BAFTE registration of an SBR

[DickWanner]

If I were to buy this ( http://www.lonewolfdist.com/Detail.aspx?PROD=4505 ) with this ( http://www.lonewolfdist.com/Detail.aspx?PROD=4009 ) would I still have to register my G22 as an SBR as I could use the stock without the barrel? Whats the deal if I were to add this ( http://www.lonewolfdist.com/Detail.aspx?PROD=3988 ) into the mix?

 

[Palladin]

start filling out forms

 

[Cuda444]

I'm asking the following out of sheer curiosity here.

Can you do that since it is registered as a pistol? Are there any laws about adding a shoulder stock to a handgun in MA?

 

[d3adeyes]

why not just get a kel-tec

 

[EasyD]

If I were to buy this ( http://www.lonewolfdist.com/Detail.aspx?PROD=4505 ) with this ( http://www.lonewolfdist.com/Detail.aspx?PROD=4009 ) would I still have to register my G22 as an SBR as I could use the stock without the barrel? Whats the deal if I were to add this ( http://www.lonewolfdist.com/Detail.aspx?PROD=3988 ) into the mix?

As soon as you have any firearm that is "designed to fired from the shoulder" with a barrel less then 16" and a rifled bore less then a half inch in diameter, its an SBR. If you have a pistol with a second pistol grip, its an AOW. The stock and grip together would also be a SBR.

If you want to use the shoulder stock and forward grip without registering your gun, it must have a 16" barrel installed before the stock and forward grip. (This can get a bit complex, see the decision in United States v Thompson/Center http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-0164.ZS.html. In general, you can make a "rifle-like firearm" from a pistol, but a rifle can't be made into a pistol.)

I'm asking the following out of sheer curiosity here.

Can you do that since it is registered as a pistol? Are there any laws about adding a shoulder stock to a handgun in MA?

No such thing as a "registered" pistol. Anyone making and registering a SBR or AOW can start with an existing pistol frame and parts if they want to. There are no specific MA laws regarding a firearm with a barrel less then 16" and a stock, but this is exactly the sort of thing governed by the NFA.

--EasyD

 

[Cuda444]

Thanks for the clarification!

 

[DickWanner]

So, if I got all three then it would be a rifle made out of a pistol and not an SBR or AOW? Or does merely possessing the foward grip and shoulder stock make it both an SBR and an AOW?

 

[DickWanner]

why not just get a kel-tec

Glock > Kel-Tec. Period.

 

[EasyD]

So, if I got all three then it would be a rifle made out of a pistol and not an SBR or AOW? Or does merely possessing the foward grip and shoulder stock make it both an SBR and an AOW?

If you own all three and either have all of them installed or just the barrel installed on a frame, you're OK. You can't have a firearm that's both a AOW and a SBR. Its one or the other.

--EasyD

 

[DickWanner]

So the barrel is good no matter what, and I need to have the barrel in before installing stock , and the barrel in with the stock before installing the foward grip?

Only question is it worth the $250 for a barrel, $80 for a stock, and $30 for a foward grip to get my G22 to be a carbine in .357sig...

Wouldn't I have to send in a new FA-10 stating that it's a rifle, but call it a .40S&W rifle becuase that's what it says on the slide?

 

[EasyD]

So the barrel is good no matter what, and I need to have the barrel in before installing stock , and the barrel in with the stock before installing the foward grip?

Only question is it worth the $250 for a barrel, $80 for a stock, and $30 for a foward grip to get my G22 to be a carbine in .357sig...

Wouldn't I have to send in a new FA-10 stating that it's a rifle, but call it a .40S&W rifle becuase that's what it says on the slide?

Yep, you got it. Restore to pistol in reverse order.

No idea if its worth the $$$... The only Glocks I've shot with a stock and forward grip where full-auto, in which case it was pretty nice to have them!

Not sure about the FA-10... I personally wouldn't do one as you haven't added to the total number of firearms, just temporarily changed ones configuration.

--EasyD

 

[DickWanner]

Sounds good to me. I'll hold off on this $360+ investment until after I pick up a Saiga-12, Kel-Tec, and Ruger snubbie and then see if I still want it. It would be a pretty cool toy to show off at the shoots though, and I'm sure DT .357sig 125gr would scream through the extra 10"+ of barrel. That and a handgun scope mount and scope would be pretty badass and I'm sure you could nail targets at 100 yards pretty damn easily.

 

[abomb60]

NFA items aren't registered again with an FA-10. You would register the host firearm (pistol in this case) with an FA-10 when you purchased it. No further state forms would be required now that it's an SBR. The state defines a rifle as having a 16"+ barrel and a pistol as having less. The fed's define a rifle as having a stock and 16"+ barrel and an sbr as having less than a 16" barrel and a stock.

 

[DickWanner]

So would I have to register the pistol as a rifle in the state on another FA-10 form? What if I wanted to go back and forth between pistol and rifle form?

 

[Major Blood]

Three words: Utterly Butt Ugly

It should be illegal to do this to a Glock.

 

[Mass-diver]

. If you have a pistol with a second pistol grip, its an AOW. The stock and grip together would also be a SBR.
--EasyD

This is why you can't mount a vertical grip (AR-15 style) on a glock light rail, right?

 

[EasyD]

This is why you can't mount a vertical grip (AR-15 style) on a glock light rail, right?

Right... You can mount the vert grip, but the gun would be an illegal AOW, unless you registered it before mounting said grip.

--EasyD

 

[Mass-diver]

Right... You can mount the vert grip, but the gun would be an illegal AOW, unless you registered it before mounting said grip.

--EasyD

Thanks.


And of course, in addition to the $200 tax my CLEO would have to sign off while I'd love to do this, it's just north worth it. The bummer is that I don't think the law would stand up in court - I just don't to be the one to test it (espically wit 10 years on the line)

 

[DickWanner]

Three words: Utterly Butt Ugly

It should be illegal to do this to a Glock.

Matter of opinion. Some think that Glocks in stock form are plain ugly too. I myself go for function and not looks.

 

[Major Blood]

Matter of opinion. Some think that Glocks in stock form are plain ugly too. I myself go for function and not looks.

Agreed. I feel the same way, my comment was referring to not only the looks, but the idea of turning a pistol into an sbr...*shudder....not the most functional, practical route to go, in my humble opinion of course.

 

[DickWanner]

Agreed. I feel the same way, my comment was referring to not only the looks, but the idea of turning a pistol into an sbr...*shudder....not the most functional, practical route to go, in my humble opinion of course.

If I were to do it, I'd turn my G22 into a .357sig carbine with a foward grip. An SBR that is not FA/BUST is pointless IMHO.