PSA multi cal lower

[Kswhitetails]

The term "register" has some different uses. I consider a "transfer" as a registration, simply because law requires your FFL to register you as the buyer of that serial number, and keep a record - to be produced at any time the ATF decides they want it, for a period of time from purchase.

After that period of time, I'm not sure what the real term for this is, because those records are "supposed" to be destroyed... I can assure you if they want them, they can get them.

That said, if you have any NFA item, such as an SBR, Suppressor, or automatic etc..., then your state's laws are irrelevant and your firearm is permanently registered to you under the NFA until you decide to "transfer" it to another party. Herein lies the ambiguity in the term "registered"...

Your FFL is technically correct. But so is A5 above. Best to do it by the T. Don't think that the ATF won't be interested in you - should they think they have a reason to be - ever.

That being said, since you posted no serial number, which lower are you talking about? (RHETORICAL)

[Bigs28]

Just because your ffl says the atf won't know doesn't mean it's legal.

[FLshooter]

The term "register" has some different uses. I consider a "transfer" as a registration, simply because law requires your FFL to register you as the buyer of that serial number, and keep a record - to be produced at any time the ATF decides they want it, for a period of time from purchase.

After that period of time, I'm not sure what the real term for this is, because those records are "supposed" to be destroyed... I can assure you if they want them, they can get them.

That said, if you have any NFA item, such as an SBR, Suppressor, or automatic etc..., then your state's laws are irrelevant and your firearm is permanently registered to you under the NFA until you decide to "transfer" it to another party. Herein lies the ambiguity in the term "registered"...

Your FFL is technically correct. But so is A5 above. Best to do it by the T. Don't think that the ATF won't be interested in you - should they think they have a reason to be - ever.

That being said, since you posted no serial number, which lower are you talking about? (RHETORICAL)

[FLshooter]

[Bigs28]

[FLshooter]

[Bigs28]

Them not knowing doesnt make it legal. Posting online is one way they could find out.

[A5BLASTER]

Flshooter need the words we are telling you, don't use a lower that's had a carbine stock are rifle stock on it already.

Start with a stripped lower that has Never had a buffer tube and stock on it before.

We are telling you this over and over for a reason.

Calling the ATF about this was the worse thing you could have done. You can bet your butt they documented your call and question.

Please please please don't not do what your asking in this thread listen too what we are telling you.

[Lastrites]

The issue isn't a brand new lower w/stock, as that doesn't make a lower a dedicated rifle lower. What makes it originally a rifle is when he placed his completed rifle upper on it for the very first time and it still had a stock on it, if that is the actually case. If he placed a long barreled upper on the lower and he had already removed the stock prior to it would be classified as being built as a pistol first, adding the stock later then converted it to a rifle. I always build my lowers as pistols first no matter what the final build is going to be as it leaves options open.

Now for all we know he had removed the stock prior to the upper being put into place but he hadn't mentioned it.

[A5BLASTER]

The issue isn't a brand new lower w/stock, as that doesn't make a lower a dedicated rifle lower. What makes it originally a rifle is when he placed his completed rifle upper on it for the very first time and it still had a stock on it, if that is the actually case. If he placed a long barreled upper on the lower and he had already removed the stock prior to it would be classified as being built as a pistol first, adding the stock later then converted it to a rifle. I always build my lowers as pistols first no matter what the final build is going to be as it leaves options open.

Now for all we know he had removed the stock prior to the upper being put into place but he hadn't mentioned it.

That's not technically correct. The ATF and federal government only considers the lower as a firearm regardless of what length barreled upper you intend to put on it.

It doesn't matter if it came into his ownership as a stripped are completed lower, if the lower in question has had a carbine are rifle at15 stock on it before having a pistol brace on it. In the eyes of the ATF and federal government it is always a rifle from that point on. No matter how it was filed when he took position if it.

The only way for a ar15 lower to be used legally as a pistol with pistol brace is if it was purchased assembled with a pistol brace are if bought as a stripped lower and the first install was with a pistol brace.

