The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 14, 2011, 02:54 PM   #26
PTK
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 20, 2008
Posts: 442
Quote:
I am aware of a couple of guys who wanted to SBR their Glocks and carry the gun CCW, with the Israeli/FAB stock in a Maxpedition-type bag to have available just in case.

After contacting ATF, their ruling was once the pistol is SBR'd it must be stored and transported in SBR configuration.

You can remove the stock and fire the gun in non-NFA (pistol) configuration for short periods of time at the range for fun, but before you leave the gun must be put back into SBR configuration (stock on). You also must store the gun in your safe in SBR configuration.
Incorrect. Modifications are perfectly permissible even for long periods of time as long as the firearm can be returned to the condition stated on the F1 or F4. The BATFE is very clear on that.

Quote:
Well, I just got off the phone with the ATF Office in Seattle. Here is the official word:

There is NO--I repeat, NO--Federal restriction to using the Mech-Tech CCU Unit with a handgun lower (1911, Glock), then removing the carbine upper and reinstalling the pistol slide assembly.

The one caution that I got was to "check your State's laws as well".

So, check your State's laws.

And, when cleared, use with confidence and much fun.
Powderman, you just got an opinion from one employee. The law is quite clear. A 1911 or Glock with a rifle upper is a rifle, it has a stock. The law is quite clear that if a firearm designed or redesigned (such as with a CCU) to be fired from the shoulder must have a 16" or longer barrel and at least a 26" OAL or it is an NFA item. Period. If it, at any point, had a stock - it's a rifle or short barreled rifle (depending on barrel length).

If you could just convert things back and forth, there would be a LOT of people with MN 91/30 "pistols". Hey, no stock, so it's a pistol, right? Doesn't matter what it started as, a pistol or a rifle, if it EVER had a stock designed or redesigned to be fired from the shoulder, EVER, it's a rifle. If that is true and the barrel is now less than 16" and/or the overall length is now less than 26", it's a "weapon made from a rifle" - an SBR. Period.
PTK is offline  
Old January 14, 2011, 03:55 PM   #27
smince
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2004
Location: Northeast Alabama
Posts: 2,580
Quote:
Incorrect. Modifications are perfectly permissible even for long periods of time as long as the firearm can be returned to the condition stated on the F1 or F4. The BATFE is very clear on that.
Sorry, but these guys have an official letter stating the same as I posted, just as official as those letters saying that you can't return a CCU to a pistol without paying the tax.

No, I don't have a copy I can scan in an post, but I have seen it.

Another case of .gov bureaucracy left hand not knowing what the right is doing, IMO.
smince is offline  
Old January 14, 2011, 03:59 PM   #28
PTK
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 20, 2008
Posts: 442
Funny, I have a letter saying what I posted, as do many other people that I've spoken to! BATFE.... ah well.
PTK is offline  
Old January 14, 2011, 04:01 PM   #29
smince
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2004
Location: Northeast Alabama
Posts: 2,580
I guess it depends on who opens the mail, the time of day, the phase of the moon...
smince is offline  
Old January 14, 2011, 06:00 PM   #30
dogtown tom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 1,506
Quote:
Powderman Well, I just got off the phone with the ATF Office in Seattle. Here is the official word...
It's not official, it's not even correct.
Who did you speak to at Seattle ATF? Enforcement? Industry Operations?

I hope you got their name because you'll need that once you go to trial.
Verbal opinions from ATF, IRS, or any other government agency are worth the paper they are printed on.
__________________
Need a FFL in north Dallas/Plano/Allen/Frisco/McKinney ? Just EMAIL me.

