Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 58

Thread: SBR refusal?

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Canon city Co. at the moment
    Posts
    3,076
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    If any of you get a chance pick the magazine up, Its very informative and a really long article! It covers everything from picking out the lower to applying for the tax stamp,getting fingerprinted...
    Quote Originally Posted by Split66 View Post
    I wouldnt listen to BCMjunkie. His brown camo clashes like hell with his surroundings. His surroundings are obviously pinkish and lacey and have big hooties.

    Instagram Dangertastic
    Danger@Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/m41979/

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    175
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Well that article is full of fail. First of all, there is no such thing as a Class 3 weapon. People use that term because of the license that a dealer must have to sell them. They are NFA weapons from the National Firearms Act of 1934.

    A case has already made it to the Supreme Court and the justices came to a decision against the US Gov't, specifically the BATF. They picked through the law and do not think that it's legal to say someone has broken the law and manufactured an NFA weapon by having the parts.

    That's it. Supreme Court decision, you can't get much more definite than that. Of course this does not mean that if by some chance you got hauled off to jail and your belongings ransacked by the law that you would not be prosecuted for this. But hopefully you could eventually win against the charges.
    Last edited by vinsonr; 01-22-11 at 00:52. Reason: spelling

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    175
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Although the legal description for an SBR doesnt include the same exact language, the statue that defines a machinegun (which,like the SBR, is a class III weapon), includes any combination of parts that can be assembled to create one." " I expect the same reasoning to apply to combinations of parts that can be used to create an SBR
    This exact piece was described in the justice's decision in the case. Here is an excerpt:

    As Justice White points out, the choice the plurality
    worries about is nowhere suggested by the language of the
    statute: § 5845 simply makes no reference to the “ ‘utility’ ”
    of aggregable parts. It does, however, conspicuously combine references to “combination of parts” in the definitions of regulated silencers, machineguns, and destructive devices with the absence of any
    such reference in the definition of regulated rifles. This,
    rather than the utility or not of a given part in a given parts
    assemblage, convinces me that the provision does not encompass Thompson/Center’s pistol and conversion kit, or at least
    does not do so unambiguously
    The full text is available here: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions...umes/504bv.pdf

    This same reasoning applies to any collection of parts that could be made into an unregulated rifle (16" or greater barrel).

    I think the only really iffy position to be in is to own one single short barrel upper or collection of parts that would make one, and a single non NFA registered lower complete with stock. As long as you have the parts necessary to make that lower into the unregulated rifle then you should receive leniency, at least if you get to the Supreme Court in your case =).

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    1,829
    Feedback Score
    21 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by BCmJUnKie View Post
    Similarily,if you if you possess an upper with a barrel shorter than 16",and you have a lower that it is physically possible for it to be assembled on, but which is NOT a registered SBR, you're in violation.


    If you want to have some fun; email the author of the article and ask him for specific cases of anyone being prosecuted for being in possession of a 16" gun and a registered SBR.
    By his logic; if you own an SBR lower you could not own any other type of AR.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Canon city Co. at the moment
    Posts
    3,076
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Ya what im thinking is that hes not a gun guy, he prolly did all this for the article or something? lol. You guys should really check out the whole article, im intrigued to find out what is real and what is FAIL!! lol
    Quote Originally Posted by Split66 View Post
    I wouldnt listen to BCMjunkie. His brown camo clashes like hell with his surroundings. His surroundings are obviously pinkish and lacey and have big hooties.

    Instagram Dangertastic
    Danger@Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/m41979/

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    AZ-Waging jihad against crappy AR's.
    Posts
    24,902
    Feedback Score
    104 (100%)
    Most of the idiots who write for gun magazines are just that. BATFE doesn't give a crap. So unless you are sending taunting emails to the BATFE showing them your "constructive intent" upper you will not have any problems.

    Quote Originally Posted by BCmJUnKie View Post
    Okay so i found the magazine i read my earlier info. in...BLACK GUNS 2011. The column writer is Jeremy D.Clough, He goes through and documents the entire process... he states and i quote "As another word of warning, its worth noting that with a platform as modular as the AR15, "manufacturing" an SBR is as simple as pulling two pins and putting a short upper on your regular lower reciever. If you do that,even if you just want to see what one would look like on your rifle, you've just manufactured a class III weapon,and you're in violation of federal law. Similarily,if you if you possess an upper with a barrel shorter than 16",and you have a lower that it is physically possible for it to be assembled on, but which is NOT a registered SBR, you're in violation. Likewise,if you have a pistoland a shoulder stock that fits it-such as a stock for a glock-you're breaking the law. The same goes for vertical foregrips on handguns,such as putting a GriPod or Crimson Trace MVF on an AR pistol". And it goes on to tell how the same rules apply for individual LEO's and "Although the legal description for an SBR doesnt include the same exact language, the statue that defines a machinegun (which,like the SBR, is a class III weapon), includes any combination of parts that can be assembled to create one." " I expect the same reasoning to apply to combinations of parts that can be used to create an SBR,so if you don't have a lower that the upper can legally be mated with- such as an SBR or a registered pistol lower- you shouldn't have an upper with a barrel less than 16''. Again, I want to make it clear I wasnt saying anyone was wrong...i just heard two different things and wanted to let you guys know as well.



