National Modifying firearms to conform with laws. Illegal or not?

[The Heretic]

It's not easy to understand any of this stuff. All I know is there are thousands of receivers and frames being sold that were once rifles or pistols. Now are they are being transferred as receivers & frames or as rifles & pistols? All the FFLs I talked to won't transfer a receiver or frame as rifle or a pistol. If it is illegal to transfer a receiver or frame that was once a rifle or pistol as a receiver or frame than a lot of FFLs must be breaking the law.

If they don't know it was a pistol or rifle, if they are breaking the law, then they are not doing it knowingly. I might assume that an FFL has asked for and received guidance on these issues. I could be totally wrong.

I start with the federal law and go down from there. I try to first comply with the federal law, then the state law. I no longer know WA state laws and I have no intention of moving back there or doing a transfer there (except maybe if I am selling a pistol, which is unlikely), so I am not going to dig into those laws.

 

[arakboss]

Just think of all the U.S. parts slapped on imported guns to make them 922r compliant.

Exactly and the "intention" was to make those firearms compliant.

 

[The Heretic]

I would agree to be cautious though - I think the viewpoint that too many people are looking for loopholes in the law and hearing only what they want, or reading into the law what they want, is a valid concern, and doing so risks getting into trouble.

 

[arakboss]

I would agree to be cautious though - I think the viewpoint that too many people are looking for loopholes in the law and hearing only what they want, or reading into the law what they want, is a valid concern, and doing so risks getting into trouble.

I am simply looking for a consensus about transferring a frame or receiver that was once a rifle or a pistol. Loopholes are great imho and if the governing body thinks the loopholes are significantly negating the intended effect of the law they can change the law to close the loophole. That is the American way.

 

[arakboss]

I have messaged a few different sellers of frames and receivers on gunbroker to see how they will be designating the frames and receivers on the fed paperwork. I will report back when I hear from them.

 

[arakboss]

This is probably why all FFL's will only transfer frames and receivers as frames and receivers.

To enter false information on the form 4473 would be committing a Federal felony. Therefore a stripped receiver must be marked as a receiver. If it is a stripped receiver, regardless of manufactures markings, it must be recorded as a "receiver" on the form 4473.
To answer the question posted. The ATF would consider an AR 15 receiver a long gun when the receiver is assembled as a long gun when it is transferred. Again a receiver only, is to be recorded as a receiver.

Source: At what point does the ATF consider an AR-15 lower receiver a long gun when filling out the form 4473? - Quora

 

[arakboss]

Well separating an upper from a lower isnt really modifying it. Its separating. And the upper isnt a firearm. So if you remove the non firearm part from the equation all you're left with is a reciever. The compliance guy at the firearm manufacturer I work for doesnt have a problem with people doing this, and he is as strict as strict gets when it comes to "bending the rules".

Separating is fine with me. The important thing is it changes the way an FFL would have to record it on the fed paperwork. A lower with no upper would have to be recorded as a receiver. Up until around July 1st that would make a huge difference on how difficult the transfer process would be for a frame or receiver.

 

[arakboss]

I have messaged a few different sellers of frames and receivers on gunbroker to see how they will be designating the frames and receivers on the fed paperwork. I will report back when I hear from them.

I received three replies back so far. The seller of the pistol frame said it would be transferred as a frame.

The seller of the AK Barreled action said they would transfer it as a rifle.

The seller of the 1903 receiver (same seller as AK barreled action) said they would also transfer the receiver as a rifle.

I don't think that is legal according to batf guidance so no consensus yet.

All FFLs-July2009-Open Letter-Selling or Delivering Firearms Frames or Receivers | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

 

[arakboss]

This outfit messaged me back and said they are selling this 1940 mosin 91 barreled action with no FFL required. How is that legal?

GunBroker.com - Error

 

[The Heretic]

This outfit messaged me back and said they are selling this 1940 mosin 91 barreled action with no FFL required. How is that legal?

