The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > NFA Guns and Gear

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 1, 2006, 05:49 PM   #1
smince
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2004
Location: Northeast Alabama
Posts: 2,580
Is this legal?

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthrea...=1#post2420693

Owner says he was deleted from TFL for having too short an overall length. According to this link(which I got from a TFL member):
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wba...st/nfa_faq.txt

"A short barreled rifle is a rifle (which is defined as a shoulder
fired, rifled bore firearm) with a barrel length of less than 16",
or an overall length of less than 26", or any weapon made from a
rifle falling into the same length parameters (like a pistol made
from a rifle). In measuring barrel length you do it from the
closed breech to the muzzle, see 27 CFR sec. 179.11. To measure
overall length do so along, "the distance between the extreme ends
of the weapon measured along a line parallel to the center line of
the bore." 27 CFR sec. 179.11. On a folding stock weapon you
measure with the stock extended, provided the stock is not readily
detachable, and the weapon is meant to be fired from the shoulder."

He says it is 23" folded and was told that it is illegal, but if the above is true, then measurements are only taken with stock extended, correct? So what is the truth? I'm not trying to stir up anything, I just want to know for my own curiosity.
smince is offline  
Old May 1, 2006, 07:15 PM   #2
deadin
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 6, 2005
Location: Ocean Shores, WA
Posts: 1,052
I just went out to the government website and read 27 CFR 179.11.
It's almost the same as the cite you posted from whatever nongov website.
The only difference is that the gov site doesn't mention the " On a folding stock weapon you measure with the stock extended " bit.
At least not that I could find.

Here's the site I was using - (notice it's .gov site, not .edu)

http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/w...cfr179_01.html


Dean
deadin is offline  
Old May 2, 2006, 08:23 AM   #3
MisterPX
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 25, 2006
Location: Amerika's Doyleland
Posts: 809
On the federal level, OAL is with extended stock. Some states IIRC have SBR definition tweaked to measure OAL with stock collapsed.
MisterPX is offline  
Old May 2, 2006, 10:10 AM   #4
deadin
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 6, 2005
Location: Ocean Shores, WA
Posts: 1,052
MisterPX,

Quote:
On the federal level, OAL is with extended stock.
Would you please cite where its says this in the Federal Regs?
I don't doubt that it may be somewhere, but I can't find it.
Federal Regulations seem to be spread all over the place and don't all agree with each other.
I have found that when this happens, a researcher needs to go to Case Law to find which one they have decided to enforce. If 5 regs say no (or aren't clear), and 1 says yes, at least you would have something to base a defense on.

Dean
deadin is offline  
Old May 2, 2006, 12:43 PM   #5
Tommy Vercetti
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 26, 2004
Location: Fairhope, Alabama
Posts: 1,110
A short barreled rifle is a rifle (which is defined as a shoulder
fired, rifled bore firearm) with a barrel length of less than 16",
or an overall length of less than 26", or any weapon made from a
rifle falling into the same length parameters (like a pistol made
from a rifle). In measuring barrel length you do it from the
closed breech to the muzzle, see 27 CFR sec. 179.11. To measure
overall length do so along, "the distance between the extreme ends
of the weapon measured along a line parallel to the center line of
the bore." 27 CFR sec. 179.11. On a folding stock weapon you
measure with the stock extended, provided the stock is not readily
detachable, and the weapon is meant to be fired from the shoulder.

from http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wba...st/nfa_faq.txt
__________________
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross." Sinclair Lewis, (It Can't Happen Here, 1935)
"Orators are most vehement when their cause is weak" Marcus Tullius Cicero
Tommy Vercetti is offline  
Old May 2, 2006, 01:45 PM   #6
deadin
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 6, 2005
Location: Ocean Shores, WA
Posts: 1,052
Tommy,
Been there, Done that. From what I can see at that site is that is somebody named James O. Bardwell at the Carnigie Mellon School of Computer Sciences interpretation of a Federal Statute. It is also full of disclaimers.
I am asking for a cite from a Federal Statute that states the measurement is taken with the stock extended.

Dean
deadin is offline  
Old May 2, 2006, 03:52 PM   #7
Hkmp5sd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 15, 2001
Location: Winter Haven, Florida
Posts: 4,303
That IS the federal statute

...

