Is it legal?

[prickett]

I want to build an SBR AR-9. Would I be able to buy an AR-9 lower complete with a butt stock. Remove the butt stock. Buy a short barrel AR-9 upper. Mount the upper on the butt stock-less lower. Shoot as an AR pistol until the tax stamp arrives. Then remount the butt stock and have an SBR.

[tb-av]

I think that lower will be pre-classified as a rifle, which means if you stick a short upper on it, it's still a rifle.

People build up a pistol first... then convert to rifle. But I don't think you can go rifle...pistol.

[BigWaylon]

Perfectly legal.

A lower transfers as an "other firearm", whether stripped or complete. Without a barrel, it can't be a rifle. That's why even complete lowers follow the same rules as stripped, where you have to be 21 to buy one and a resident of the state you're in.

If you buy a complete lower, remove the stock, and then attach a short upper...you've initially built a pistol and can freely go from pistol to rifle and back.

ETA: straight from the 4473:

Question 16. Type of Firearm(s): "Other" refers to frames, receivers and other firearms that are neither handguns nor long guns (rifles or shotguns), such as firearms having a pistol grip that expel a shotgun shell, or National Firearms Act (NFA) firearms, including silencers.

If a frame or receiver can only be made into a long gun (rifle or shotgun), it is still a frame or receiver not a handgun or long gun. However, frames and receivers are still "firearms" by definition, and subject to the same GCA limitations as any other firearms. See Section 921(a)(3)(B). Section 922(b)(1) makes it unlawful for a licensee to sell any firearm other than a shotgun or rifle to any person under the age of 21. Since a frame or receiver for a firearm, to include one that can only be made into a long gun, is a "firearm other than a shotgun or rifle," it cannot be transferred to anyone under the age of 21, nor can these firearms be transferred to anyone who is not a resident of the State where the transfer is to take place. Also, note that multiple sales forms are not required for frames or receivers of any firearms, or pistol grip shotguns, since they are not "pistols or revolvers" under Section 923(g)(3)(A).

[cdmiller]

Don't just remove the buttstock. Swap the carbine receiver extension for a pistol receiver extension. Having the ability to mount a buttstock is a no-no on an AR pistol.

[Iraqgunz]

Wrong. As long as you do not attach a stock it is just a receiver extension.

Don't just remove the buttstock. Swap the carbine receiver extension for a pistol receiver extension. Having the ability to mount a buttstock is a no-no on an AR pistol.

[Romanov]

Wrong. As long as you do not attach a stock it is just a receiver extension.

If you use the standard receiver extension and own a stock that would fit onto it that is in "close proximity" then it is a short barrel rifle as defined by the NFA. Attaching it, unfortunately, is not required to violate the law according to ATF, based on the reading of this ruling.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/ru...stols/download

Held, 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 (e.g., a receiver, an attachable shoulder stock, and barrel of less than 16 inches in length); or
(b) Convert a complete weapon into such an NFA firearm, including –
(1) A pistol and attachable shoulder stock; and
- 4 -
(2) A rifle with a barrel of 16 inches or more in length, and an attachable barrel of less than 16 inches in length

People are going to argue this stuff endlessly. A pistol receiver extension that is unable to accept a stock is definitely legal. A standard receiver extension may or may not be a violation. It is significantly easier and, I think, smarter to simply choose the option that is definitely legal.

[BigWaylon]

Wrap the buffer tube in paracord.

[fledge]

If you use the standard receiver extension and own a stock that would fit onto it that is in "close proximity" then it is a short barrel rifle as defined by the NFA. Attaching it, unfortunately, is not required to violate the law according to ATF, based on the reading of this ruling.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/ru...stols/download



People are going to argue this stuff endlessly. A pistol receiver extension that is unable to accept a stock is definitely legal. A standard receiver extension may or may not be a violation. It is significantly easier and, I think, smarter to simply choose the option that is definitely legal.

Pistol tubes can receive stocks too so that is moot.

http://phase5wsi.com/universal-mini-stock-ums.html

The ATF link specifies an issue if all you have in your inventory is parts for an SBR. If you have a pistol, don't have a stock around that it can accept. If you have a non-NFA rifle or parts for a non-NFA rifle in your inventory, extra stocks that work on that rifle are not an issue. Read the whole context of the letter. Pretty clear.

[prickett]

Thanks for the info everyone. Sounds like the laws need to go away given that they are obsolete and fraught with danger to us.

For example, the "close proximity" rule. OK, I don't have a stock on my pistol. Nor do I have one in my house. But I would have an AR rifle in the house with a very removable stock that could be fairly quickly attached. Also, what does "close proximity" mean? The Feds could have it mean anything they want. Same house? How about if I leave the stock at a next door neighbor's house. Is that too close? VERY subjective.

If you use the standard receiver extension and own a stock that would fit onto it that is in "close proximity" then it is a short barrel rifle as defined by the NFA. Attaching it, unfortunately, is not required to violate the law according to ATF, based on the reading of this ruling.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/ru...stols/download



People are going to argue this stuff endlessly. A pistol receiver extension that is unable to accept a stock is definitely legal. A standard receiver extension may or may not be a violation. It is significantly easier and, I think, smarter to simply choose the option that is definitely legal.

[cdmiller]

The subjectivity of it is why I made the pistol extension comment above. I witnessed an ATF agent having a rather pointed conversation with someone about the issue at a Houston gun show a couple of years ago. I decided better safe than sorry was the best course of action when it comes to anything subject to interpretation by any given ATF agent. Sure, you may legally be correct in what you do but that doesn't mean the process won't be costly if you somehow manage to run afoul of an overzealous/underinformed ATF agent. Pistol buffer tube is just inexpensive insurance to me. But then I have never actually owned an AR pistol. I just waited for Form 1s to clear.