[Lastrites]

I'll see if I can find the letter/response from the ATF, but it's not a rifle or a pistol until an upper has been installed. This has been hashed out several times over in the pistol forum on ARF over the years, even look at FL's response from PSA it was sold/delivered as an "Other" not as a rifle. Furthermore it's what the manufacture books it as not what a FFL decides to put on the paperwork as well. Been playing the ar15 pistol game for a long time, somethings are as clear as mud lol and several things have changed back and forth quite a few times in the past several years but the above hasn't.

[Kswhitetails]

Bigs, agree to disagree. The part I am seeing you overlook is that that lower, stripped, not yet assembled. is not a pistol, rifle, or firearm. It is an "other". It was registered with it's serial number to the ATF.gov that way. By whomever milled and sold it. Once that is done, it can be in any form the owner wishes it to be, because it remains registered as an "other" firearm.

The danger your referring to only applies, ONLY, to a lower that was built by a manufacturer as a "Rifle" lower. Meaning they milled it, assembled it, and sold it with the intention for it to have a rifle stock on it; and therefore registered it upon it's completion to .gov as a rifle lower.

Another tidbit that gets hairy: According to my FFL, if they receive an "other" lower that has a rifle stock on it, they are required to re-register that lower serial as a rifle before they can legally transfer it to your possession. I say hairy, because I don't know if this is true. But if mine does it out of the abundance of caution, then I wonder how someone else with the best mind and intentions could get it wrong if it was easy and cut-and-dry?

Here's why I think you're incorrect. If you own an "other" lower, how does the ATF have any idea in the world how you or anyone else built it? Do you call up and ask to register your newly assembled weapons with them? Otherwise, how would they know, and how would they care? You are not obligated anywhere in law to call them or send a letter to them to change it's registration if you're building a non-NFA firearm.

NFA items get re-registered with them upon the form 1-2-4 application with the appropriate tax payments, so they don't apply in the same way... (before some frogman gets hoppy and wants to argue about it).

[Kswhitetails]

Been playing the ar15 pistol game for a long time, somethings are as clear as mud lol and several things have changed back and forth quite a few times in the past several years but the above hasn't.

This ambiguity rubs me the wrong way. It helps no one but the ATF in court. And proves the flaw in the law. Every case is argued based on facts that change on the whims of whoever is in office, leaving the law abiding citizen to fend for themselves. That borders on evil and goose-stepping IMHO...

[Bigs28]

Ks the great thing about America is you can agree or disagree all you want. Ive answered all your questions. The atf would know if you posted pictures online etc. Do they have the manpower to be checking all this stuff all the time? No. Are they knocking on people's doors? Have you ever seen them at a range? I haven't. But if you use your firearm in a self defense situation won't they start investigating you/ it? Most likely. At the end of the day their definition of pistol is clear, "A weapon originally designed". If you use a stripped lower to create a rifle originally then it was not originally designed as a pistol. You guys can play any game you want but a stripped lower is under $40 so why risk it.

[FLshooter]

Bigs, agree to disagree. The part I am seeing you overlook is that that lower, stripped, not yet assembled. is not a pistol, rifle, or firearm. It is an "other". It was registered with it's serial number to the ATF.gov that way. By whomever milled and sold it. Once that is done, it can be in any form the owner wishes it to be, because it remains registered as an "other" firearm.

The danger your referring to only applies, ONLY, to a lower that was built by a manufacturer as a "Rifle" lower. Meaning they milled it, assembled it, and sold it with the intention for it to have a rifle stock on it; and therefore registered it upon it's completion to .gov as a rifle lower.

Another tidbit that gets hairy: According to my FFL, if they receive an "other" lower that has a rifle stock on it, they are required to re-register that lower serial as a rifle before they can legally transfer it to your possession. I say hairy, because I don't know if this is true. But if mine does it out of the abundance of caution, then I wonder how someone else with the best mind and intentions could get it wrong if it was easy and cut-and-dry?

Here's why I think you're incorrect. If you own an "other" lower, how does the ATF have any idea in the world how you or anyone else built it? Do you call up and ask to register your newly assembled weapons with them? Otherwise, how would they know, and how would they care? You are not obligated anywhere in law to call them or send a letter to them to change it's registration if you're building a non-NFA firearm.

NFA items get re-registered with them upon the form 1-2-4 application with the appropriate tax payments, so they don't apply in the same way... (before some frogman gets hoppy and wants to argue about it).