-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
SBR Loophole?
- Thread starter RedSoxandAKs
- Start date
The law isn't gonna tell you what you "can do". If the pistol has the ability to accept detachable magazine it falls under the assault pistol regs. if you make the magazine permanently attached, it no longer falls under those regs.
Only BATFE agents have the authority to ask to see the tax stamp or copy there of. So unless you routinely run in to ATF agents at your local range you are GTG. If anyone asks any questions about your SBR tell them to go **** themselves unless they have ATF credentials...
ChevyGuy91
NES Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2008
- Messages
- 22,937
- Likes
- 23,568
Not with out modifications. It is a tight fit on a pistol tube.
Glockster30
NES Member
For the second time, this is incorrect as it still falls under MA regs:
Welding a magazine would not get around it because there is still the weight issue and the barrel shroud for AR/AK pistols.
The definition of “assault weapon” is the same as the federal law that went into effect on September 13, 1994. Specific guns are banned by name, and guns with certain combinations of features are banned:
"a semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of--
(i) an ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip;
(ii) a threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip,
or silencer;
(iii) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits
the shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned;
(iv) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; and
(v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm;
(ii) a threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip,
or silencer;
(iii) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits
the shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned;
(iv) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; and
(v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm;
The part immediately after "a semiautomatic pistol" is "that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine". If you weld the magazine in place, the pistol can no longer accept a detachable magazine, and so it cannot be an Assault Weapon.
Now, the magazine that you weld in still needs to be preban, as the definition of "large capacity feeding device" includes fixed magazines:
lancecolonel
NES Member
Glockster30
NES Member
The third feature would still be "(v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm;"
Let us know how the weld job works out.
To be honest IMHO in MA I think someone is 10 times more likely to get hooked up by the feds than they are by the state on an AWB charge. Even guys I've seen that don't give a shit about the MA AWB, have told me that they still get tax stamps for SBRs and the like because of this.. It's trivially easy for the feds to prosecute someone on an NFA violation. Not to mention the feds always go for blood- the odds of the charges getting dropped are near zero (unlike MA courts which drop gun charges all the time when they know they don't have a leg to stand on, or your lawyer is smarter than the DA and they know it) once they've pressed the button; on top of that if you get convicted you are going to see prison. Not something I'd mess around with but that's my decision and others have to come to their own conclusions on what they're comfortable with.
-Mike
Last edited:
Never had a problem with NFA hardware at any of the ranges I've been to in NH, neither F&G clubs nor MFLR. Yes, other people at the range are going to be interested in your gear -- because it's unusual, not because they intend to sic the feds on you.
![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
I was just being friendly, I'm still waiting on a few more stamps.
Pmags aren't NFA devices, though.80% chance a cop sees someone at a range with a pmag they would be like "Hey where did you get those? I've been looking for them forever."
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
-Mike
There was a rumor a while back about a guy in the Southeast getting jammed up over possession of pmags at a range after getting into a discussion with a LEO about being able to own them after he was told they were prohibited.
Well, then there's the 20%. Would be interesting to find more details on that kind of thing, but usually these AWB cases go into a sort of "lawyer hell" and nobody talks about them much after the fact, how the case gets disposed, etc.
-Mike
With a "non detachable" magazine (welded), it may as well be a bolt gun. "The ability to accept a Detachable magazine" is the basis for the regulations, if this does not exist then the evil features don't apply.
Last edited:
What is the LOP in that configuration?
If you want to get technical... There are plenty of pinned Pmags on the market... Unless someone sees you fire more than 11 rounds, where's the probable cause... At this point you are trying to get the case thrown out of course, but there is no reason to suspect a PMAG isn't pinned if its just seen at the range. Same way detaining you and ****ing with your presumably pinned stock, or trying to crank off your presumably pinned flash hider, would get tossed out in a second. That's my thinking anyway. Regardless, not worth the hassle so I stick with pre-ban mags, but there is no way that just having a PMAG sitting on the bench should even be able to get you jammed up as there is no PC to screw around with it to verify that it is in fact a real PMAG, and if they do, an honest judge would toss it out.
All the cops I am good friends with, and the other cops that I know, have never and would never pull the AWB card, and all are vocally opposed to it.
