AR-15 BS Thread

Yup i dont even use a punch til the final to get it even or just inset so it doesnt snag

 

I hope your tax stamp came after all that time?

 

Good catch!
@Choco_Taco is that an SBR or is the barrel at least 16" ?
Looks awfully short, hope it's an SBR!

 

So assuming it’s <16”, changing to a brace (like an SBA3) would make it pistol and thus compliant...correct?

 

Only after his $250k fine and 10 years in a fed pen

 

I could be wrong, but, I'm pretty darn sure that once the lower was built with a rifle stock, it is and forever will be a rifle, thus you cannot put a barrel less than 16" on it. You can make pistols in to rifles, but not rifles in to pistols,,,, not without going through the tax stamp payment/process.
Again, I'm no legal scholar.

 

That is my understanding as well. Though I assume the mistake would have been unknown to anyone if the picture had not been taken and posted. I’m also not a legal expert so I’m unsure how they go about enforcing this.

 

I believe this only pertains to lowers originally sold in a rifle configuration. A stripped lower would be sold as a “firearm” and can be assembled as you please as long as it meets NFA guidelines

 

thanks man, all good!

 

Thanks and had assistance from ATF, so all good.

 

Yes, I think it was either angle or how I cropped the photo to fit. I deleted my post to remove all the drama about it, but I do appreciate everyone looking out.

 

At one point all my friend owned were AR pistols, but he also owned a full AR stock. Apparently just owning the parts to configure a pistol as a rifle is a no-no, unless you also have a 16"+ rifle to install them on. That was his excuse for building a full-length AR. His wife did not clue in on the fact that he could just sell off the stock. I imagine some of these odd rules are going to get some more attention in the coming years.

 

Im not crazy about the braces, they’re wobbly. I might just do the paperwork for a stamp to put a stock on.

 

According to my friend who’s an ATF Agent, this is not accurate, as they charge for that.

There is one piece that changes an AR to fully automatic (I can’t remember what he called it) but said just having that part, even if there are no other parts of a gun in the house, he can arrest and charge for having a machine gun. This is because that’s the sole reason for this one little piece to exist. This administration will be making more changes and regulatory requirements he told me.

 

Sear. You cannot have a full auto sear or modify a sear even if it’s not installed

 

yep, that’s it!

 

Typically with SBRs it's referred to as "constructive possession" and people do get charged with it. As far convictions... I dunno. I'm subscribed to the BATFE email newsletter and read an article on there about a guy who had gone to the range with an AR pistol and an AR rifle. If I remember correctly he had some kind of dispute with the range master when he left. For some reason he disassembled the uppers and lowers to transport them home and when police caught up with him after the range master called police they charged him with constructive posession.

 

That's the first I've ever heard of constructive possession. I guess it all depends on your location as well. I see all sorts of guns at my local range, single shot, semi, even full auto every now and then.