|
|
12-10-2010, 08:45 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: West Central IL
Posts: 1,028
Likes: 477
Liked 325 Times in 148 Posts
|
|
legality
Since I'm getting into a new venue with my recently purchased 15-22 MOE rifle and 15-22P guns, I need to know if I would take my MOE lower and put the 22p upper on it, would I be creating an illegal platform? SBR or AOW problems? The combo looks in my mind like it might feel good but not good enough to sit in a federal court.
Regards,
Hobie
Last edited by Hobie1; 12-10-2010 at 10:53 PM.
|
12-10-2010, 09:37 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
i read somewhere owning both could be considered "content" to sbr...not sure on that though....
|
12-10-2010, 10:14 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: West Central IL
Posts: 1,028
Likes: 477
Liked 325 Times in 148 Posts
|
|
Holy ****.
Sorry, but if by owning these two guns, legally purchased from a long time local dealer(Gil Hebard Guns, Knoxville Il.)can be construed to be commiting a federal crime, I would of sure liked to know.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
I'm going to look a little more into this but I'm hoping that as long as I don't ever exchange the components, I isnt goin to prizen.
Hobie..........out for now
|
12-10-2010, 10:20 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: West Central IL
Posts: 1,028
Likes: 477
Liked 325 Times in 148 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyFingers
|
I got a chance to sit down and read those references..........Okay, no SBR for me. If I go to a new range I'll leave one or the other at home.
Ready on the right
|
12-10-2010, 10:25 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: West Central IL
Posts: 1,028
Likes: 477
Liked 325 Times in 148 Posts
|
|
Isn't it a sad state of affairs that a piece of plastic could send you to a world of hurt?
Hobie
|
12-10-2010, 10:33 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 3,054
Likes: 107
Liked 456 Times in 205 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hobie1
The combo looks and feels good...
|
You mean, it would probably feel good if you put them together, but you haven't, right?
Don't flirt with this idea or post about it on internet forums until you research the NFA and class 3 laws.
|
12-10-2010, 10:38 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Florence, Al
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hobie1
I got a chance to sit down and read those references..........Okay, no SBR for me. If I go to a new range I'll leave one or the other at home.
Ready on the right
|
I think you'd be fine carrying both to the range, but you might want to look into it more..
Having them both in your house at the same time, if it's wrong to take them to the range at the same time, is just as wrong..
|
12-10-2010, 10:49 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: West Central IL
Posts: 1,028
Likes: 477
Liked 325 Times in 148 Posts
|
|
Roger that
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragon88
You mean, it would probably feel good if you put them together, but you haven't, right?
Don't flirt with this idea or post about it on internet forums until you research the NFA and class 3 laws.
|
Thank you as I just felt that might be okay but that's why i asked. They will be kept intact, no other action.
Thanks folks,
I'm learning.
|
12-10-2010, 11:50 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 3 Posts
|
|
The word bradystrib was looking for was "intent", as in you have the parts and although they are not illegally assembled it's very likely you intend to make an illegal configuration.
I think if you had a 10" barreled complete upper without a registered pistol lower you could be guilty of intent, but not by simply owning the 2 guns.
Same as it's not illegal to own a full-auto sear by itself, owning the gun the sear can be installed in without having paperwork on file is considered intent to construct a full-auto weapon.
This is also why barrels under 16" need permanently affixed muzzle devices to get them to 16" unless you have SBR paperwork/tax stamp. Otherwise you've got a rifle that can readily be made under a controlled length and guilty of intent to do so.
|
12-11-2010, 12:41 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: West Central IL
Posts: 1,028
Likes: 477
Liked 325 Times in 148 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by blowncole
I was hoping to see a picture. Photochop anyone?
|
Just think about the little pistol upper on the rifle lower. Not going to happen in my life.