$20 transfers ($10 for CHL, active military,police,fire or schoolteachers)
dogtown tom is offline  
Old January 14, 2011, 08:06 PM   #31
PTK
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 20, 2008
Posts: 442
dogtown tom,

Nicely done emphasis. Hopefully anyone reading this thread in the future will be well aware what a verbal opinion is worth, especially in the light of the fact that even the WRITTEN opinions constantly conflict.
PTK is offline  
Old January 14, 2011, 09:02 PM   #32
dogtown tom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 1,506
Quote:
PTK dogtown tom,

Nicely done emphasis. Hopefully anyone reading this thread in the future will be well aware what a verbal opinion is worth, especially in the light of the fact that even the WRITTEN opinions constantly conflict.
How true.
I'm a fan of the Browning Hi Power. One of my favorites is a WWII era Inglis Hi Power made in Canada. It has a tangent rear sight and a slot cut in the backstrap for a detachable stock/holster.

ATF has exempted these particular HP's from the NFA when the stock is attached due to their status as a collectible firearm. The stock/holster attached to another Hi Power would result in a SBR.

ATF Technical Branch has issued at least two letters regarding the type of stock/holsters that may be used with the Inglis MkI Hi Power.....the first letter issued in 1991 said reproduction stocks "which duplicate or closely approximate the configuration of the original stock" were perfectly fine and did not require a tax stamp: http://www.panchogun.com/FVWebPhotos...cs-5x100px.jpg

A few years later ATF TB issued another letter where it stated only "original" stock/holsters were NFA exempt. So much for anyone who owned a copy.

Bureaucracy.
__________________
Need a FFL in north Dallas/Plano/Allen/Frisco/McKinney ? Just EMAIL me.

$20 transfers ($10 for CHL, active military,police,fire or schoolteachers)
dogtown tom is offline  
Old January 14, 2011, 09:16 PM   #33
Ridge_Runner_5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 8, 2008
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,857
Besides, if you put it on, then took it off, unless you took photos and posted them in a public place, the ATF could never prove you mounted it...
Ridge_Runner_5 is offline  
Old January 14, 2011, 10:18 PM   #34
Powderman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 7, 2001
Location: Washington State
Posts: 2,157
OK. Let me do a quick recap...

1. Did anyone miss the post that I made earlier, where I mentioned that I had seen one of the units in use, fired, and reconverted to a pistol in front of Special Agents from the DEA and ATFE?

2. Second, the guy I talked to is from ATF Enforcement. In other words, he's one of the guys you would talk to if you DID make an SBR illegally.

3. I must point out that some of you guys have been wearing the tinfoil hats WAY too long. MechTech has been selling these units for a LONG time. Not only on line, but through other venues as well. They HAVE contacted--and have been contacted--by ATF who gave the OK to sell the units, as they are termed as ACCESSORIES. Do you think that a company would risk financial ruin and criminal charges by selling something that would be illegal OPENLY?

By the way, if you want to call these guys a fly-by-night operation, one of the companies that carried their units for many years was BROWNELL'S. Is Brownell's a fly by night company?

In closing, a challenge...Go ahead, someone, and post an official letter from ATF stating that the conversion cannot be removed, and the pistol reassembled.

One other thing...since some of you are so paranoid that you seem to be wrapped in tinfoil. On Monday, I believe I will call the ATF Compliance Office in Atlanta, GA--the main office for compliance matters, and get the word ONE MORE TIME. I may or may not post it here.

To the OP--check your State laws, and then purchase with confidence.
__________________
Hiding in plain sight...
Powderman is offline  
Old January 14, 2011, 11:12 PM   #35
PTK
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 20, 2008
Posts: 442
Quote:
Originally Posted by Powderman
In closing, a challenge...Go ahead, someone, and post an official letter from ATF stating that the conversion cannot be removed, and the pistol reassembled.
Sure thing. Your scenario is clearly listed under "Question #1". Do I win a prize?







In closing, I do hope you're sane and logical enough to publicly admit that you were incorrect and misled people.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 1zlakg5.jpg (90.3 KB, 753 views)
File Type: jpg 13z3cki.jpg (129.9 KB, 747 views)
File Type: jpg 2n9gr34.jpg (112.8 KB, 745 views)
PTK is offline  
Old January 14, 2011, 11:13 PM   #36
rjrivero
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 17, 2008
Location: NW Ohio
Posts: 1,348
Powderman,

I highly suggest you talk to the "home office." Call the ATF-NFA branch, Technologies division. Let me know what they tell you. If you want to know about the NFA rules, call the NFA. You're local branch office isn't the correct "source."

