Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: SBR & 922(R) Compliance

  1. #1
    Gunco Rookie scottinthegrove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    13
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default SBR & 922(R) Compliance

    Hey guys, Ive heard a rumor about the BATF&E taking a new stance with 922(R) and a registered short barreled rifle. It is my understanding that up to this point a SBR was exempt from 922 compliance because , by definition, a SBR is not a "sporting"rifle. Since it isn't a "sporting" rifle, how could it ever comply?

    I've heard this rumor about a new ruling that not only are post '89 SBRs subject to 922 but, a pre '89 import, if made into a SBR after the '89 ban would also need to be 922 compliant. I just don't see how this could be? If a pre '89 AK was registered this year as a SBR and rebuilt with a Krink kit, the receiver was originally made pre '89. At no time does the receiver stop being a firearm.

    After being built into a SBR, a permanent extension could be added to the barrel, returning the rifle to Title I configuration. Then you could write the NFA Branch and notify them that that rifle has been reconfigured to a Title I firearm. You don't have to wait for confirmation from the NFA Branch to change the firearm back to Title I configuration. You forfeit the $200 tax and the NFA Branch removes the firearm from the active NFA registry.

    Apparently the BATF&E position is that Filing a Form 1 is making a firearm. While that is true if you are making the firearm from scratch. To me if the receiver that you want to make into a SBR was originally made before '89, you are only changing the configuration of the firearm. You are not making a new firearm. Just as if you changed the caliber of a pre '89 receiver. You would note that change on the receiver, but it is not a "new" firearm. The configuration has been changed.

    I don't know how you can make an SBR compliant when it is a "non sporting" firearm by definition. As I recall during the National Assault Weapons Ban, registering a post '94 receiver as an SBR, the firearm was still prohibited from having more than one knotty feature on that SBR. But I see no way that registering a pre '89 receiver as an SBR is only a change in configuration. At no time did the receiver stop being a firearm. What do you guys think?

    Scott

  2. #2
    GuncoHolic kernelkrink's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    4,965
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)

    Default

    I think my head hurts even worse than it did before! ATF has been re-interpreting things regarding NFA and 922(r) lately and has been none too clear about it. I would write them and ask for their opinion on the exact firearm you intend to SBR.

  3. #3
    AKAHOLIC o.d. ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    South West Missouri
    Posts
    1,580
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)

    Default

    I think the ATF needs to make a decision and stick with it rather than keep redefining this crap every year or two. This shit does not prevent any crimes so why are we (the taxpayers) paying these idiots to keep making things so convoluted ?

    Crap like this is the #1 reason i don't have any NFA firearms...

  4. #4
    Gunco Rookie scottinthegrove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    13
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default The Thing About Firearms Collection

    Whether or not you have NFA registered items in your collection, you still must know the law. I had a "bonehead" sell me an original SP-1 Colt carbine during the AWB. He advertised a package deal, the original lower + the original upper and another upper. His ad said a 16" and 18" Colt uppers. He went through his dealer to ship the lower and two uppers to my dealer.

    My dealer called me when the package arrived and asked me "What the #*@% was going on?" The other dealer had shipped the second upper attached to the lower with the original upper in the box. The second upper was a 14.5" Colt "M4" upper. The other dealer had shipped to my dealer an unregistered SBR. I contacted the seller and told him he needed to pay to have an extended flash hider permanently attached to the barrel. The seller basically told me to "pound sand". He wasn't going to return any money for anything. I got a "great deal" and should be happy with what I got.

    I then contacted the seller's dealer, and told him that he sent my guy an unregistered SBR. My guy was ready to call the BATF&E if this wasn't going to get straightened out. The dealer said he just wrote down the serial # and shipped it off. He said he would talk with the seller and straighten it out. After speaking with his dealer, the seller came around and sent the funds to get the upper fixed. Once that got settled, the seller admitted to me he had another 14.5" Colt " M4" at home. I can just imagine the problems both the seller and his dealer could have had.

    It is funny, if you collect stamps and you buy the wrong stamp, you wasted your money. If you collect firearms and collect the wrong firearm you could end up with a $10,000 fine and/or ten years in prison. Even if you aren't convicted, you could spend tens of thousands of dollars on lawyers to stay out of prison. I feel it is imperative that anyone that collects firearms know the law. If they don't, it would be easy to get into all kinds of legal problems collecting the wrong item.

    Scott

  5. #5
    White Cracker 4thIDvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Swamp Florida
    Posts
    12,315
    Feedback Score
    17 (100%)

    Post Scott.

    I fully agree on "should" know the law.
    I have a C&R so the ATF sends me copies of the updated laws.
    Kinda go with the Kernel on the headache.
    Try calling the ATF and asking a question. The laws have become so confusing, "They" dont know the law, half the time.
    Most all of the ATF agents I have talked to have been very polite in trying to help.
    But in my callings. I get bounced from one guy too another because nobody wants to commit to an answer.
    One of my last calls to the Orlando office. They put me through to, what I guess was the legal department.
    Guy was real nice and actually told me he really did not know the answer to my question.
    Too many laws. Creates confusion to the point of nobody knows what the hell is going on.
    Damn. I am getting a headache.
    "Man needs but two things to survive alone in the woods. A blow up female doll and his trusty old AK-47" - Thomas Jefferson 1781


  6. #6
    Gunco Maniac sjohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    7,452
    Feedback Score
    15 (100%)

    Default

    The problem is not with the law, but with the associated regulations. Regulations (the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, CFR) is how the various agencies interpret and enforce the laws. Since the regulations can and do change over time without the law itself changing, a bureaucrat's interpretation of law gives us the headache.
    I have a daughter. I tell her, "911 is what you dial after you're raped. 1911 is what you should have before they try."

Search tags for this page

There are currently no search engine referrals.
Click on a term to search our site for related topics.

Posting Permissions

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