"RIFLEMAN" article (T/C USSC Case)

W

Wyoredman

New member
Just read the new NRA Rifleman and see where the ATF have clarified the rifle/pistol parts controversy. Am I getting this correct that as citizens we are alowed to convert a pistol to a rifle then back to a pistol, but if the weapon left the factory as a rifle, we can't convert it to a pistol? Is it now true that if you purchase a reciever and build a rifle, once it is complete you can't change it to a pistol in the future? Just gathering info. Thanks.
 
if you buy a stripped lower from an FFL it is generally sold as a handgun lower anyways. Atleast my local FFL does.
 
my FFLs sell them as rifles so that you dont have be 21 to buy them...though I come from a fairly rural area and they probably couldn't afford to turn away paying customers because of little technicalities in paperwork.
 
Stripped lowers such as an AR or TC Encore, should be sold under the "both" category on the 4473. That was added years back to avoid the confusion. It functions just like the handgun selection, and requires the user to be 21.
Some FFLs used to sell them as handguns before the "both" option, so that you could go back and forth in theory.
ATF's current, more consistent position is that it's the configuration that matters. So when you take down an Encore rifle, don't take the rifle barrel off and add a pistol barrel first. Remove the buttstock and add the pistol grip first, THEN change to the pistol barrel. That way you never create an SBR for any length of time.
The constructive possession issue still exists however. If you have an Encore pistol barrel, it's a good idea to have a pistol grip. Likewise, you'd be best off having an AR pistol buffer around if you keep a <16" barreled upper.
 
There was some discussion about this with the MechTech crowd. I saw what appeared to be a photocopy (online) of the ATF letter detailing it is now legal to put a carbine upper on a pistol, then change it back to the pistol slide.

Before you weren't allowed to revert it back to being a pistol without a tax stamp.:cool:
 
if you buy a stripped lower from an FFL it is generally sold as a handgun lower anyways. Atleast my local FFL does.
Click to expand...

Interesting...
Never thought of it before. Bought a stripped lower online and had it shipped to my LGS, and he did the usual transfer. Had it been considered a handgun (and if I didn't have a CWP), I would have had a 3-day wait...
 
Just read the PDF and as I understand it, it is completely legal to convert a rifle to a pistol and vice-versa, AS LONG AS, it was sold and designed to be able to convert from rifle to pistol and vice versa, ala T/C Encore/Contender. Caveat #1 is that if you convert from rifle to pistol, the pistol must be less than 16'' in barrel length and have a non-shouldered grip. If you go from pistol to rifle, the barrel must greater or equal to 16" and have a shoulderd grip. Caveat #2 is you CANNOT do this to a pistol or rifle not designed and sold to be converted back and forth, i.e, you cannot take a Winchester Model 70, cut the barrel to 15 inches, saw the butt stock off and call it a pistol.
 
I've read it 3 times, and I don't see where a pistol is limited to under 16" bbl. You can't make a rifle with less than 16" bbl., but a pistol can have any length bbl. you want to put on it.
 
Just read the PDF and as I understand it, it is completely legal to convert a rifle to a pistol and vice-versa, AS LONG AS, it was sold and designed to be able to convert from rifle to pistol and vice versa, ala T/C Encore/Contender. Caveat #1 is that if you convert from rifle to pistol, the pistol must be less than 16'' in barrel length and have a non-shouldered grip. If you go from pistol to rifle, the barrel must greater or equal to 16" and have a shoulderd grip. Caveat #2 is you CANNOT do this to a pistol or rifle not designed and sold to be converted back and forth, i.e, you cannot take a Winchester Model 70, cut the barrel to 15 inches, saw the butt stock off and call it a pistol.
Click to expand...

This seems spot on - however, how does the letter relate to AR-15 receivers? The letter states that

Nonetheless, if 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 otherwise produced from
a weapon originally assembled or produced only as a rifle, such a weapon is a “weapon
made from a rifle” as defined by 26 U.S.C. 5845(a)(4). Such a weapon would not be a
“pistol” because the weapon was not originally designed, made, and intended to fire a
projectile by one hand.
Click to expand...

So that seems to be saying that if I buy an AR-15 receiver, then whatever I build it into first decides - forever - whether I can change the configuration. So if I make a rifle first, then it must always remain a rifle (see bold part above), but if I build a pistol first, I can change back and forth between non-NFA rifle and non-NFA pistol as often as I like?
 
Hmm...from researching it on the web, this interpretation seems to be the consensus, sure enough. It seems pretty stupid to me though - I bought mine as a stripped lower receiver, and then fitted a barreled upper receiver, stock and pistol grip. Now, if it's the case that I fitted the stock first, then at that point, it was a rifle, for ever more. On the other hand, if I fitted the barrel and pistol grip first, then it was originally a pistol, and I can change back and forth until the cows come home. The truth is, the barreled upper, stock and pistol grip were all fitted within a few minutes of each other, but I can't remember in what order. So what hope does anyone have of ever proving whether my AR-15 was a rifle first?