If you will take a letter as "proof" perhaps a conversation with the folks who WRITE the letters will suffice?

ATF NFA branch: 304-616-4500

Last edited by rjrivero; January 14, 2011 at 11:19 PM.
rjrivero is offline  
Old January 14, 2011, 11:59 PM   #37
dogtown tom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 1,506
Quote:
Powderman OK. Let me do a quick recap...

1. Did anyone miss the post that I made earlier, where I mentioned that I had seen one of the units in use, fired, and reconverted to a pistol in front of Special Agents from the DEA and ATFE?
We didn't miss anything because that is not what you wrote in your earlier post. You failed to mention that the firearm was "reconverted" to a pistol.....only that a MechTech was fired in front of everyone but the Vatican Swiss Guard.

Quote:
2. Second, the guy I talked to is from ATF Enforcement. In other words, he's one of the guys you would talk to if you DID make an SBR illegally.
Wrong department.


Quote:
3. I must point out that some of you guys have been wearing the tinfoil hats WAY too long. MechTech has been selling these units for a LONG time. Not only on line, but through other venues as well. They HAVE contacted--and have been contacted--by ATF who gave the OK to sell the units, as they are termed as ACCESSORIES. Do you think that a company would risk financial ruin and criminal charges by selling something that would be illegal OPENLY?
One more time..........NO ONE has stated that the MechTech unit is illegal. You keep bringing this up but find one post where anyone said a MechTec is illegal. What IS illegal is converting a MechTech rifle back to a pistol without having an ATF tax stamp. Your undying love of MechTech is commendable..........but note that even MechTec does not address the legality of converting their rifle back to a pistol. And there is a reason for their failure to do so. Why don't you call MechTec and ask them why they dance around that question? Their answer (or failure to answer) may surprise you.

Quote:
By the way, if you want to call these guys a fly-by-night operation, one of the companies that carried their units for many years was BROWNELL'S. Is Brownell's a fly by night company?
Stop. No one called anyone a "fly by night operation".


Quote:
In closing, a challenge...Go ahead, someone, and post an official letter from ATF stating that the conversion cannot be removed, and the pistol reassembled.
Well.........there's one letter.

Quote:
One other thing...since some of you are so paranoid that you seem to be wrapped in tinfoil. On Monday, I believe I will call the ATF Compliance Office in Atlanta, GA--the main office for compliance matters, and get the word ONE MORE TIME. I may or may not post it here.
One more time.......what ATF tells you on the phone doesn't mean squat. If you can't get it in writing it is worthless blather. It's not that I don't trust you would accurately report their answer.....it's that the folks that answer the phone.........they aren't the ones who are authorized to state official ATF interpretations. To get a determination you have to submit your question in writing.
__________________
Need a FFL in north Dallas/Plano/Allen/Frisco/McKinney ? Just EMAIL me.

$20 transfers ($10 for CHL, active military,police,fire or schoolteachers)
dogtown tom is offline  
Old January 15, 2011, 03:30 AM   #38
chris in va
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 26, 2004
Location: Louisville KY
Posts: 12,493
Still no word from the BATFE on the matter.

Seems there's another 'conversion kit' on the market, except it doesn't have a barrel...just gives your handgun a stock.

http://www.ematactical.com/viewProdu...=267&catID=376



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Quote:
This product is regulated by NFA rules. Transfer of this product is regulated by NFA rules.

This product converts a pistol into a short barreled rifle (SBR). SBR are regulated under the laws of the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA). It is illegal to possess this product unless it is registered with Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives BATF&E (Form 1) or you are a Class 3 Dealer. It is illegal to transfer this product to anyone before they have registered this product with BATF&E.
chris in va is offline  
Old January 15, 2011, 05:24 AM   #39
Powderman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 7, 2001
Location: Washington State
Posts: 2,157
To PTK and others--problem solved. PTK, you might want to go back and read the letter in your own post--specifically the third image.