Hobie
|
12-11-2010, 12:43 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 3,054
Likes: 107
Liked 456 Times in 205 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by blowncole
I was hoping to see a picture. Photochop anyone?
|
Here you go:
National Firearms Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Seriously don't joke about this stuff. You think the BATFE doesn't monitor forums like this? Discussing how to get a tax stamp for a class III item is one thing, but talking about just slapping a pistol upper on a rifle lower is asking for trouble, not only for you but for this forum.
|
12-11-2010, 01:46 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: West Central IL
Posts: 1,028
Likes: 477
Liked 325 Times in 148 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragon88
Here you go:
National Firearms Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Seriously don't joke about this stuff. You think the BATFE doesn't monitor forums like this? Discussing how to get a tax stamp for a class III item is one thing, but talking about just slapping a pistol upper on a rifle lower is asking for trouble, not only for you but for this forum.
|
There was no humor intended. I am finding quickly that I'm into a different area that I never dealt with before. All I'v ever owned are a couple match grade pistols and a couple rifles. My question was truly a new guy question. The subject will never come from me again. No kidding.
Thanks for your guidance.
I am going to research as much BATF material as I can because obviously i can't safely ask a simple question here without causing damage to this forum.
As a matter of fact, no great loss here, I'm out of here.
|
12-11-2010, 03:39 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Just a thought. But since SBR laws are so rigid, I'm sure S&W took measures in order to keep the pieces from fitting. You'd think so anyhow.
I wanna see a photochop too!!!
|
12-11-2010, 03:52 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Ok, here's my attempt...no photoshop, just good old microsoft paint. Here's a S&W M&P 15-22P MOE
Can someone make one with the butt extended? I can't find a suitable pic (well, I have only been lookin for MOE's).
Aieet, I think I got it. The second one has a shorter barrel, I wasn't really payin attention; just whippin these out. I like the first one better, haha.
Last edited by VooDuuChild; 12-11-2010 at 04:03 AM.
|
12-11-2010, 03:58 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: MI
Posts: 577
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rustpot
The word bradystrib was looking for was "intent", as in you have the parts and although they are not illegally assembled it's very likely you intend to make an illegal configuration.
I think if you had a 10" barreled complete upper without a registered pistol lower you could be guilty of intent, but not by simply owning the 2 guns.
Same as it's not illegal to own a full-auto sear by itself, owning the gun the sear can be installed in without having paperwork on file is considered intent to construct a full-auto weapon.
This is also why barrels under 16" need permanently affixed muzzle devices to get them to 16" unless you have SBR paperwork/tax stamp. Otherwise you've got a rifle that can readily be made under a controlled length and guilty of intent to do so.
|
i think proving that they are both fully independent purchases/weapons would be a logical defense to "not intent". but who says law is logical.
it's sad we have to make stupid laws like this because along the lines some idiots somewhere screwed it up for everybody else.
really makes no sense to me that the 15-22 pistol is legal but switching the receivers makes it illegal. it does not make the weapon any more 'dangerous'. is it basically because it now has a extendable stock? the weapon is just as deadly as if it didn't have the stock. Thats the whole "big jail time sentence"? hardly logical. but, thats how it is i guess.
Last edited by grimreaper21; 12-11-2010 at 04:02 AM.
|
12-11-2010, 12:53 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: West Central IL
Posts: 1,028
Likes: 477
Liked 325 Times in 148 Posts
|
|
I'm learning all the time. Just like when I bought my 15-22p I thought a VFG would be really cool. WRONG!!! I fortunately asked about it's legality and discovered I'd be breaking the law big time. So, no VFG for it ever.
I'm going to the range in a bit and run some rounds through these little jewels.
Regards,
Hobie
|
12-11-2010, 07:55 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The valley of Cali
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
|
|
whats scary is just cause you honestly dont know doesnt mean they wont throw the book at you
__________________
Gun control means two hands
|
12-11-2010, 08:34 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: SE Tennessee
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Liked 308 Times in 108 Posts
|
|
As one of the earlier posters pointed out, having both a rifle and pistol model at the same time, whether at the range or at home is not illegal, but having a rifle and an unattached pistol upper is cause for suspicion. The logical question anyone would ask is "Why do you have that?".
Definately do not put yourself into a situation that can, at the very least, cost you thousand of dollars to get out of.
Realistically tho, if the authorities are rooting around your house or person you've probably already got big time problems, that's just icing on the cake for them.
