
Originally Posted by
Army Chief
I don't want to make this personal, and I understand that there are many, many "opinions" out there when it comes to NFA law (making it difficult to separate fact from fluff); however, this question should have never gone to the ATF.
A most basic understanding of NFA law -- which is something that you simply MUST have, if you wish to get involved in purchasing "stamped" items -- tells us that the registered lower is what constitues the SBR, and that when it was added to the registry, you informed the ATF that could expect it to normally be configured with a 10.5" 5.56 barrel. You could put a 16" barrel on it, and technically not even have an SBR in that configuration. You could put a different NFA- length barrel on it, change the caliber, or both, and still not run afoul of the law because the lower is approved for use with NFA-length uppers.
Now, again, in the interest of accurate recordkeeping and effective administration, if any of these changes are to become more or less permanent, than they would like to be notified of that fact with a simple letter. It doesn't change the legal status of the weapon, so you aren't re-registering or re-transferring anything; you're simply keeping them in the loop. In this case, a combination of over-thinking things a bit, and under-researching led to what we might call a simple ATF party foul, but we have to be careful about these, because this is often where some branch office will fire off an ambiguous reply that may or may not seem to be changing existing policy. Definitely want to let sleeping dogs like when we can.
AC
Bookmarks