GunBroker.com - Error

Curios & Relics | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

A regulation implementing federal firearms laws, 27 CFR § 478.11, defines curio or relic (C&R) firearms as those which are of special interest to collectors by reason of some quality other than is associated with firearms intended for sporting use or as offensive or defensive weapons.

www.atf.gov

 

[arakboss]

Curios & Relics | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

A regulation implementing federal firearms laws, 27 CFR § 478.11, defines curio or relic (C&R) firearms as those which are of special interest to collectors by reason of some quality other than is associated with firearms intended for sporting use or as offensive or defensive weapons.

www.atf.gov

Doh! I just realized this doesn't have a reciever, it's just the barrel.

Edit: Double doh! Now I am not sure is the receiver there or not?

 

[arakboss]

Curios & Relics | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

A regulation implementing federal firearms laws, 27 CFR § 478.11, defines curio or relic (C&R) firearms as those which are of special interest to collectors by reason of some quality other than is associated with firearms intended for sporting use or as offensive or defensive weapons.

www.atf.gov

They didn't require a C&R to deliver it. I know antiques can be delivered with out a C&R but 1940 wouldn't qualify as antique.

 

[arakboss]

Doh! I just realized this doesn't have a reciever, it's just the barrel.

Edit: Double doh! Now I am not sure is the receiver there or not?


View attachment 711496

I am thinking now that part of the receiver is present but part has been removed. This would explain why they can ship it to my door.

 

[The Heretic]

They didn't require a C&R to deliver it. I know antiques can be delivered with out a C&R but 1940 wouldn't qualify as antique.

I thought a firearm manufactured 50+ years ago qualified as a C&R and 1940 is 80 years ago.

 

[Member 34319]

Keyword:

Intent

I took apart the gun to avoid selling it as a controlled item.

I sold a lower receiver.

 

[trevi]

This is an interesting thread and i have similar dilemma/question. As i am moving from buffer tube ARs, what if i sell my upper and replace it with a compatible bufferless upper (Think PSA JAKL or other), but later decides to sell just the lower, do i need to list it as rifle?

 

[Alexx1401]

This is an interesting thread and i have similar dilemma/question. As i am moving from buffer tube ARs, what if i sell my upper and replace it with a compatible bufferless upper (Think PSA JAKL or other), but later decides to sell just the lower, do i need to list it as rifle?

Did you buy it from a dealer?
If yes, how? Was it sold as a lower only?
Was it sold to you as a rifle?
If the answer is you did not buy it from a dealer and have no idea how it was originally sold, and you wish to sell it in WA state you need to use a Dealer to transfer the lower. Tell the dealer what you do know, see what they say.

 

[trevi]

Did you buy it from a dealer?
If yes, how? Was it sold as a lower only?
Was it sold to you as a rifle?
If the answer is you did not buy it from a dealer and have no idea how it was originally sold, and you wish to sell it in WA state you need to use a Dealer to transfer the lower. Tell the dealer what you do know, see what they say.

All but one are manufacterer branded. The other is a used "franken-gun" sold to me by a dealer as a rifle.

 

[Alexx1401]

All but one are manufacterer branded. The other is a used "franken-gun" sold to me by a dealer as a rifle.

Just let the FFL you decide to use tell you how to do it then. Since you have to use an FFL to sell the lower anyway see what they tell you. Have to guess they have some way to look up the Serial #. If you do this let us know what happens as I am kind of curious too.

 

[Sporting Systems]

In another thread sportingsystems mentioned that separating an AR to sell it and avoid I-1639 laws was illegal. To me that is a modification to the firearm to make it compliant under one set of rules. If it is illegal wouldn't other modifications be illegal as well?

For example if firearms with threaded barrels were illegal in WA and you replaced a threaded barrel in your firearm with a non-threaded barrel.

Or adding a bullet button to firearm in states that require it.

Or adding a compliant stock and removing pistol grip where required.

Selling a pistol kit versus an assembled pistol.

Etc...

Why would only one of those actions be illegal?

Adding features is not an issue, as long as they are legal in the state you're in. Changing the classification is the issue (Rifle, Pistol, Frame, Receiver, other). Separating a rifle into a lower and an upper, specifically to circumvent the law is illegal, as the intent was to transfer the entire product to the new owner.