NFA Untouched by Post Oct 1st Laws

[OH IT'S KINO]

This thread is hilarious.

Flipz, thanks for trying.

 

[Flipz]

This thread is hilarious.

Flipz, thanks for trying.

"Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue." ("Airplane" reference)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hd1ciPnTGKg&feature=youtube_gdata_player

 

[Franklin]

so a SB upper is illegal even if it isnt on the lower?

 

[swinokur]

If you don't have a stamp, yes. BATF says if you have access toi the components, it's an SBR. Doesn't matter if it's assembled. Get the stamp first.

Called Constructive possession.

 

[Franklin]

so then that would make thompson contender barrels and encore barrels illegal to then right? since there is nothing stopping you from putting a stock on it with a super 14 .223 barrel. why isnt anybody going to jail over that?

 

[swinokur]

I can't speak to that. IIRC there was a court case about it. Someone else here will know.But what I said came from the BATF NFA FAQ on the BATFE web site.

IANAL

 

[teratos]

so then that would make thompson contender barrels and encore barrels illegal to then right? since there is nothing stopping you from putting a stock on it with a super 14 .223 barrel. why isnt anybody going to jail over that?

I know there are special rulings on some things like the old Lugers with the removable stocks. Maybe it is the same case with these? God knows.

 

[teratos]

It also doesn't say anything about SBRs or barrel length.

If banning SBRs was their intent, the state would have written it into the bill.

Give them time. They don't know what a SBR is. They will, I'm sure, at some point. It will be interesting to see what kind of bills they introduce next session. I can envision some jackass on "our side" getting up and testifying that he can still get SBR AK's and AR's and just needs to pay $200 more and wait 6 months, and their laws are stupid. Then that avenue will be closed.....

 

[Franklin]

I can't speak to that. IIRC there was a court case about it. Someone else here will know.But what I said came from the BATF NFA FAQ on the BATFE web site.

IANAL

yeah i gottcha, just pisses me off there is a double standard for everything

I know there are special rulings on some things like the old Lugers with the removable stocks. Maybe it is the same case with these? God knows.

idk, i know it says in the manual not to put the stock on with a short barrel so it is illegal but doesnt that mean i have constructive components?

 

[Franklin]

Give them time. They don't know what a SBR is. They will, I'm sure, at some point. It will be interesting to see what kind of bills they introduce next session. I can envision some jackass on "our side" getting up and testifying that he can still get SBR AK's and AR's and just needs to pay $200 more and wait 6 months, and their laws are stupid. Then that avenue will be closed.....

its already been said on this site and im sure the hippies have already been sending emails to the SS about it.

 

[teratos]

its already been said on this site and im sure the hippies have already been sending emails to the SS about it.

No doubt. Hopefully they will look at the process we have to go through to get a SBR and determine it isn't worth it. Photographs, fingerprints, background check via ATF, 6 month wait, and $200 "tax". They never met a tax they didn't like. Maybe they will just institute a $200 MD tax......

 

[Franklin]

No doubt. Hopefully they will look at the process we have to go through to get a SBR and determine it isn't worth it. Photographs, fingerprints, background check via ATF, 6 month wait, and $200 "tax". They never met a tax they didn't like. Maybe they will just institute a $200 MD tax......

i want to build one bad with one of my lowers but im so damn confused

 

[teratos]

i want to build one bad with one of my lowers but im so damn confused

Send it in now. They haven't banned it yet, and I guess if there is a problem, you can document it is a "purchase order". Also, unless you are using a trust, MSP will have to sign off on it. Why would MSP sign off on something that is illegal??

 

[Kingjamez]

i want to build one bad with one of my lowers but im so damn confused

Go ahead and send it in. While I may not agree on transfering new SBR versions of guns on the banned list, I do think there is a good case for it being perfectly within the law to use a pre-Oct 1 banned gun to make a SBR post Oct. 1. After all, like Flipz reported, NFA items are not banned in the law.

-Jim

 

[swinokur]

I'm in that process right now using one of my Engage lowers. It will be 8 weeks tomorrow I gave my Form 4 to MSP.

 

[Franklin]

Send it in now. They haven't banned it yet, and I guess if there is a problem, you can document it is a "purchase order". Also, unless you are using a trust, MSP will have to sign off on it. Why would MSP sign off on something that is illegal??

does it have to be MSP cant be sheriffs office?

 

[teratos]

does it have to be MSP cant be sheriffs office?

Yes, some of the sheriffs will sign off.

 

[Flipz]

I'm in that process right now using one of my Engage lowers. It will be 8 weeks tomorrow I gave my Form 4 to MSP.

I feel your pain. My last two took 10 and 11 weeks respectively to get back from MSP. The week I got my last one back tons of guys got theirs back after only a week or two. MSP's signoff system is pure BS.

 

[BradMacc82]

Took 1 week to get my signed Form 1 back from my sheriff. Already sent my app, NFA Branch is quoting 8-10 weeks from time they accept payment till the time the app is in the system.

 

[tc617]

If you don't have a stamp, yes. BATF says if you have access toi the components, it's an SBR. Doesn't matter if it's assembled. Get the stamp first.

Called Constructive possession.

There is one exception... If you have a lower with a pistol buffer tube you are GTG until you get your stamp.