This is the part that says, "It is the position of ATF that if a multipurpose firearms kit is obtained as an assemblage of parts from a single source, the components of the kit can be assembled and re-assembled an unlimited number of times as a rifle or a pistol."

Moreover, I'm sure that you noted that the preponderance of the letter dealt with the Thompson/Center Contender.

No, I'm not a proponent of the Mech-Tech unit. I don't own one, and have no plans to buy one. Still, the answers are there--now posted in writing, and posted on this board.

And, I guess I'm done with this one. Bye, y'all.
__________________
Hiding in plain sight...
Powderman is offline  
Old January 15, 2011, 06:29 AM   #40
smince
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2004
Location: Northeast Alabama
Posts: 2,580
Quote:
This is the part that says, "It is the position of ATF that if a multipurpose firearms kit is obtained as an assemblage of parts from a single source, the components of the kit can be assembled and re-assembled an unlimited number of times as a rifle or a pistol."
If you re-read the letter, it also says "a frame or receiver that has never been assembled as a rifle or pistol".

The CCU kit does not include one of these. You provide your own from a pistol.
smince is offline  
Old January 15, 2011, 07:45 AM   #41
Powderman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 7, 2001
Location: Washington State
Posts: 2,157
OK, so I guess I'll come back to this one for a bit.

With regard to the last post, yes, I noted that. I also noted the part printed BEFORE that, which asked, "With regard to the Thompson/Center Contender pistol and carbine kit..."

The Contender differs in one significant way--you CAN attach a stock to the receiver of the firearm.

The Mech-Tech kit comes with a stock attached to the ACCESSORY, with no provision to attach it to the receiver of the Glock or 1911 pistol. That single factor is the most significant facet that makes the whole thing legal.

Or, so I was told by the ATF Agent....
__________________
Hiding in plain sight...
Powderman is offline  
Old January 15, 2011, 10:03 AM   #42
PTK
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 20, 2008
Posts: 442
Powderman, think and do what you want. You've been given definitive proof, cited the law, and had multiple people point out why exactly you're incorrect. There's nothing I can do that will change your mind, clearly.

One day, you might find that with your head in the sand on this issue, someone has put shiny bracelets on your wrists.

I'm done here.
PTK is offline  
Old January 15, 2011, 10:42 AM   #43
rjrivero
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 17, 2008
Location: NW Ohio
Posts: 1,348
chris in va....

I sent in a Form 1 for a glock 35 so I can put this on it and play with it! Just looks like FUN!
rjrivero is offline  
Old January 22, 2011, 08:55 AM   #44
smince
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2004
Location: Northeast Alabama
Posts: 2,580
Just add the new 'stockless' upper and treat it like an AR pistol:



smince is offline  
Old April 16, 2011, 02:13 PM   #45
Cali-V
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 17, 2008
Location: CA/NV
Posts: 3
chris in va, did BATFE ever give you a response?
Cali-V is offline  
Old April 16, 2011, 07:49 PM   #46
smince
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2004
Location: Northeast Alabama
Posts: 2,580
As much as I like the CCU, I went with the Keltec S2K for a Glock-compatible carbine for just a little more than a tax stamp would cost.
smince is offline  
Old April 24, 2011, 03:23 PM   #47
tulsamal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 25, 2004
Location: Vinita, OK
Posts: 2,454
Quote:
I am aware of a couple of guys who wanted to SBR their Glocks and carry the gun CCW, with the Israeli/FAB stock in a Maxpedition-type bag to have available just in case.

After contacting ATF, their ruling was once the pistol is SBR'd it must be stored and transported in SBR configuration.