Quote:
TITLE 27 CFR CHAPTER II

PART 479 - MACHINE GUNS, DESTRUCTIVE DEVICES, AND CERTAIN OTHER FIREARMS

Subpart B- Definitions

§ 479.11 Meaning of terms.

Firearm: For purposes of this definition, the length of the barrel having an integral chamber(s) on a shotgun or rifle shall be determined by measuring the distance between the muzzle and the face of the bolt, breech, or breech block when closed and when the shotgun or rifle is cocked. The overall length of a weapon made from a shotgun or rifle is the distance between the extreme ends of the weapon measured along a line parallel to the center line of the bore.
Hkmp5sd is offline  
Old May 2, 2006, 04:40 PM   #8
deadin
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 6, 2005
Location: Ocean Shores, WA
Posts: 1,052
Typical "grey" government wording. Why can't they just say "with stock deployed" rather than all of the BS ?

The only way I feel comfortable with this is the fact that there are commercial carbines (ex. the IMI Uzi Carbine Model A) that are less than 26" folded.

The wording in 27 CFR Part 478.11 (The one that affects the most of us)
only mentions "modified".

Short-barreled rifle. A rifle having one
or more barrels less than 16 inches in
length, and any weapon made from a rifle,
whether by alteration, modification, or
otherwise, if such weapon, as modified,
has an overall length of less than 26 inches.

I believe that the Feds could try to make a case that when the stock is folded, the rifle has been "modified" into an SBR and therefor requires registration and a tax stamp.



BTW: Chapter 27 Title II Part 479 is the description of an NFA firearm which are illegal to own without all of the paperwork as required by law.
deadin is offline  
Old May 2, 2006, 08:54 PM   #9
MisterPX
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 25, 2006
Location: Amerika's Doyleland
Posts: 809
Modification would entail adding or removing components. Folding a stock is like working a bolt. All my info deals with "extreme ends".
Anyhow, if you're worried that the ATF will get get you for folding your stock, you better make sure you don't wear any shoes with laces.
MisterPX is offline  
Old May 3, 2006, 11:50 AM   #10
deadin
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 6, 2005
Location: Ocean Shores, WA
Posts: 1,052
OK, now that we've determined that the 26" overall minimum length is measured with the folding stock extended, that means that one could build a rifle whose "folded" length would be 16 inches plus the action length. I think a decent action could be devised that would be, say, 4 inches giving and overall stowed length of 20 inches.
Now you've given me an idea. How about a telescoping barrel? I believe it is ok to extend a barrel with a "permanently' attached flash hider or such. It doesn?t need to be rifled, just nonremovable. So build a unit that has a sliding "flash hider" that can't be removed, just slid back. This would allow the use of an 8 inch rifled barrel and an 8 inch "nonremovable" extension. Over all length collapsed would be 8 inch barrel and a 4 inch receiver. Total length 12 inches. Slide out the 8 inch the "flash hider" and unfold the 6 inch plus stock and you have a perfectly legal 16 inch barreled, overall 26 inch plus rifle.

Right?

Dean
deadin is offline  
Old May 3, 2006, 03:55 PM   #11
Hkmp5sd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 15, 2001
Location: Winter Haven, Florida
Posts: 4,303
I think they already invented it. It's called a handgun.
Hkmp5sd is offline  
Old May 3, 2006, 05:02 PM   #12
deadin
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 6, 2005
Location: Ocean Shores, WA
Posts: 1,052
Last time i looked you can't put a buttstock on a handgun without registration. (Unless it's on the C&R list)

Dean
deadin is offline  
Old May 3, 2006, 05:24 PM   #13
smince
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2004
Location: Northeast Alabama
Posts: 2,580
Quote:
Last time i looked you can't put a buttstock on a handgun without registration. (Unless it's on the C&R list)
But it does have a 16" barrel, which is what makes it evidently legal. Otherwise, the T/C Contender/Encore barrels and stocks wouldn't be legal.

These type kits have been available for years in one form or another, but usually with a fixed stock instead of a folder. Adding a stock without a 16" or longer barrel would be a no-no.