    Owner/Instructor at Semper Paratus Arms

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SemperParatusArms/

    Semper Paratus Arms AR15 Armorer Course http://www.semperparatusarms.com/cou...-registration/

    M4C Misc. Training and Course Announcements- http://www.m4carbine.net/forumdisplay.php?f=141

    Master Armorer/R&D at SIONICS Weapon Systems- http://sionicsweaponsystems.com

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Barre, VT
    Posts
    7,148
    Feedback Score
    94 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by BCmJUnKie View Post
    Okay so i found the magazine i read my earlier info. in...BLACK GUNS 2011. The column writer is Jeremy D.Clough, He goes through and documents the entire process... he states and i quote "As another word of warning, its worth noting that with a platform as modular as the AR15, "manufacturing" an SBR is as simple as pulling two pins and putting a short upper on your regular lower reciever. If you do that,even if you just want to see what one would look like on your rifle, you've just manufactured a class III weapon,and you're in violation of federal law. Similarily,if you if you possess an upper with a barrel shorter than 16",and you have a lower that it is physically possible for it to be assembled on, but which is NOT a registered SBR, you're in violation. Likewise,if you have a pistoland a shoulder stock that fits it-such as a stock for a glock-you're breaking the law. The same goes for vertical foregrips on handguns,such as putting a GriPod or Crimson Trace MVF on an AR pistol". And it goes on to tell how the same rules apply for individual LEO's and "Although the legal description for an SBR doesnt include the same exact language, the statue that defines a machinegun (which,like the SBR, is a class III weapon), includes any combination of parts that can be assembled to create one." " I expect the same reasoning to apply to combinations of parts that can be used to create an SBR,so if you don't have a lower that the upper can legally be mated with- such as an SBR or a registered pistol lower- you shouldn't have an upper with a barrel less than 16''. Again, I want to make it clear I wasnt saying anyone was wrong...i just heard two different things and wanted to let you guys know as well.
    Some of that information is wrong. Some of it is right but obvious. If you put an SBR upper on a non SBR regular lower you just committed a felony. No kidding thanks for the update. If you put a VFG or shoulder stock on an AR pistol again a felony. Having the parts is not illegal. That is like the old argument that having a hacksaw and a rifle means you have the intent/means to create an SBR or SBS. I have a six pack of beer in the back seat of the car with other groceries but I'm not attempting a DUI. I'm just driving home. The argument the author makes is full of holes and BS. You will find much better info and guidance here for free.
    Last edited by usmcvet; 01-22-11 at 08:19.
    "Real men have always needed to know what time it is so they are at the airfield on time, pumping rounds into savages at the right time, etc. Being able to see such in the dark while light weights were comfy in bed without using a light required luminous material." -Originally Posted by ramairthree

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Canon city Co. at the moment
    Posts
    3,076
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by usmcvet View Post
    You will find much better info and guidance here for free.
    And i am extremely grateful for it. Thank you all
    Quote Originally Posted by Split66 View Post
    I wouldnt listen to BCMjunkie. His brown camo clashes like hell with his surroundings. His surroundings are obviously pinkish and lacey and have big hooties.

    Instagram Dangertastic
    Danger@Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/m41979/

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Barre, VT
    Posts
    7,148
    Feedback Score
    94 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by BCmJUnKie View Post
    And i am extremely grateful for it. Thank you all
    You'll do well here. I think I bought the same gun mag. They're still fun to read and some of the I for is solid you just have to Wade through alot of glorified marketing. Ever notice how write ups and adds are paired up nicely.
    "Real men have always needed to know what time it is so they are at the airfield on time, pumping rounds into savages at the right time, etc. Being able to see such in the dark while light weights were comfy in bed without using a light required luminous material." -Originally Posted by ramairthree

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Canon city Co. at the moment
    Posts
    3,076
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by usmcvet View Post
    You'll do well here. I think I bought the same gun mag. They're still fun to read and some of the I for is solid you just have to Wade through alot of glorified marketing. Ever notice how write ups and adds are paired up nicely.
    Awfully coincidental isnt it hahaha. I always noticed not only that but what i said earlier...I wonder if the writer's are just normal writers, maybe shot a few old marlin's when they were kids, and and because of their job title and position, various gun companies give them guns to try out. Im not sayin all of them, I really hate to say that without ever have met or talked to them, but cant help but think that they dont know a good rifle from a bb gun.
    Quote Originally Posted by Split66 View Post
    I wouldnt listen to BCMjunkie. His brown camo clashes like hell with his surroundings. His surroundings are obviously pinkish and lacey and have big hooties.

    Instagram Dangertastic
    Danger@Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/m41979/

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •