Would it be legal to add a stock to a pistol with 16" barrel?

[ilikegunspdx]

Was just thinking about can u add a stock (not brace) to a heritage revolver which was manufactured as a pistol with a 16" barrel? I mean without turning it into an sbr.

I'm thinking along the lines of the Hollywood bunt line removable stock things. More just curious about legality than actually doing the project most likely, although I do have an old wood stock I could convert probably.

Read More

 

[Unka-Boo]

if the bbl is 16" you shoud be GTG

 

[Flopsweat]

if the bbl is 16" you shoud be GTG

My understanding is that you can turn a pistol into a rifle (barrel length considered) but not vice versa. Also a rifle that was originally a pistol can be changed back to a pistol but if it started out as a rifle, that is not permitted. That's my understanding of it but I make no promises as to the accuracy of that opinion.

 

[po18guy]

The answer from, guess who?

If a person has a pistol and an attachable shoulder stock, does this constitute possession of an NFA firearm? | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

Yes, unless the barrel of the pistol is at least 16 inches in length (and the overall length of the firearm with stock attached is at least 26 inches). However, certain stocked handguns, such as original semiautomatic Mauser “Broomhandles” and Lugers, have been removed from the purview of the...

www.atf.gov

Focus on the "unless"

 

[mpmax]

Legal with or without the stock. Without the 16" barrel, illegal.

 

[CountryGent]

Some additional details from BATFE here.

 

[The Heretic]

1) 16"+ barrel

and

2) 26"+ OAL

 

[The Heretic]

My understanding is that you can turn a pistol into a rifle (barrel length considered) but not vice versa. Also a rifle that was originally a pistol can be changed back to a pistol but if it started out as a rifle, that is not permitted. That's my understanding of it but I make no promises as to the accuracy of that opinion.

Correct.

If originally a rifle, can't go to a handgun, with a barrel less than 16" it legally becomes an SBR regardless of stock.

But if it was originally a handgun, you can go to a rifle and back to a handgun.

Thompson Center vs ATF

United States v. Thompson/Center Arms Co., 504 U.S. 505 (1992).

www.law.cornell.edu

 

[TTSX]

Legal with or without the stock. Without the 16" barrel, illegal.View attachment 1063521

Keep being reminded I want one of those

 

[CountryGent]

Relevant ATF Q&A entry for the "started life as a rifle" scenario here.

 

[Flopsweat]

Correct.

If originally a rifle, can't go to a handgun, with a barrel less than 16" it legally becomes an SBR regardless of stock.

But if it was originally a handgun, you can go to a rifle and back to a handgun.

Thompson Center vs ATF

United States v. Thompson/Center Arms Co., 504 U.S. 505 (1992).

www.law.cornell.edu

This is why I build all of my AR receivers as pistols first. There is no wondering if I can switch one of my lower builds around. They have all been pistols. I have a pistol buffer tube that I loan to friends so they can be sure build a pistol first.

 

[TTSX]

This is why I build all of my AR receivers as pistols first. There is no wondering if I can switch one of my lower builds around. They have all been pistols. I have a pistol buffer tube that I loan to friends so they can be sure build a pistol first.

Unless pictures are taken in pistol form or video taken of assembly, how can it be proven they were once pistols if sold as a receiver? Or opposite, that they were never rifles.

 

[Flopsweat]

Unless pictures are taken in pistol form or video taken of assembly, how can it be proven they were once pistols if sold as a receiver? Or opposite, that they were never rifles.

Why would I need proof?

 

[osprey]

Absolutely you can! I bought a cva pistol in 6.5 creedmoor with a 14" barrel. I had a different vision for it. Being the barrel was threaded, I found a flash suppressor long enough to make barrel over 16" and proceeded to pin and weld it onto barrel. I then cobbled a rifle stock on it with a bit of machining and devcon epoxy to make it work. I now have a perfectly legal and handy little hunting rifle. It also breaks down pretty small to go into a backpack.

 

[Stomper]

Unless pictures are taken in pistol form or video taken of assembly, how can it be proven they were once pistols if sold as a receiver? Or opposite, that they were never rifles.

This is a classic example of what "the state" depends on….. people forgetting that the burden of proof (ie- to show it was/wasn't originally assembled as a rifle) is ON THE STATE, not the citizen.


A right not claimed is a right surrendered and lost.

 

[TTSX]

Why would I need proof?

Then why do you need the pistol tube at all? Just say they were pistols and make government prove they weren't. Not being argumentative, asking questions

 

[The Heretic]

Right now, the burden of proof is on the gov side.

But it doesn't hurt to have some evidence yourself - you never know what the gov will do with laws/courts/etc., and a jury is unpredictable. Even judges can't be relied on. Doesn't hurt to go the extra step.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Then why do you need the pistol tube at all? Just say they were pistols and make government prove they weren't. Not being argumentative, asking questions

Re ARs, one Q I have is In Oregon my understanding is that all lowers when transferred by FFL are not designated as a pistol or rifle (someone correct me if I'm wrong please).

So my q is, for OR only, would any of the following be any different in terms of the new owners ability to turn it into either a pistol or rifle?

(1) new a stripped lower (never previously registered)
(2) used lower (was previously registered neither as a rifle or pistol because it was bought new by previous owner as a stripped lower in OR)
(3) used lower from another state that was registered upon previous transfer by previous owner as a pistol
(4) used lower from another state that was registered upon previous transfer by previous owner as a rifle

 

[Flopsweat]

Then why do you need the pistol tube at all? Just say they were pistols and make government prove they weren't. Not being argumentative, asking questions

Because I don't like lying. Nor do I advocate breaking the law.

 

[Stomper]

Re ARs, one Q I have is In Oregon my understanding is that all lowers when transferred by FFL are not designated as a pistol or rifle (someone correct me if I'm wrong please).

So my q is, for OR only, would any of the following be any different in terms of the new owners ability to turn it into either a pistol or rifle?

(1) new a stripped lower (never previously registered)
(2) used lower (was previously registered neither as a rifle or pistol because it was bought new by previous owner as a stripped lower in OR)
(3) used lower from another state that was registered upon previous transfer by previous owner as a pistol
(4) used lower from another state that was registered upon previous transfer by previous owner as a rifle

Answers in order:

1) new stripped lowers = firearm

2) used stripped lower = firearm

3) Out of state lower "registered" as a pistol = pistol

4) Out of state lower "registered" as a rifle = rifle.



Pistols may go from rifle (>/=16"bbl) or NFA tax-stamped SBR (<16"bbl) and back to a pistol. For instance, I could take my Draco (AK pistol) that I (legally) SBR'd and remove the stock (and mounting trunnion) and it'd be legally considered a pistol while in THAT configuration, then put the stock back on it and it's a (NFA registered) SBR again.

Pretty much once a rifle (or shotgun) from the start, it's always a rifle (or shotgun), it's seemingly just the opposite for a "pistol" or "firearm".