SBR/14.5 Question [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : SBR/14.5 Question


Fwdftw
02-26-2012, 21:54
So basically my question is this. If i own a multi cal stripper lower. No parts kit. No stock kit. Can i be in possession of a 14.5 upper prior to pinning and welding the FH? Or does the lower still have to registered even though its not stated as a pistol or rifle yet?

Im trying to build my upper from scratch so i can get what forend i want on it and this question popped in my head

Thank you:wavey:

WoodenPlank
02-26-2012, 22:02
So basically my question is this. If i own a multi cal stripper lower. No parts kit. No stock kit. Can i be in possession of a 14.5 upper prior to pinning and welding the FH? Or does the lower still have to registered even though its not stated as a pistol or rifle yet?

Im trying to build my upper from scratch so i can get what forend i want on it and this question popped in my head

Thank you:wavey:

If you do not have a serviceable lower, nor the parts to build one, in your possession you should be free and clear to have whatever upper parts you want. A stripper lower without the parts to make it functional in your possession should be OK.

Kinda like having an M16 FCG (with sear) is perfectly legal, so long as you don't have any form of AR lower laying around.

Also, unless a state law says otherwise, there is no "registering" a stripped lower as a rifle or pistol once it is assembled.

Edit: Side note, I'm pretty damn sure you don't have to pin AND weld the FH - one or the other will suffice, so long as it is done properly.

Fwdftw
02-26-2012, 22:12
Yea ive owned a ar15 in the past but ive sold it. So i dont think that counts either.. lol

WoodenPlank
02-26-2012, 22:34
Yea ive owned a ar15 in the past but ive sold it. So i dont think that counts either.. lol

Nope.

Boxerglocker
02-27-2012, 09:26
Edit: Side note, I'm pretty damn sure you don't have to pin AND weld the FH - one or the other will suffice, so long as it is done properly.

I'm pretty sure it's an matter of pinning and welding the pin not the FH itself to the barrel.... that's the way Rainier Arms does all the builds. If you just pin the FH it's not a permanent modification as the pin can mechanically be removed. Welding the pin flush to the FH makes it permanent was my understanding.

faawrenchbndr
02-27-2012, 10:22
1200 degree plus silver solder is also acceptable

Fwdftw
02-27-2012, 11:19
Buddy of mine works in a bike shop.. Said he could do both but if he silver soldered the barrel would need refinishing?

faawrenchbndr
02-27-2012, 14:16
As long as he heats evenly,........no refinish needed.

chemcmndr
02-27-2012, 17:23
Kinda like having an M16 FCG (with sear) is perfectly legal, so long as you don't have any form of AR lower laying around.


I don't see how the AR lower would matter in this case. As long as you didn't have the 3rd hole drilled and the lower milled to accept the sear, the FCG wouldn't serve you any use.

Bravo 1
02-28-2012, 02:36
I don't see how the AR lower would matter in this case. As long as you didn't have the 3rd hole drilled and the lower milled to accept the sear, the FCG wouldn't serve you any use.


It's called "intent to manufacture"

They think it matters

chemcmndr
02-28-2012, 16:38
It's called "intent to manufacture"

They think it matters

Never actually heard of that particular term before. I've heard of "constructive possession", but I would have thought intent to manufacture would kick in once you drilled the sear hole. Who knows. I once wrote the ATF about using an M16 trigger and selector to be able to move the selector to the FA position for aesthetic looks. The response that I got more or less said "we can't tell you if that setup will turn the gun into a machine gun or not, but that the law suggests you install SA parts. Also, as long as it fires one round per trigger pull, it's not a machine gun and is legal to possess."

Javelin
02-28-2012, 16:51
The ATF put some poor guy through the coals and finally dropped the case (the one I am thinking of anyway).

Long story short the guy had parts but did not assemble. The ATF said that merely having the parts proves "intent". Problem is to prove intent the judge wants motive. Then they have to prove that. It was a long legal battle... cost the guy a lot of money in legal fees he was never able to recover.

Remember the BATFE has limitless pocket books. You most likely do not. They will thug you to certain death in litigation should they choose to do so. Sad but the reality of life.