Complete Lower with Stock - Is It Already a Rifle?

[rhino]

So . . . back in 20[STRIKE]12[/STRIKE]08 the week after the previous president was elected and lowers got really, really scarce, I purchased a completed Rock River Arms lower, including the buffer tube and stock installed. It's been so long since then that I have no idea if it was transferred as a rifle or just a receiver. Since I bought it with the stock already installed, does that means it's by default a rifle?

Can it be used to build an AR pistol without legal issues if the stock is removed?

 

[phylodog]

The latest determination I read from the BATFE was that it is neither a rifle nor a pistol if it has not had an upper placed on it. A receiver is a receiver, regardless of the stock or lack thereof, until is has been completely built into one or the other with the addition of a barreled upper receiver.

 

[rhino]

The latest determination I read from the BATFE was that it is neither a rifle nor a pistol if it has not had an upper placed on it. A receiver is a receiver, regardless of the stock or lack thereof, until is has been completely built into one or the other with the addition of a barreled upper receiver.

Cool... that's what I wanted to know. I should probably do some research on the BATFE site to know for myself. Thank you, sir!

 

[d.kaufman]

Im under the impression that it would depend on what the ffl put it down as on the form. If the put as other then you're good to go. If they ran it is rifle then not good to go. Not sure how they would list it since it was a completed lower with a stock on it. Could go either way i guess. Is it possible to ask where you made the purchase/transfer at what they listed as?

 

[Dead Duck]

Doesn't it matter what it says on the FFL paperwork?
I forget what their options are but I believe it's like "other" vs "rifle"?

It's been a while for me so I forget all the terminology.



EDIT- If I would have just read the post above me.....
^^^^What he said way up there^^^^

 

[rhino]

I can make a call and ask! November [STRIKE]2012[/STRIKE] 2008. . . seems like forever ago.

 

[phylodog]

If it was purchased as a receiver it should be listed as a receiver on the FFL's bound book and on the 4473. I don't think an error on the part of an FFL would reclassify a receiver as anything else. I reckon receipts would be important in such a situation.

 

[rhino]

If it was purchased as a receiver it should be listed as a receiver on the FFL's bound book and on the 4473. I don't think an error on the part of an FFL would reclassify a receiver as anything else. I reckon receipts would be important in such a situation.

I'll have to call him and ask him to check his records. It's definitely never even touched an upper.

 

[phylodog]

I believe this is the letter I was referring to but I saw it elsewhere: https://www.typicalshooter.com/atf-putting-a-stock-on-an-ar-15-lower-does-not-make-it-a-rifle/

 

[rhino]

I believe this is the letter I was referring to but I saw it elsewhere: https://www.typicalshooter.com/atf-putting-a-stock-on-an-ar-15-lower-does-not-make-it-a-rifle/

Thank you for finding that for me, sir! The BATFE response to that guy answers my questions explicitly. The date is 2010, though. Maybe I should write a letter and get my own response since their regulations can change more quickly than wind direction.

My FFL is open tomorrow. I'll call him and ask him to check his books to see if he listed it as a "other" or a rifle. If "other," I'm good. If rifle, then that was clearly an error. I don't know if he can correct that after the fact or not.

 

[croy]

I recently purchased a complete lower and they marked it as other and said until an upper is attached its neither a rifle or pistol.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

You have a cat. Schrodinger's cat.

2008? The FFL likely checked raffle. Call and confirm.

 

[rhino]

You have a cat. Schrodinger's cat.

2008? The FFL likely checked raffle. Call and confirm.

I shall!

If he checked rifle, can it be amended/corrected on his end, or am I stuck?

 

[Mgderf]

I shall!

If he checked rifle, can it be amended/corrected on his end, or am I stuck?

My guess is you'd be stuck.
When the FFL calls in the 4473 they denote what is being transferred, ie. rifle/pistol/other...
The FFL changing his records would put him in disagreement with the Feds.
I seriously doubt you could/should get one to try.

 

[rhino]

My guess is you'd be stuck.
When the FFL calls in the 4473 they denote what is being transferred, ie. rifle/pistol/other...
The FFL changing his records would put him in disagreement with the Feds.
I seriously doubt you could/should get one to try.

I'm not interesting in any shenanigans (if I were, I wouldn't bother with this topic in the first place). There may exist a means of correcting errors both lawfully and within BATFE policy that I don't know about.

 

[Expat]

Just curious, if you were found to be riding around with a AR pistol, is there any PoPo that would have the ATF do a trace to run this down. Not suggesting you not do your due diligence or anything, just curious if anything like this has ever happened.

 

[rhino]

Just curious, if you were found to be riding around with a AR pistol, is there any PoPo that would have the ATF do a trace to run this down. Not suggesting you not do your due diligence or anything, just curious if anything like this has ever happened.

That's an interesting point. It's unlikely that anyone would ever have a reason to question it.

 

[WebSnyper]

You have a cat. Schrodinger's cat.

2008? The FFL likely checked raffle. Call and confirm.

I shall!

If he checked rifle, can it be amended/corrected on his end, or am I stuck?

Let us know if you find out if the cat is dead or alive once you make that call...

For the uninitiated:

[video=youtube;LFBrRKnJMq4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=LFBrRKnJMq4[/video]

 

[T.Lex]

Thought of this thread when I perused the AR-15/M-16 thread topic about the "Colt Government Model" roll marks. One of the links to a retail shop stated that the complete lowers were "takeoffs" from whatever model. That means that, presumably, they had been attached to a rifle upper at some point, but were now marketed just as complete lowers.

That's an important data point on the transfer form.

 

[phylodog]

Thought of this thread when I perused the AR-15/M-16 thread topic about the "Colt Government Model" roll marks. One of the links to a retail shop stated that the complete lowers were "takeoffs" from whatever model. That means that, presumably, they had been attached to a rifle upper at some point, but were now marketed just as complete lowers.

That's an important data point on the transfer form.

This points out the lunacy of the current regulations. If someone ordered one of those and had it shipped to me for a transfer it would most likely leave the shipping FFL as a receiver, it would certainly be listed as a receiver when I put it on my books and as a receiver when I transferred it. The reason? Because it is a receiver in every sense of the word. Only the ATF could walk in and claim it to be something else.