The process of obtaining an SBR, provided they are legal in your area, is easy. It just requires some leg work on your part, some spare cash and a bit of patience. If you want one go ahead with the process.
SBR's and Suppressed weapons are the hottest areas in firearms right now, people seem to have realized that full auto weapons have been pushed out of the price range for the average Joe/Jane and with the cost of feeding the same are just not feasable.
But anyone who is capable and has the initiative and funds can go thru the process and have something just as cool, but with a much smaller appetite.
I have a 10.5" AR (5.56) that i really like, does everything I want except make a loud, sustained blast. Really gets the attention at the range and is surprisingly accurate. I also have paperwork in for a YHM suppressor for my SIG 226 TAC, very much looking forward to gettiig that.
Enjoy the hobby but do be aware of the laws and consequences.
RD
__________________
Got a Phd from Hard Knocks U
|
12-11-2010, 08:51 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Greensburg , PA
Posts: 2,160
Likes: 60
Liked 503 Times in 239 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rustpot
Same as it's not illegal to own a full-auto sear by itself, owning the gun the sear can be installed in without having paperwork on file is considered intent to construct a full-auto weapon.
|
Owning an Auto-Sear most certainly *is* illegal unless you own a pre ban Machine Gun and have the valid tax stamp to own it.
"Regardless of the date of manufacture of a drop in auto sear, possession of such a sear and certain M-16 fire control parts is possession of a machinegun as defined by the NFA. Specifically, these parts are listed as “(a) combination(s) of parts” designed “Solely and exclusively” for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun and are a machinegun as defined in the NFA."
National Firearms Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
12-11-2010, 08:54 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: pa.
Posts: 677
Likes: 225
Liked 611 Times in 226 Posts
|
|
well i guess that the 1000's of thompson contender owners are in the same boat too. if you put a barrel under 16" on a rifle stock-recever you are breaking the law if you do not have the proper paper work......
|
12-11-2010, 09:07 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: TN
Posts: 1,595
Likes: 3
Liked 55 Times in 34 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smithhound
As one of the earlier posters pointed out, having both a rifle and pistol model at the same time, whether at the range or at home is not illegal, but having a rifle and an unattached pistol upper is cause for suspicion. The logical question anyone would ask is "Why do you have that?".
Definately do not put yourself into a situation that can, at the very least, cost you thousand of dollars to get out of.
Realistically tho, if the authorities are rooting around your house or person you've probably already got big time problems, that's just icing on the cake for them.
The process of obtaining an SBR, provided they are legal in your area, is easy. It just requires some leg work on your part, some spare cash and a bit of patience. If you want one go ahead with the process.
SBR's and Suppressed weapons are the hottest areas in firearms right now, people seem to have realized that full auto weapons have been pushed out of the price range for the average Joe/Jane and with the cost of feeding the same are just not feasable.
But anyone who is capable and has the initiative and funds can go thru the process and have something just as cool, but with a much smaller appetite.
I have a 10.5" AR (5.56) that i really like, does everything I want except make a loud, sustained blast. Really gets the attention at the range and is surprisingly accurate. I also have paperwork in for a YHM suppressor for my SIG 226 TAC, very much looking forward to gettiig that.
Enjoy the hobby but do be aware of the laws and consequences.
RD
|
This is exactly correct if you own a pistol ar 15 and a rifle ar15 its perfectly legal as far as the feds r concerned where the problem would lie is having a pistol barrel annd a only a rifle lower.. but you r perfectly legal just don't swap them around...
And check with yhm but I don't think you are supposed to put that can on a 10.5 barrel
__________________
07/SOT2
NRA Instructor
|
12-11-2010, 09:25 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: TN
Posts: 1,595
Likes: 3
Liked 55 Times in 34 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenjen
well i guess that the 1000's of thompson contender owners are in the same boat too. if you put a barrel under 16" on a rifle stock-recever you are breaking the law if you do not have the proper paper work......
|
This is correct and it says so right on the barrel but you can put the pistol grip on it and its legal... you get alittle more snuggle room with a single shot rifle than an "evil gun"
__________________
07/SOT2
NRA Instructor
|
|
Posting Rules
|
|
|
|
|