I got a message from the poster on THR and he found out it was legal in Oregon where he is from as long as extended length was 26" or more.
smince is offline  
Old May 3, 2006, 06:15 PM   #14
deadin
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 6, 2005
Location: Ocean Shores, WA
Posts: 1,052
I guess I didn't make myself clear. I'm not talking about a handgun here. I'm talking about a rifle, using a rifle receiver.
Let's change the premise just a little. Instead of a rifle, we will extend the barrel and "flash hider" by 1 inch each. This will give an 18 inch barrel when extended and now it can be smoothbore. (shotgun). Smoothbore handguns are definitely non-reg.

The T/C Encore thing took some kind of a special case by the Supreme Court to make them legal, but as far as I know, it was only for specific T/C models.

I've always wondered about the carbine conversion kits you mentioned.(I even had one years ago. It made a crappy carbine.) Apparently you can convert a pistol into a rifle, but not the other way around.

Dean
deadin is offline  
Old May 3, 2006, 06:35 PM   #15
James K
Staff
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 18,649
That "secret rule" about measuring with the stock extended was made for one firearm, the M1A1 carbine, some of which were sold by the Army through DCM back in the 50's. Since the government cannot break its own laws, those guns must have been legal (like the 17 7/8" barrel carbines sold the same way - the law was changed), hence the "stock extended" rule, which BATFE does not publish but which they have acknowledged in writing.

IIRC, they say if the gun cannot be easily fired with the stock folded, the measurement is with the stock extended. The M1A1 carbine, they say, is not easily fired with the stock folded. But that is not true of some other folding/collapsible stocks, so the whole thing becomes a matter of interpretation. Of course, interpretation can only come from a court, which means the guy with the folder gets arrested, put in jail, pays through the nose for bond, etc., etc., and picks up an arrest record even if he is not convicted. Not really worth it for 1" of barrel or stock.

Part of the problem is that what the lawmakers had in mind was not folding or collapsible stocks but sawed off stocks. They never even thought of folding stocks, since in 1968 those were mainly encountered in submachineguns, which are controlled by another part of the law. (MG's, incidentally, are not subject to any of those rules.)

If building a rifle/shotgun, it is easier to just add any difference onto the barrel and forget about it. Unless, of course, you are just going to play games and get thrills by skating close to the edge and thumbing your nose at BATFE. If so, get ready to mortgage the house to make bail.


Jim
__________________
Jim K
James K is offline  
Old May 3, 2006, 08:36 PM   #16
smince
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2004
Location: Northeast Alabama
Posts: 2,580
Quote:
That "secret rule" about measuring with the stock extended was made for one firearm, the M1A1 carbine, some of which were sold by the Army through DCM back in the 50's. Since the government cannot break its own laws, those guns must have been legal (like the 17 7/8" barrel carbines sold the same way - the law was changed), hence the "stock extended" rule, which BATFE does not publish but which they have acknowledged in writing.
Confusion time again. If the Carbines were sold in the 50's, and the GCA wasn't enacted until '68, what does one have to do with the other? The government couldn't "break its own laws" if it wasn't in effect yet.

Also confused on where a 17 7/8" barrel vs. the 16" legal minimum from GCA'68 applies?

Thanks.
smince is offline  
Old May 3, 2006, 08:53 PM   #17
deadin
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 6, 2005
Location: Ocean Shores, WA
Posts: 1,052
Jim,

Don't worry, I have no intention of becoming a poster boy for the BATFE.
I'm just trying to raise some discussion about the rules and the lack of clairity therein.
In fact, I called my District office and asked about the folded/extended measurement. I was told they are measured extended. No mention of whether or not it would be easy to fire when folded. (Of course, as we know, a "ruling" over the phone isn't worth a bucket of warm snot.) As you said, the only thing that really counts is a court decision. And even that can be viewed differently by different courts.

My point being: If they will allow what would otherwise be a SBR to fall out of that category by merely extending a collapsible stock, would they be willing to accept the same type of alteration on the other end. i.e. a collapsible barrel? My guess would be no, but maybe there has been a precedence set with the stock.
Now all we need is for someone to step forward and become the sacrificial lamb.

