To SBR or not to SBR

[Theohazard]

ATF has said that once a rifle, the firearm can no longer be a pistol. So it’s a one way street.

Not if it started life as a pistol. It’s only a one-way street if it started life as a rifle. Since his firearm is starting as a pistol, if he SBRs it he can remove the stock and it goes back to being a pistol. Check out Ruling 2011-4.

Remember that you can’t have parts of the SBR around your other title 1 firearm because of the possibility of constructive possession.

Not necessarily. According to the Supreme Court and ATF Ruling 2011-4, those parts are fine being in “close proximity” to each other if there is a “useful purpose” for having them. For example, I have an extra 8.3” 300 BO upper for my 10.5” 5.56 SBR. I can have that upper lying around my regular 16” AR-15 parts since the fact that I also have a registered SBR gives me a “useful purpose” for having that short upper.

 

[TruthTellers]

If I ever owned and SBR or SBS, yes I would notify the ATF that you've reconfigured the gun into non NFA territory. I would sell the upper or the barrel though and include a proof of sale, unless the upper/barrel is what's considered NFA regulated. Idk, I've always thought that it was the lower/frame that had the serial number.

From all I've read, I think I'm never going to SBR anything and will just pay the hefty sum for a Sig brace or adjustable Sig brace and put that money towards a company and workers that actually adds value and creates something in the world instead of gov't that exists solely to redistribute wealth through draconian tactics via taxes.

There's only two pistols I want to Sig brace and shoulder fire and that's a Ruger Charger .22 and a 9mm with a 9 or 10 inch threaded barrel. Can do it with the Charger now, but that particular 9mm I'll have to wait on. Hopefully Ruger comes out with a pistol variant of their new PC carbine.

From what others on TFL have said, the SBR/SBS novelty wears off quickly... probably much more so now that the pistol brace exists.

So, as pertains to the OP's question, I wouldn't SBR anything. Do as much as you can now with a Sig brace as I don't think a higher cheek weld recontructs the brace to be fired from the shoulder. Before the ATF said it's okay to shoot them shouldered, there was a tactic to "cheek fire" them in which the brace never touched the shoulder, which at that time was legally making it an SBR.

I wouldn't put anything on the rear portion of the brace though, because that's where the shoulder touches it. That could be construed to be making it into an SBR.

 

[9x19]

I have four SBRs, three AR pattern and one 10/22 pattern (Charger). I wouldn't go back. I've had more than my $200 worth of fun with them.

The Charger can be a pistol again, simply by removing the full stock and dropping it in a pistol stock.

The ARs can be rifles again, simply by replacing the 10.5" uppers with a 16" upper.

What's not to like? I only shoot my full size ARs when hunting (which is why I have them), everything else sees an SBR.

As said above IF I were getting rid of them, I'd have them removed from the registry and sell them separately as complete uppers & lowers, or a complete Charger, no great money lost.

If I feel the need to take a 10.5" AR out of state on the spur of the moment, I have a complete pistol lower (with KAK brace) hanging in my gun room for any rare whims like that.

 

[Machineguntony]

I don’t know that an SBR can be made back into a pistol. I learned something new today. Of course, since I’m a chicken when it comes to violating NFA laws, I’ll have my lawyer verify this.

 

[Theohazard]

I don’t know that an SBR can be made back into a pistol. I learned something new today. Of course, since I’m a chicken when it comes to violating NFA laws, I’ll have my lawyer verify this.

I don’t know if he specializes in gun laws or not, but if he doesn’t, here’s how to point him in the right direction.

If you look at my references in post #9, you’ll see that the definition of an SBR under federal law specifically defines it as a rifle with certain length characteristics. And the Supreme Court ruled in US v. Thompson Center Arms Co. in 1992 (further clarified in ATF Ruling 2011-4) that a firearm which was first made into a pistol and was subsequently made into a rifle can always be turned back into a pistol.