The real 10 million dollar SBR question relates to AWB features. Definitely grey, AT BEST. In order to be an AW, the gun must be a rifle. Massachusetts defines rifles as having a barrel of 16 inches or greater. Since an "SBR" would not be a rifle by the Massachusetts definition, it could not be given the feature test. I also think a very coherent argument could be made to a judge "this is intentional as an SBR requires CLEO sign off and specific ATF approval." It's not a stretch to think this exception was allowed to stand because the extra scrutiny those with an SBR go through... My .02
Mike
All the cops I am good friends with, and the other cops that I know, have never and would never pull the AWB card, and all are vocally opposed to it.
The real 10 million dollar SBR question relates to AWB features. Definitely grey, AT BEST. In order to be an AW, the gun must be a rifle. Massachusetts defines rifles as having a barrel of 16 inches or greater. Since an "SBR" would not be a rifle by the Massachusetts definition, it could not be given the feature test. I also think a very coherent argument could be made to a judge "this is intentional as an SBR requires CLEO sign off and specific ATF approval." It's not a stretch to think this exception was allowed to stand because the extra scrutiny those with an SBR go through... My .02
Mike
I agree that this "SBR not being in the scope of the AWB" thing exists but I doubt it was intentional. There are a lot of holes in MGL you can drive trucks through (sometimes in the states favor, and sometimes in ours) and they all exist because the laws are poorly written.
-Mike
It may or may not be intentional (probably not), but an argument could be made that it was, or at least that it was intentionally overlooked. If I were considering whether or not to prosecute someone, and the letter of the law said they were in the clear, and they had ATF paperwork and local police chiefs signature attesting to their character, I don't think it would be a good idea to try to prosecute them in front of a jury, because a jury will eat that up. My guess is any decent judge would throw-out the charge. It would have to be a hard core witch-hunt for a cop to wrap you up with a form-1 in hand for something that isn't illegal per the letter of the law, and for a judge to not dismiss the charges and for it to make it in front of a jury. Even the most retarded jury wouldn't convict.
Put it this way, I would be comfortable having an SBR that had "evil features" as long as I had the ATF paperwork and the printed and highlighted MGL references.
If I recall, someone was dragged through the mud for a post-ban rifle being an "AW" even though that turned out not to be the case (cop was wrong).. and he never got the gun back. It's floating around somewhere in the laws section. If they want to **** with you, they will **** with you.
Mike
Put it this way, I would be comfortable having an SBR that had "evil features" as long as I had the ATF paperwork and the printed and highlighted MGL references.
If I recall, someone was dragged through the mud for a post-ban rifle being an "AW" even though that turned out not to be the case (cop was wrong).. and he never got the gun back. It's floating around somewhere in the laws section. If they want to **** with you, they will **** with you.
Mike
Last edited:
True, but.... whether its a rifle or an SBR, if its semi automatic with a Detachable magazine the SBR could possibly be considered an AW. Definitely grey, and would probably end up costing you some serious money in lawyers fees at the very least, is it worth it, not to me.??
It'll never be an issue because it will likely never be tested in a court of law. The odds of someone getting prosecuted for an AWB violation AND the gun involved being a registered SBR... = somewhere around someone on NES winning powerball.
-Mike
Well the law says SEMI AUTOMATIC RIFLE with a detachable magazine... And Massachusetts law specifically defines a rifle as having a barrel length of 16 inches or longer. So yes it's a rifle... but not by Massachusetts law, which is what matters. It's gray because they could definitely still try to **** you on it, but I don't think it would stick.
This is by no means my "legal advice" to anyone, but considering every other person at the range has a post-ban rifle with a "broken" stock I wouldn't be too concerned with an SBR and all appropriate paperwork, police chief signature, etc.
Mike
This is by no means my "legal advice" to anyone, but considering every other person at the range has a post-ban rifle with a "broken" stock I wouldn't be too concerned with an SBR and all appropriate paperwork, police chief signature, etc.
Mike
F
Finalygotabeltfed
Another opinionated statist trips over his pussy and outs himself.
I think every politician and liberal should be hanged by their neck until dead and encourage everyone to go out and do it.
Banned? I'd be delighted.
warwickben
bubba Kalashnikov
When did ar pistols start to show up? After 1986?.
If so I figure you don't have to worry about the sa version of a fa pistol.
It be like saying a glock 17 is a sa version of a glock 18 or a beretta 92 is a sa version of the 93r.
What came first is the key.
If so I figure you don't have to worry about the sa version of a fa pistol.
It be like saying a glock 17 is a sa version of a glock 18 or a beretta 92 is a sa version of the 93r.
What came first is the key.
Twigg
NES Member
Similar threads