Not that they'd need to prove it of course - they'd just need to convince a jury, which would be easy - but it does make a mockery of the whole concept in my book.

Luckily I don't really want to convert my AR-15, currently configured as a rifle, into anything else. I'm just curious.
 
There are many inaccuracies in this thread. I sent a clearification letter to the ATF back in Sept 2009 about this issue because I kept seeing people suggesting things that were contrary to what the ATF was saying was legal.

http://www.go2gbo.com/forums/index.php/topic,184325.0.html

Their response letter caused quite a stir among several gun boards and even more new letters being sent to the ATF. The ATF decided to change an older ruling in favor of allowing an original pistol to become a rifle and back to a pistol, but original rifles are still not allowed to be made into pistols.
The only TC product allowed to interchange outside of the rule is the original kits that the Supreme Court case was about. Regular TC contenders, G2s, or Encores are not exempt. So an original TC Encore or Contender rifle cannot be made into a pistol without doing the NFA tax stamp paper work.
As of last year before the new ruling, you couldn't make a pistol into a rifle and back to a pistol without a tax stamp. By the way, pistols can have any length of barrel without restriction.
 
Thanks expeditionx. Unfortunately, the letter is riddled with the same ambiguity as the other ATF letter linked tlo from this thread: one answer expressly forbids the AR-15 scenario I described, and then the other expressly allows it. To clarify :

"if an individiual utilizes a receiver that has already been barreled as a rifle action in the assembly of a pistol, such an assembled pistol would constitute a "weapon made from a rifle" as defined in the NFA"
Click to expand...

This makes what I proposed illegal: buy a stripped lower receiver, buy a kit of parts that include a stock, barrel and pistol grip, then build a rifle, and then change it into a pistol using parts I bought at the same time - since at the time I make it into a pistol, I'm using a receiver that "has already been barreled as a rifle action". (To make a pistol using parts I bought at the same time, I could simply remove the stock and use the 16" barrel, since there is no upper or lower limit on pistol barrel lengths. But, I could have bought a shorter barrel along with the other components originally- they would have come from a "single source").

On the other hand, the following statement completely contradicts the above, and gives me clear permission to do exactly that:

"It is the position of the ATF that if a multipurpose firearm kit containing the above-listed components is obtained as an assemblage of parts from a single source, the components of the kit may be assembled and reassembled an unlimited number of times as a rifle or a pistol"[/QUOTE

Presumably, since the contradictory statement comes after the statement it contradicts, it's intended to take precedence. But when one statement fails to acknowledge the other, it isn't exactly confidence-inspiring :(
Click to expand...
 
http://www.atf.gov/regulations-rulings/rulings/atf-rulings/atf-ruling-2011-4.pdf

The link again so people don't need to look.

This is the point I am making; the opinion given in 2011 (July) concerning a case from many years ago does nothing to help us understand the law. Even here on this forum with all these knowledgeable gun folks, we can't agree. Imagine if two lawyers on opposing sides try and figure out what this July 25, 2011 letter means. I can't help but think this was written exppressly to confuse people. I think we need to make our confusion known.
 
Divil,

A multipurpose kit refers to something that a manufacturer sells with the gun so as to allow reconfiguring. TC used to make one but it ended up in a legal fight at the supreme court. I am not sure that another kit has ever been available since from the same source being the manufacturer. I would think that the ATF would need to give its blessing to allow such a kit to happen and no one makes ones anymore. Buying a rifle and assembling a bunch of parts so that you can reconfigure it as a pistol is not legal. If it were, plenty of gun makers would be suggesting to do so, but in fact there are warnings to not do that. The ATFs position from the letter I posted is that if it started out as a rifle it needs to stay a rifle otherwise don't be surprised if you get locked up in Federal prison with a permanent felony record. Plenty of people get locked up every year for short barrel violations. I think the NFA law that restricts barrel lengths is unconstitutional, but I don't intend on going to prison because of a disagreement.
 
Wyoredman,

Only original rifles are left as restricted so that they cannot be made into a pistol. Call the NFA branch and ask them directly.

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
National Firearms Act Branch
244 Needy Road
Martinsburg, West Virginia 25405 USA
Voice (304) 616-4500
 
Don't think for one second that most laws especially gun laws aren't written on purpose to have a very broad meaning. That way they can twist and turn it however they need to best fit there agenda......Gotta love the **** we put up with.
 
Actually, we discussed th new ruling in the NFA forum when it came out. It appears ATF is finally applying a reasonable interpretation of Thompson Center.

Also, never rely on telephone advice from the ATF. Get it in writing. Not only will you get different answers depending on who you talk to at ATF; but a telephone call won't save your bacon if you later run into someone at ATF who takes a different view.
 
just my $0.02 here, and a lifetime of living in the peoples republic of illinois... all stripped lowers are sold (HERE) as pistols with the 72 hrs waiting period and everything. so i would take the atf letter to mean i could make my stripped lower both ways flipping back and forth at will.

on the other hand a COMPLETED lower (with butstock attached would be sold as a rifle and would therefore be illeagle if converted to a pistol.

thats my take
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top