You can remove the stock and fire the gun in non-NFA (pistol) configuration for short periods of time at the range for fun, but before you leave the gun must be put back into SBR configuration (stock on). You also must store the gun in your safe in SBR configuration.
Quote:
Incorrect. Modifications are perfectly permissible even for long periods of time as long as the firearm can be returned to the condition stated on the F1 or F4. The BATFE is very clear on that.
I have to go with PTK on this one. It's the whole reason I did my build in a certain order. Started with an AR pistol. Custom DI .357 SIG with 9" barrel. No problem, totally legal. Then got it certified as a SBR. Tax stamp came, changed buffer tube and put on a stock. But one of the big problems with any NFA item is the way you have to plan ahead to take them over state lines. You have to do the paperwork. But the rules clearly say that I can remove the stock, change back to a pistol buffer tube, and then travel where I like with no tax stamp. At that point it's just a pistol again.

Now it would be a different story if I had the stock and buffer tube in my car with me and the pistol!

Them's the rules!

Gregg
tulsamal is offline  
Old April 29, 2011, 10:22 PM   #48
HKFan9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 3, 2008
Posts: 2,689
I have a few friends with them, two of which are police. You are not attaching the stock to the frame of the handgun... you are not altering the frame to accept the stock in any way. That frame is registered as a handgun, NOT a rifle. Like their website states, it is just an accessory. Think of a buying a .22 conversion kit for a 1911 and such. You are attaching a slide that has a longer barrel and stock, but the FRAME (IE the registered part) is still a pistol frame and registered as one. I purchased one used off a state trooper friend, then traded it back into a shop. I have watched them take 1911's and Glocks and field strip them to install the upper before a carbine match. I don't see the issue. Like others have stated... they have been around forever.
HKFan9 is offline  
Old April 29, 2011, 11:29 PM   #49
dogtown tom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 1,506
Quote:
HKFan9 I have a few friends with them, two of which are police. You are not attaching the stock to the frame of the handgun... you are not altering the frame to accept the stock in any way. That frame is registered as a handgun, NOT a rifle. Like their website states, it is just an accessory. Think of a buying a .22 conversion kit for a 1911 and such. You are attaching a slide that has a longer barrel and stock, but the FRAME (IE the registered part) is still a pistol frame and registered as one. I purchased one used off a state trooper friend, then traded it back into a shop. I have watched them take 1911's and Glocks and field strip them to install the upper before a carbine match. I don't see the issue. Like others have stated... they have been around forever.
It doesn't matter whether the stock attaches to the frame, the slide, the magazine, the grips or any other part..............you attach a shoulder stock to a handgun you have manufactured a short barrelled rifle. That makes the handgun an NFA item subject to a tax stamp.

I have no idea what internet lawyer told some of you that the frame must be altered. Once a handgun has had a shoulder stock attached in any way it is an NFA item whether the stock remains attached or not. Without the stock attached it becomes a "firearm made from a rifle" meaning it remains an NFA firearm.

Being around forever is immaterial. The manufacturers of the MechTech are not making an NFA item.....you are. They dance happily to the bank while you ignorantly violate Federal law.
__________________
Need a FFL in north Dallas/Plano/Allen/Frisco/McKinney ? Just EMAIL me.

$20 transfers ($10 for CHL, active military,police,fire or schoolteachers)
dogtown tom is offline  
Old July 25, 2011, 03:52 PM   #50
Mind Bridge
Junior Member
 
Join Date: July 25, 2011
Posts: 1
Update - Another ATF Letter on CCU

I became concerned about my CCU in general when a range officer at a local range challenged me on it today.

Sorry to resurrect, but I found further information in my searches.

This was posted on AR15.com. Looks like it is ok afterall:

http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j8...echtech001.jpg - page 1

http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j8...echtech002.jpg - page 2

Original poster: http://www.ar15.com/mobile/topic.html?b=6&f=48&t=345636

I am going to send my own letter to the ATF and see if I get a similar response.

Further thoughts on this ... The whole thing demonstrates the insanity of our gun laws; the fact that a federal agency can't even interpret its own laws. Laws that are serious enough to result in felony convictions. I do fear that our inquiries into these inane matters justify the existence of the bureaucracy. I mean what would these ATF agents do if they didn't have to unravel these logical puzzles all day? Real jobs I suppose ... :-(
Mind Bridge 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 01:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13763 seconds with 8 queries