Poll: SHTF and the SBR laws

[ORBrit]

So we've already touched on ethical and legal issues with a SHTF scenario.
Here's my next question:

Scenario: it really is a SHTF situation - rioting in the streets, looting is happening, and general meltdown and the authorities have no control.

Question: Would you take that pistol/shorty upper from your AR and put it on a rifle lower illegally if it allows you to have a versatile but somewhat concealable firepower at your disposal?

This is just a hypothetical question for discussion. I sold my AR pistol long ago.

Read More

 

[Silver Fox]

Nope. I am Mr. Legal Eagle.

SF-

 

[wyattburp]

Hmm...I dunno I guess

 

[Selftest]

I'll bite:

At the point of complete disregard for all laws, safety, and personal freedoms, I wouldn't hesitate to break about any law that inhibited my life, or the life of my loved ones. This, of course, doesn't include rape/pillage/murder/mayhem, but I'm not going to fret over a little "illegal" weapon mod.


hat being said; until that day comes, I follow the rules.

 

[Silver Fox]

It would really suck to have quotes from this thread as a center focal point in a CNN anti-gun story.

SF-

 

[ORBrit]

yep - but it's based on a hypothetical situation like a zombie invasion, so hopefully won't be taken out of context!

 

[matt_w]

Nope. I am Mr. Legal Eagle.

SF-

 

[MountainBear]

No, as besides looking cool, an SBR wouldn't give me any advantage over the guns I already legally own.

Besides illegal activities during times of civil unrest have a nasty habit of becoming the focus of vindictive people after things settle down. I'm not trying to compare illegally building and using a SBR to genocide, but people have a tendency to try to hang (literally and figuratively) people from the losing side after a conflict. No sense in giving them an excuse for a gun that holds no tactical advantage for a lot of people...

 

[Silver Fox]

Russian tank commanders started using krinks as a "Oh... SNAP!!!!" go to kind of gun, but they complained about its short range effectiveness when there adversaries where shooting from 600 meters plus from a dug in mountain side. It was designed for the Spetsnaz and there unique missions, but really hindered the soldiers survivability rating for the non-spec op Russians.

But you have to admit.... SBR's do look super goober-cool!

SF-

 

[terrylf72]

yes i would!!

hypothetical situation

 

[asiparks]

apart from the aforementioned cool-tastic look, I can't see any advantage to toting an SBR over a carbine in a SHTF situation. I think a concealable AR pistol would be low on my list of things to lug around after a zombie apocalypse...

then again if we're playing law and orderlessness breakdown, sure, why not. With a beta mag. And a suppressor. From a GSG 5SD.

 

[Siglvr]

Although I voted no, and I don't have, nor do I think I will need a SBR combo whatever, I can speak with some assurance that I really don't truthfully know all the mundane little complex and confusing dot the i cross the laws on all this crap, and if I was on a jury and they hauled you up for the pistol/rifle combo platter thing, you'd walk if I had my say. I'm a 2nd amendment guy. Big government and excessive needless laws are wrong and not good for our country IMO.

Why you wouldn't want one of those little 12 ga shotguns that are totally legal and bought cheap brand new in lots of places is beyond me.

 

[Martini_Up]

Looks like most all of you need to go get yourself a form-1 and find an engraver

 

[Riot]

No, I would never break any law in any situation...

 

[supergenius]

Tell you what, IF SHTF and my life's on the line ANYTHING and I mean ANYTHING is fair game... ef the buearocratic(sp) BS at that point... Weather or not I use a SBR would be the last thing thing "they" should worry about.

 

[cbzdel]

I am new to the legality of SBR and such but why would one own a Pistol upper with no matching lower?

Seems easy enough to go buy a lower and say its for a pistol and just be done with it.

Or does it not work like that?

 

[ORBrit]

Most people who have a short barreled upper have the pistol or legal SBR'd lower to go with it - I hope.
If not you could be treading in dangerous territory if you have a complete rifle lower on the premises and a short upper.

I'm suggesting that in a hypothetical situation, some might consider having the short upper from your pistol mated to an illegal rifle lower.

There's some that say that a stripped receiver has to be either pistol marked or never been registered as a rifle. Most 4473 transfers are done stating stripped receiver or pistol.
There are some other weird things like if the receiver has ever been assembled as a rifle it cannot be used in a pistol - my question is how would anyone know if it has ever been assembled before - let alone as a rifle??

 

[ORBrit]

No, I would never break any law in any situation...

So if a bill was passed that created a law banning all firearms of any form, you'd comply just like that.
You must be the only person to have never ever driven over the speed limit too!
Never carried in a place that prohibits it and violated a trespass law?

 

[Harrytop]

I would do whatever I took to keep my family safe. So if the shoe fit shoot it.

 

[MountainBear]

I understand those of you saying whatever it takes to protect yourself or your families. I agree. And those of you who say a SBR shotgun handles better, I disagree based on the pattern spread, but that's reasonable.

But what tactical or other advantage would an 11.5" AR upper vs. a 14.5 with a permanently attached break offer in a SHTF scenario? You can clear a house with a 16" barrel. The rifle shoulder extends the same as a pistol held out at a standard shooting position. Beyond that you lose velocity and range with the shorter barrel.

The only benefit I can see of an SBR is as a truck gun or something where size matters for storage. Am I wrong here? What advantage do you see yourself gaining?