Theohazard
New member
Yeah, I've talked to many people who owned the parts to make an SBR (or other NFA item) and didn't realize that simply owning those parts could be considered illegal even if they never assembled them.44 AMP said:The operative principle is "constructive possession". Meaning, if you have all the parts to make the illegal item (unregistered SBR) you could be guilty of violating the law, even though you did not actually assemble it. That is something a jury will decide, and, personally, I think that is a situation to be avoided.
Just to elaborate on what 44 AMP posted, the ATF ruling I linked to above also contains their opinions on the requirements for being charged with constructive possession. Here's the key part of that ruling regarding the issue:
According to the ATF, if you have the parts for an SBR in "close proximity" to each other with "no useful purpose" other than to make an SBR, then it's the ATF's opinion that you're breaking the law.A firearm, as defined by the National Firearms Act (NFA), 26 U.S.C. 5845(a)(3), is made when unassembled parts are placed in close proximity in such a way that they: (a) serve no useful purpose other than to make a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length; or (b) convert a complete weapon into such an NFA firearm.
Now, the term "no useful purpose" seems clear to me: If you have a shoulder stock designed for a Glock and you have a Glock nearby that's not registered as an SBR, you have "no useful purpose" for those parts other than to make an illegal SBR with them. But if you have a short-barrel AR-15 upper receiver and a pistol-configured lower nearby, that's a "useful purpose" because AR pistols are legally considered regular pistols.
However, the term "close proximity" is pretty vague. I once asked the lead ATF agent for an FFL/SOT audit what "close proximity" meant exactly, and he told me that was a question for a lawyer. That vagueness is why people often avoid having the parts together in the same house just to be safe.
Here's a case of someone getting charged for constructive possession of an SBR:
http://blog.princelaw.com/2009/09/01/florida-man-arrested-for-constructive-possession-of-an-sbr/