who have never actually fired a 12guage PISTOL, i can tell you that the recoil is "considerable".

NOTE: when i was a city marshal, i had a "sawed-off 870", that i carried in the truck - just taking it out from under my Tuffy jacket QUICKLY STOPPED many a fight in one of the "joints out on the county line", W/O bloodshed. - i never had to shoot it "in anger" a single time.

yours, PG
 
further, individually made weapons (which are otherwise lawful) are NOT required to be serial numbered, according to the technical branch of BATFE. -
the "techie" that i talked to tells me that the fact that numerous firearms were manufacturered "in the old days" (Sears was still selling single barrel shotguns & 22 rifles W/O serial numbers in the 1960s.) without serial numbers, so that it is still "lawful" BUT "not a good plan".
Click to expand...

The old days are past.

Read the instructions on your ATF 5320.1 form 1.
 
Willie Lowman,

did you bother to read what the "techie" & the letter confirming what i was told (and that i'm pending receipt of) said???

sadly, the "rules" change constantly. i'm not at all sure that the form instructions is "up to date".

yours, PG
 
I haven't seen this letter. You have not posted it. From where I sit, the information I have from the BATF&E is the law. What you have is chit-chat on the internet.

When you get this letter, I would very much like to see it, as would many other people in the NFA community.

As you said, rules change all the time.

This conversation is useless with out that letter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top