Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26

Thread: Is there a "dark side" to the SBR permit?

  1. #11
    GuncoHolic BigAl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,038
    Feedback Score
    12 (100%)

    Default

    I have several SBR's and FA's. I think it's a pretty good deal since you can use all original parts and end up with an original rifle.

  2. #12
    BANNED nalioth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    1,529
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigAl
    I think it's a pretty good deal since you can use all original parts and end up with an original rifle.
    Short a receiver, anyway.

  3. #13
    Cranky Curmudgeon zoom6zoom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,498
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)

    Default

    Another plus to the SBR is you don't have to worry about 922(r) parts.

  4. #14
    GuncoHolic 555th's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    KY
    Posts
    3,295
    Feedback Score
    16 (100%)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nalioth
    Short a receiver, anyway.
    not on a VZ58 build or when you use a Hungarian receiver on a Hungarian kit.

  5. #15
    BANNED nalioth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    1,529
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 555th
    Quote Originally Posted by BigAl
    I think it's a pretty good deal since you can use all original parts and end up with an original rifle.
    Quote Originally Posted by nalioth
    Short a receiver, anyway.
    not on a VZ58 build or when you use a Hungarian receiver on a Hungarian kit.
    Please tell me how rebuilding a cut up bunch of parts on a foreign receiver makes it "original".

  6. #16
    GuncoHolic BigAl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,038
    Feedback Score
    12 (100%)

    Default

    my SBR VZ58 is original....

    i think you get the point...

  7. #17
    Cuerno de Chivo chipmechanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Oregun
    Posts
    1,975
    Feedback Score
    13 (100%)

    Default

    Ok the question I have is say I started with a M92 yugo kit and wanted to make it a pistol. Would I need a receiver that started out life being designated as a "pistol" receiver or could I just use a rifle receiver that had never been built into a rifle? Wouldnt there be a question about the original transfer of the receiver to be on the yellow ( OK I know its not yellow any more ) form since I did not have it transfered as a pistol and did not wait my state mandatory 7days or whatever it is waiting period for a pistol transfer?

  8. #18
    BANNED nalioth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    1,529
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chipmechanic
    Ok the question I have is say I started with a M92 yugo kit and wanted to make it a pistol. Would I need a receiver that started out life being designated as a "pistol" receiver or could I just use a rifle receiver that had never been built into a rifle? Wouldnt there be a question about the original transfer of the receiver to be on the yellow ( OK I know its not yellow any more ) form since I did not have it transfered as a pistol and did not wait my state mandatory 7days or whatever it is waiting period for a pistol transfer?
    A receiver that has not been built on can be made into anything.

    "Pistol" markings are not legally required by the feds

    A receiver is not a pistol or rifle.

  9. #19
    Gunco Maniac sjohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    7,452
    Feedback Score
    15 (100%)

    Default

    If the Feds are able to go back to the 4473, and the receiver was transferred from the manufacturer to a FFL or private individual as a rifle then anything you build on that receiver is a rifle. Forever.

    Conversely, if transferred as a pistol, then you can go back and forth from pistol to rifle, etc.

    Anything stamped "pistol" on the receiver by the manufacturer could reinforce a pistol 4473 transfer but wouldn't alter the legal status of the receiver being a rifle if the receiver were initially transferred as a rifle.

  10. #20
    Cuerno de Chivo chipmechanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Oregun
    Posts
    1,975
    Feedback Score
    13 (100%)

    Default

    Its been a 10+ years since I was an ffl licensee and I dont think this ever came up back then. Does the licensee have the discretion as to whether he can transfer the receiver as a pistol or a rifle? Does it come in on his books as a pistol or a rifle?

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

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
  •