922R rifle compliance question and SBR

[Acera]

So they see you have a non-compliant semi-auto rifle in your posession. 4473 says you are the original buyer. It is registered to you on a Form 1. ATF has no records of any other transfers to anyone else.

And if you keep your mouth shut and exercise your right to not self incriminate (still not convinced what he wants to do is illegal), any lawyer worth his salt would tear their argument to pieces. You make assumptions that the seller could not have changed the rifle, or the distributor before them.


Sounds like we need someone to send in a letter to the tech branch.


Possession of a non-complaint rifle is not a crime, period.

You don't have to prove your innocence, they have to prove your guilt.

It is not low hanging fruit, that would be tough to prove. Plus federal prosecutors have better things to do, and how the heck would it get brought to their attention unless you have much more serious federal problems facing you??

 

[Renegade]

I have no idea, but I trust members here more than random posters on other forums. So my question is, is there a legal way to thread the barrel of a CX4 and not cross any legal lines?

Ask this guy:

 

[Acera]

Gotta love our governors record on guns

 

[grumper]

It is not low hanging fruit, that would be tough to prove. Plus federal prosecutors have better things to do, and how the heck would it get brought to their attention unless you have much more serious federal problems facing you??

Fine do whatever the hell you want. I don't care.

ATF has been calling applicants lately to inquire about firearm markings, barrel lengths, and overall lengths. Sucks to be anyone who gets a call about what method they will be using to make their SBR 922r compliant and they draw a blank and can't answer the question.

May or may not happen, but those of us who manage information and computer systems for a living know how utterly simple it would be to generate a list of all current applicants and all approved SBR/SBS eforms made from imported firearms. Surely an administration who has no qualms about unleashing the IRS, FEC, and NSA on political opponents would have no reason to use the ATF as a weapon either, amirite?

Like I said do whatever you want, ain't my ass on the line. If ever get asked I'll just tell them I'm swapping out 7 imported parts and name them.

 

[Younggun]

An SBR in itself wouldn't effect 922r compliance. Nothin in the Form 1 has anything to do with barrel threading.

Why would an ATF examiner have any reason to ask how my SBR will be compliant when making it an SBR does not effect compliance?

 

[grumper]

An SBR in itself wouldn't effect 922r compliance. Nothin in the Form 1 has anything to do with barrel threading.

Why would an ATF examiner have any reason to ask how my SBR will be compliant when making it an SBR does not effect compliance?

No NFA weapon is importable for non-LE/mil/govt agency use, except non-machineguns that are rendered inoperable for museum pieces or attorney general approved research.

I'm tired of this, do whatever you want. If you even care what the law is look up the following:

Title 18, 922(r)
Title 18, 925(d)
Revenue Code 5845(a)

 

[Younggun]

No NFA weapon is importable for non-LE/mil/govt agency use, except non-machineguns that are rendered inoperable.

I'm tired of this, do whatever you want. If you even care what the law is look up the following:

Title 18, 922(r)
Title 18, 925(d)
Revenue Code 5845(a)

I haven't said anything insulting. As you said yourself, the laws are complicated. I'm learning. If you want to take your ball and go home I can except that, but I wish you wouldn't.





But I would still like to know, does shortening, but not threading a barrel make a rifle non 922r? If not, I see no reason why the ATF would question compliance on the form 4.

 

[Renegade]

The problem is, as the law is written it applies to nothing. So folks are trying to interpret what it was meant to apply to, and nobody knows for sure until SCOTUS weighes in, which has not happened. Let's see why I say this:

922(r)It shall be unlawful for any person to assemble from imported parts any semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun which is identical to any rifle or shotgun prohibited from importation under section 925 (d)(3) of this chapter as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes except that this subsection shall not apply to—

1) Pretty simple - it applies to semiautomatic rifles or any shotgun. This obviously includes NFA.
2) But only if they are prohibited from importation under section 925 (d)(3) as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes

And that is where the problem is. NOTHING, NADA, ZILCH is banned from importation in 925 (d)(3). ALL firearms are banned in 922(l):

922(l) Except as provided in section 925 (d) of this chapter, it shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to import or bring into the United States or any possession thereof any firearm or ammunition; and it shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been imported or brought into the United States or any possession thereof in violation of the provisions of this chapter.

Ironically, 925(d)(3) is where firearms are ALLOWED to be imported!

925(d)The Attorney General shall authorize a firearm or ammunition to be imported or brought into the United States or any possession thereof if the firearm or ammunition—
(3)is of a type that does not fall within the definition of a firearm as defined in section 5845(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and is generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes, excluding surplus military firearms, except in any case where the Attorney General has not authorized the importation of the firearm pursuant to this paragraph, it shall be unlawful to import any frame, receiver, or barrel of such firearm which would be prohibited if assembled; or

What 922r probably was meant to say instead of "prohibited from importation" was to say "not authorized for importation". In that case, a gun such as an Norinco AK-47S would subject 922r, since an Norinco AK-47S is not authorized for importation.

 

[Younggun]

Thanks for that Renegade.

One thing I've found for sure, the more I learn about NFA and 922r, the more I realize how completely irrelevant and nonsensical these laws are.

None if it makes any sense when applied in real world scenarios.

 

[Jakashh]

Ask this guy:

Hell of a rifle for an indoor range.

 

[Younggun]

Best place to test grouping is a controlled environment.


BTW, that's pretty much what I want to do with the CX4, but I want the can to be pushed up to the stock. No scope.

 

[poolingmyignorance]

SBRs, and SBSs are Title II firearms, and are regulated under NFA, not GCA. 922® compliance is a GCA requirement. There is no 922® compliance requirement under NFA.

Just make sure your NFA tax stamps are in order.
This was according to Mike Rogers of Lone Star Arms, an SOT TitleII

 

[A.Texas.Yankee]

I have yet to see anyone convicted of any charges for compliance issues.

 

[Renegade]

SBRs, and SBSs are Title II firearms, and are regulated under NFA, not GCA. 922® compliance is a GCA requirement. There is no 922® compliance requirement under NFA.

Just make sure your NFA tax stamps are in order.
This was according to Mike Rogers of Lone Star Arms, an SOT TitleII

922(o) is where machine guns are banned. That is the GCA.