question on short barreling an AR.

[HKFan9]

I recently bought a Stag arms AR-15 from a member off here. I have always been interested in doing up a short barreled AR and obviously getting the ATF paperwork to do it and all that legally. Here is my question.

It seems the easiest thing for me to do is: I still want to have my 16 inch upper with rails all complete to change out. I have been seeing more and more AR-15 Pistol uppers. My question is is it LEGAL to buy a pistol upper... DO the proper ATF paperwork, and mount it to a rifle lower (I know the NFA part and $200 tax.) My question simply is with the right paper work, can you mount a pistol upper, to a registered rifle lower, and do paperwork to register it as a SBR.

Open to all info. I know paperwork is required and I can't just slap on a pistol upper without the ATF's blessing but I wasn't sure if it mattered what the parts were registered as at the start.

 

[rjrivero]

Yes. You can register your lower and then put a pistol upper on your lower. I would caution you to engrave your lower appropriately first, then send your form 1. When the form 1 comes back, then you should buy your upper and then put it together.

Why this order?

If you wait until the stamp comes back, you are sending a NFA item to be engraved. That's a no-no.

You want to get the engraving done first.

You don't want to have the short barrel upper before you have a legal lower to put it on because it could be interpreted as constructive intent. Another No-No.

 

[MrM4]

Sounds like you have it under control, do not purchase the sub 16 inch upper until you have your tax stamp back on a approved form 1. Even if its not assembeled having the parts with out th epaper work being approved can get you in hot water.


This is a great site for all things NFA related:

www.uzitalk.com

 

[HKFan9]

Thanks for the help

 

[demigod]

do not purchase the sub 16 inch upper until you have your tax stamp back on a approved form 1.

This has been long debated over the years on the gun boards.

If you want to play it really safe, you can wait til your approval is in hand. I personally had a Colt commando upper in my locker for over a year before I got around to registering a few of my lowers.

Having a short barreled upper isn't a per se violation, but if you have other reasons for the ATF to be mad at you, I suppose they could make your life hell over it.

 

[jmorris]

As your AR is a rifle on paper you would need the approved F1 in hand before getting the short upper. If you were starting from a reciever not on paper as a rifle, I would just get the pistol "kit" and put it together. Then make sure it runs, have it engraved and send in the paper work. After you get the F1 back take the buffer tube off and install the stock.

 

[demigod]

As your AR is a rifle on paper you would need the approved F1 in hand before getting the short upper.

Although it may be a good idea to wait for you approval, there is nothing in any law I've ever read that states this.

 

[rjrivero]

Although it may be a good idea to wait for you approval, there is nothing in any law I've ever read that states this.

That's one of the biggest gripes I have with the National Firearms Act and the ATF in general. A lot of the policies they have seem to be their interpretation of the law rather than the law itself.

I mean, constructive intent? What a crappy way to say "We can convict you for your thoughts." How do you prove that kind of crap anyway?

We do know that Constructive Intent has been used for convicitons in the past, so if you are going to play completely above board, the advice of NOT having a short barrel upper is SOUND until the lower gets registered.

Of course, you could always construct a pistol, and then buy the STOCK for that pistol later, when the form 1 comes back and you'll be "covered."

 

[MrM4]

They are not using "constructive intent" anymore, it is now know as "constructive possession" (sp?, its late) anyways having the parts is the same having them assembelled in the eyes of the court. Rember the guy from Gunbroker last summer that had the H&K SP89 with the front grip in the picture? Hes still in a legal fight with ATF as far as I know.

Having control over NFA parts without a proper use can get you hung. NFA owners tend to be the upmost lawful people, no need to dirty that rep by getting in a hurry to play with your new toy.

 

[demigod]

anyways having the parts is the same having them assembelled in the eyes of the court.

Which court? Please site the caselaw when refering to legal precedence.

If you're referring to that guy in Florida, he never was in ANY fight with ATF. It was a local bust based on FL law, and the ATF apparently had no interest.

I inquired about this guy, and someone local to him replied that he paid some fine and was back on the gun scene.... apparently he didn't get a felony charge. (not sure how reliable the fine info is because I don't know the guy who replied to my question)

 

[paull]

They are not using "constructive intent" anymore, it is now know as "constructive possession" (sp?, its late) anyways having the parts is the same having them assembelled in the eyes of the court.

"constructive possession" has nothing to do with construction.

p

 

[MrM4]

http://blog.princelaw.com/2009/9/1/florida-man-arrested-for-constructive-possession-of-an-sbr

This link contains the mans account of what happened when he attemped to sell is hk sp89.

and it touchs on constructive possesion as well.

 

[paull]

Constructive Possession exists when a person knowingly has the power and intention at a given time to exercise dominion and control over an object, either directly or through others. US v. Turnbough, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 11886, *6.

You must notice that constructive possession has NOTHING to do with "construction".

People seem to think that it does.

An example is:
If you are in possession of parts that can be constructed or made into an illegal item, that is constructive possession of an illegal item.


Not so.
Anyone who has a firearm, duct tape, and a plastic soda bottle is in possession of items that can be combined into a silencer.

Constructive possession can be explained by the fact that you are indeed in possession of the items in your safe at home, or the contents of your car, etc., even when you are at work, or at the range, or wherever.

There really is a difference.

p

 

[THORN74]

sort of off topic, but close enough that i didnt want to start a new thread. If one were to purchase a pistol-AR, but then want to have a butstock and perhaps a longer upper (sub 16 or 16+) would it be leagle to switch back and forth provided u got the nfa stamp??

i know its a weird question, but i was thinking why buy 2 seprate weapons when its so easy to swap an upper and pop on a butstock.

 

[superchi]

sort of off topic, but close enough that i didnt want to start a new thread. If one were to purchase a pistol-AR, but then want to have a butstock and perhaps a longer upper (sub 16 or 16+) would it be leagle to switch back and forth provided u got the nfa stamp??

i know its a weird question, but i was thinking why buy 2 seprate weapons when its so easy to swap an upper and pop on a butstock.

It would be based on the combination of parts you have at a time. For example:

-A lower with a stock and a pistol upper will need a Form 1 registered lower.
-A lower with a pistol buffer tube and a pistol upper is legal without a stamp.
-A lower with either a stock or pistol buffer tube and any upper 16" or longer is legal without a stamp.

If I remember correctly, in order for the lower to be legal as a pistol lower combined with a pistol upper, it must not have provisions to have a stock attached (usually sold as a pistol buffer tube by dealers). You can't just pull off the stock and put on a pistol upper while leaving a multiple position buffer tube installed.

Now if it were me, having to install and reinstall buffer tubes each time I wanted to switch from a rifle-stocked gun to a pistol-grip-only setup would get kind of tedious.