Is a modernized antique still antique?

[HankC1]

I built a 7.62x39 rifle on a 1895 small ring mauser receiver/action. My understanding is 95 mausers are antique and I was told once an antique always an antique. So, my 7.62x39 Mauser built with a new sporter barrel and scope base on a new stock is an antique and no need to go thru FFL to transfer? I have a buyer interested in buying it.

[Jim Watson]

As I understand it, if it was made before 1899, it is an antique even modified.
Just because it is a MODEL 1895 does not mean it was MADE in 1895.
It is not a curio/relic any more.

Are you trying to sell across the state line?

If you are in a repressive jurisdiction that requires private sales be run through a dealer, they may not distinguish between BATF definitions.

[Jimro]

The ATF redefined "manufacture" to include "significantly modify" a few years ago. I do not know if that ruling is still on the books, but I would err on the side of caution.

If you are selling across state lines determine if a long rifle requires an FFL transfer or not. If you have little knowledge of the buyer, an FFL transfer is cheap piece of mind even if it does add some to the cost.

Jimro

[BigG]

I wouldn't try to finesse it because the receiver is old. The additions are enough manufacturing to satisfy me it is basically a new firearm. Antique also refers to ammunition typically not available. Besides the authorities may not take your word for what it is.

[James K]

Jim Watson's comment deserves a ^^^^^^^^^^^^.

Too many folks think that the antique (and the C&R 50-year rule) are based on the model date. Both are based on the date a specific gun was made, not on its model date or when the model was introduced.

So a Winchester 94 (1894) made in 1960 is not an antique, but it is a Curio & Relic because it was made before Oct. 31, 1964, 50 years ago.

Jim

[HankC1]

What I have is a 1895 Ludwig Chilean mauser which was only made 1895 and 96 I believe. The guy who is interested in buying the rifle is out of state and he knows 95 Chlean mausers were sold as antiques by many vendors such as SPG many years ago. I do prefer go thru FFL but I don't want to be too stiff to the buyer if it is indeed an antique and no need for FFL.

[Jim Watson]

I think you have an antique.
Jimro says maybe not.

The next problem will be finding a carrier to ship from one American Commoner to another, regardless of the rifle's status.

I'd line up a dealer on his end.

[Snyper]

It's far better to assume it's NOT an antique than to be informed later by the ATF that you guessed wrong.

If your buyer is in your home state, and there are no silly restrictions like in CA, then no paperwork is required anyway

[Jimro]

Because of the extensive modification I expect that C&R rules do not apply. I'm not a lawyer, but here is what I think is applicable to the situation as far as classifying the rifle.

From ATF Ruling 85-10

In classifying firearms as curios or relics under this regulation, ATF has recognized only assembled firearms as curios or relics. Moreover, ATF’s classification of surplus military firearms as curios or relics has extended only to those firearms in their original military configuration. Frames or receivers of curios or relics and surplus military firearms not in their original military configuration were not generally recognized as curios or relics by
ATF since they were not of special interest or value as collector’s items. More
specifically, they did not meet the definition of curio or relic in section 178.11 as firearms of special interest to collectors by reason of
a quality other than is ordinarily associated with sporting firearms or offensive or defensive weapons. Furthermore, they did not
ordinarily have monetary value as novel, rare , or bizarre firearms; nor were they generally considered curios or relics because of their
association with some historical figure, period or event.

https://www.atf.gov/files/regulation...ling-85-10.pdf

Curios or relics.
Firearms which are of special interest to collectors by reason
of some quality other than is associated with firearms intended for sporting use or as offensive or defensive weapons. To be recognized as curios or
relics, firearms must fall within one of the following categories:
(a) Firearms which were manufactured at least 50 years prior to the current date, but not including replicas thereof;
(b) Firearms which are certified by the curator of a municipal, State, or
Federal museum which exhibits firearms to be curios or relics of museum
interest; and
(c) Any other firearms which derive a substantial part of their monetary
value from the fact that they are novel, rare, bizarre, or because of their
association with some historical figure, period, or event. Proof of qualification
of a particular firearm under this category may be established by evidence
of present value and evidence that like firearms are not available except as
collector’s items, or that the value of like firearms available in ordinary
commercial channels is substantially less.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/granule/CFR...vol1-sec178-11

Hope this helps.

Jimro

[Jim Watson]

I have no doubt that C&R does not apply, the question is whether it is an antique.

I think it is, but I would not fight city hall on it, either.
Just get in touch with an FFL. Or have the buyer do it.

[James K]

I would tell the buyer to contact his FFL and have the dealer send you a copy of his license. Then you can ship the gun by USPS (the post office) with no problems and at a reasonable cost, and no need to worry about its age.

Jim

[Jimro]

James Wesley Rawles has a leter from the ATF that states any firearm built on a pre 1899 receiver is an antique.

I don't really trust letters from the ATF as they have a history of going back on previous letters and then prosecuting the activities they previously considered legal.

You can read his stance here:
http://www.rawles.to/Pre-1899_FAQ.html

But the actual text of the GCA68 could go either way.

Jimro

[briandg]

Be conservative in your interpretation. Don't press your luck.

You took an antique "action/receiver" and "built" a gun on that action. You may find people who will consider it an antique, just based on the receiver and a few intact parts, but IMO you would be foolish to be the one who winds up in court testing that case just because you read or you were told that it would be legal to sell as an antique. It will not be your preferred method of doing it, but you should, in simple self defense, jump through the hoops. You are right on the cusp of legal trickery.