Dean
deadin is offline  
Old May 4, 2006, 12:10 AM   #18
Hkmp5sd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 15, 2001
Location: Winter Haven, Florida
Posts: 4,303
Quote:
Also confused on where a 17 7/8" barrel vs. the 16" legal minimum from GCA'68 applies?
All of this length stuff comes from the 1934 NFA, not '68 GCA. The M1 Carbine is the reason rifle barrels are 16" while shotguns are 18" and why the folding stock measurement is made extended.
Hkmp5sd is offline  
Old May 4, 2006, 06:31 PM   #19
smince
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2004
Location: Northeast Alabama
Posts: 2,580
DUH! I completely forgot about the '34 ACT.
smince is offline  
Old May 4, 2006, 11:06 PM   #20
444
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2000
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,727
One thing I never understood in these threads.
People discuss how to tiptoe around the law. How to invent stuff that gets around the law. People discuss the exact meaning of various laws etc.

People, we are talking about $200 here. Just get a tax stamp and it is the end of discussion. You don't have to worry about any of this. More importantly you don't have to worry about losing everything you own and spending 10 years in prison because you were trying to be cute. It's only $200 bucks.
FWIW, I own a 7.5" barreled .223 AR15, a 10.5" barreled .223 AR15, a 9mm AR15 with two uppers: 11.5" and 7"+integral suppressor, a 12" HK .308, and a 14" Remington 870 shotgun. I am in the process of buying a Serbu Super Shorty 870 shotgun with a 6" barrel.
It isn't complicated to do and it is only $200.
__________________
You know the rest. In the books you have read
How the British Regulars fired and fled,
How the farmers gave them ball for ball,
From behind each fence and farmyard wall,
Chasing the redcoats down the lane,
Then crossing the fields to emerge again
Under the trees at the turn of the road,
And only pausing to fire and load.
444 is offline  
Old May 4, 2006, 11:44 PM   #21
deadin
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 6, 2005
Location: Ocean Shores, WA
Posts: 1,052
Quote:
One thing I never understood in these threads.
People discuss how to tiptoe around the law. How to invent stuff that gets around the law. People discuss the exact meaning of various laws etc.
The one thing I don't understand is why anyone would want to spend good money to own one of these things in the first place. But that's just me.

However I do enjoy the intellectual excercise of discussing something, in theory, that may or may not be "within the law". (If for no other reason than to point out how unclearly and poorly the "law" is written in the first place.)

So, tell you what, I won't slam what turns you on and, in return, you won't belittle what I enjoy. OK?

Dean
deadin is offline  
Old May 4, 2006, 11:51 PM   #22
444
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2000
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,727
You can lead a horse to water...........
__________________
You know the rest. In the books you have read
How the British Regulars fired and fled,
How the farmers gave them ball for ball,
From behind each fence and farmyard wall,
Chasing the redcoats down the lane,
Then crossing the fields to emerge again
Under the trees at the turn of the road,
And only pausing to fire and load.
444 is offline  
Old May 4, 2006, 11:56 PM   #23
deadin
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 6, 2005
Location: Ocean Shores, WA
Posts: 1,052
??????????
deadin is offline  
Old May 5, 2006, 12:25 AM   #24
Csspecs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 21, 2005
Posts: 1,111
The law is like a fence. If I am leaning on the fence and still on my side I am fine. The fence is there for a reason, if the fence is a few feet off of my side and I lean on it they really can't say I am trespassing until they move the fence to the right spot. So if they screwed up putting the fence in and I take advantage of it I have not done anything wrong, once the fence is fixed I wont do it anymore. But until they do something I am still on my side.

Another one.

If the speed limit is 75 MPH do I have to do 55? If they give out tax tags for 200.00 that let me do over 75 do I have to get one to go 69? NO I can go right up to 74.99 MPH and have never done a thing wrong.

If my barrel is 18.05 inches long it is longer than 18 right?
If I can have a rifle with a 16.05 inch barrel, an over all length of 26.05 with the stock open and a length of 19 closed. I am within all the laws and I do not have to pay the 200.00 tax (that should not be). WHY WOULD I GIVE AWAY EXTRA MONEY???
Csspecs is offline  
Old May 6, 2006, 08:13 AM   #25
MisterPX
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 25, 2006
Location: Amerika's Doyleland
Posts: 809
Deadin- The flaw with your logic on the telescoping barrel shroud, is that barrels aren't measured at "extreme ends". If your shroud is retracted, then your barrel is no longer a minimum 16".

CC- I'm not exactly sure what your post means in regards to SBR's. If you've got a 16" barrel and a 26" OAL, you're not dealing with an SBR.
MisterPX is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2013 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.12793 seconds with 7 queries