NFA SBR/pistol transport questions

R

raimius

New member
If there are ATF letters addressing these questions, please point me in the right direction!

I have two scenarios I would like to address:
Scenario 1: Registered NFA SBR (via Form 1) from an AR-15 lower. Should a person desire to travel with said lower, would reconfiguring it to a pistol configuration (buffer tube only or with SB-brace) negate the need to file paperwork with the BATFE when crossing state lines? (Assume that the stock remains at home, and that upon return, the owner will configure the firearm back into SBR configuration.)

Scenario 2: Registered NFA SBR (via Form 1) from an AR-15 lower. The owner is moving to another state, and will be stopping in a state where SBRs are not legal (staying 2 days to visit their mother), then ending the trip in their new state, where SBRs are legal. May the owner temporarily configure the firearm as a pistol to avoid violating the state's anti-SBR laws (assuming pistol-type ARs are legal there)?

For both scenarios, would the original classification of the lower (prior to Form 1 submission) matter? (e.g. pistol lower, rifle lower, or "firearm" lower)
Any help and references would be appreciated.
 
I actually think that is incorrect...

As i understand it, a SBR may be configured back into a 16" barreled rifle and transported anywhere that 16" barreled rifle is legal.

Its only an SBR when it is configured as an SBR (<16" barrel).

ETA .. The post i reference above was deleted. I think you get the drift.
 
Last edited:
To answer the OP's question, the ATF only considers an SBR to be an SBR if it's currently in SBR configuration. That means you can put a 16" barrel on it and it's not an SBR as long as it's configured as a regular Title I rifle with a 16" barrel. However, the question on whether you can configure it as a pistol is less clear.

The 1992 Supreme Court case United States v. Thompson-Center Arms Co. (further clarified in ATF Ruling 2011-4) determined that a firearm that started off as a pistol could then be configured as a pistol or a rifle at any time, but a firearm that started off as a rifle could never be configured as a pistol. This means that if you buy an AR lower and build it first into a pistol, it can forever go back-and-forth between being a pistol or a rifle. But if you buy an AR lower and build it first into a rifle, it can never be configured as a pistol.

Now, it seems that this also applies to SBRs: If the SBR was made from a firearm that started off as a pistol, then it can be made back into a pistol and it won't be an SBR as long as it's in that configuration. And if it was made from a rifle (or manufactured from the start as an SBR), it can't be configured as a pistol; if you want it to go back to being a non-SBR it has to be configured as a rifle.

I said, "It seems that this also applies to SBRs" because, from my layman's reading of Ruling 2011-4, the rifle-to-pistol switch rules don't seem to mention what happens when you make that firearm into an SBR. Most people in the industry think that it applies to SBRs also, but as far as I know there haven't been any ATF rulings or letters on the subject, and no court cases either.
 
Not that a court case might help much... notice that Thompson happened in 1992 and for the next 19 years, ATF took the position that the holding was specific only to the exact firearm and set of facts at issue in that case.
 
Bartholomew Roberts said:
Not that a court case might help much... notice that Thompson happened in 1992 and for the next 19 years, ATF took the position that the holding was specific only to the exact firearm and set of facts at issue in that case.
Click to expand...
Good point. I suppose a previous court decision could be helpful if you end up in court, but ideally you don't end up in court to begin with.

raimius said:
would the original classification of the lower (prior to Form 1 submission) matter? (e.g. pistol lower, rifle lower, or "firearm" lower)
Click to expand...
Just for clarification, when it comes to lowers that have never been built into a full firearm, there is no such thing as a "pistol lower", or a "rifle lower", or a "firearm lower". They're all sold on form 4473 as "Other Firearm" on question 18 and "receiver" on question 29. Here's an open letter to all FFLs regarding this issue.

If you build a lower into a pistol first, it can always go back and forth between being a rifle or a pistol. If you build it as a rifle first, you can't ever make it into a pistol.

On a side note, it doesn't matter if you buy a lower receiver with a stock attached; it still isn't a rifle and can be made into a pistol.
 
Also, as long as your SBR isn't in an SBR configuration (i.e., it's configured as a regular Title I pistol or rifle, or it's disassembled and the parts aren't in "close proximity" to each other), you don't need a form 5320.20 to take it interstate. However, you must return to your home state to be able to configure it as an SBR again; either that or receive an approved form 5320.20 if you want to assemble it as an SBR out of state (in a state where it's legal, of course).

This actually came up at work once. We were in the middle of an ATF inspection and we had a customer who picked up an SBR from us three days before he was moving out of state. The customer asked me to talk to the ATF and see if they could get his form 5320.20 expedited so he could move with his SBR. The ATF Industry Ops guy in charge of our inspection told me he couldn't get the form expedited that quickly, but he said the customer could still move with his SBR, he just needed to dissassemble it and transport the upper and lower separately. Then the customer could file the form 5320.20 when he got to his new state, and once the form was approved he could reassemble his SBR.
 
Last edited:
Thanks. That assembly/disassembly bit leads me to believe that it is only considered an SBR when in SBR configuration...that said, I'm not looking to be a test case!
 
I'm no lawyer, nor am I a legal expert, but I doubt that you'd be a test case. A test case already occurred in 1992, and the Supreme Court determined that an SBR was only an SBR when the parts required to assemble it were placed in "close proximity" to each other and there was no other "useful purpose" for having those parts. And like Bartholomew Roberts pointed out, after years of claiming that case only applied to the specific Thompson-Center kit in question, the ATF decided in 2011 that US v. Thompson-Center Arms Co. applied universally. So you have both a Supreme Court case and a federal regulatory agency on your side.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top