Keep in mind that you cannot "build" a rifle/pistol out of an action that had previously been assembled and numbered as a different class of firearm. An XP100 that began life as a handgun cannot be rebuilt as a rifle, under any circumstances, nor can a judge be rebuilt as a rifle. A rifle action cannot be rebuilt as a handgun. You must purchase untouched actions to do so.

[JHansenAK47]

What about antique receivers built into a different rifle configuration at a later date for military use. Specifically a Mosin nagant rifle with a antique receiver rebuilt into either a M39 or Tkiv 85.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62_Tkiv_85

[Jimro]

According to JWRawles even the Turk small rings that were re-stamped with a later arsenal date are still considered "antiques."

I'm not confident that someone wouldn't be prosecuted for "manufacturing" or "dealing" in antique firearms even if the frame is an antique only because the ATF has rescinded policy letters before. But, as the law stands now, as long as the receiver on a Mosin was made before 1899 it is an "antique."

Jimro

[carguychris]

Originally Posted by briandg

Keep in mind that you cannot "build" a rifle/pistol out of an action that had previously been assembled and numbered as a different class of firearm. An XP100 that began life as a handgun cannot be rebuilt as a rifle, under any circumstances, nor can a judge be rebuilt as a rifle. A rifle action cannot be rebuilt as a handgun. You must purchase untouched actions to do so.

Pardon the slight thread veer, but this is not entirely correct, at least per ATF guidance as of November 2014; you CAN build a rifle from a pistol without incurring the NFA, but NOT vice versa. (If you're reading an archived version of this post in the future, please check current ATF guidance.)

The NFA requires registration of a so-called "Weapon Made From a Rifle". This term is defined in 26 U.S.C. 5845(a)(3) as "a weapon made from a rifle if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length".

The NFA definition of "antique firearm", found in 26 U.S.C. 5845(g), is slightly different than the 68 GCA definition. Hence, pre-1899 fixed-cartridge firearms generally ARE subject to the NFA if they're modified into a configuration encompassed in 26 U.S.C. 5845(a). (There is an exception for a weapon "for which ammunition is no longer manufactured in the United States and is not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade", but this exception is rarely applicable in real life.) Refer to the following ATF guidance:

http://www.atf.gov/content/firearms/...ntique-firearm

In 2011, the ATF issued the following ruling:

https://www.atf.gov/files/regulation...ing-2011-4.pdf

To quote the relevent sections, with my emphasis in boldface and my notes [in brackets]:

Originally Posted by ATF Rul. 2011-4

...a firearm, as defined by 26 U.S.C. 5845(a)(3) [a SBR] and (a)(4) [a "Weapon Made From a Rifle"], is not made when a pistol is attached to a part or parts designed to convert the pistol into a rifle with a barrel of 16 inches or more in length, and the parts are later unassembled in a configuration not regulated under the NFA (e.g., as a pistol).

Held further, a firearm, as defined by 26 U.S.C. 5845(a)(4) [a "Weapon Made From a Rifle"], is made when a handgun or other weapon with an overall length of less than 26 inches, or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length, is assembled or produced from a weapon originally assembled or produced only as a rifle. Such weapons must be registered and are subject to all requirements of the NFA.

In short:

• If a handgun is converted into a rifle with a barrel 16 inches or more in length, the resulting weapon is NOT subject to the NFA. (The weapon may also be converted back again without incurring NFA regulations.)
• If a weapon originally assembled or produced as a rifle is subsequently converted to a handgun, it IS subject to the NFA. The fact that a former rifle has been stripped down to a barreled action or a bare receiver is irrelevant; the issue is the weapon's original as-built configuration.
• This applies equally to modern firearms and pre-1899 antiques that use commercially available fixed cartridge ammunition.

The potential issue is that most (if not all) pre-1899 Mauser receivers in circulation were originally part of a rifle; Mauser and DWM were notably not in the bolt-action pistol business. If someone were somehow able to obtain an untouched pre-1899 receiver that had never been built into a rifle (antique or otherwise), that person would conceivably be in the clear from an NFA standpoint, but the issue becomes proving it in court. I wouldn't personally want to try it.

Mandatory disclaimer: I am not an attorney, nor do I play one on TV. This is not legal advice. Caveat emptor and YMMV.

[briandg]

Thanks for the up to date details. Not that it matters in my situation, I'm not going to be altering an firearms.

Again, IMO, he question is not exactly the absolute legality of the issue or what is approved/disapproved/licensed, or controlled, it's whether the neighbor turns him in for having sawed off weapons or the guy at the gun club calling in the ATF because he believes that laws are being violated, etc, and the ATF dragging him out in handcuffs while they toss his house.

The next phase is determining if there are actually violations, and whether or not the case has to be decided in court, or if they find too many percocets in his cabinet.

You've heard the cliche that every person in America can be diagnosed with mental illness. It's true. I am diagnosed with three different mental illnesses. Bipolar disorder, depression, ADD. When I was hospitalized at the beginning of the year, they added Alcohol dependence and several other things. Alcohol dependence? I drink a few cases of beer every year. Maybe a case in a month. I keep liquor on hand and drink good whisky. I have been known to drink 'til I got a buzz, and in the past I sometime binge drank as a teen and for a while after.

Based on just the volume of beer, and drinking beer on a regular basis (i rarely drink more than two at a time) I am clinically alcohol dependent.

If the ATF tosses his home and finds any evidence of wrongdoing or being "unfit to own firearms" it may go badly. In this case, it's wise to look to the worst case scenario, and surrender to the best decision, and that best decision is to go ahead and sell the thing through legal channels as a modern weapon instead of classifying it as an antique.

Somethings are not worth taking a risk over, right?