What is the legal status of an AR-15 without a buttstock?

[kristo]

I am guessing it's not legal, but can someone point me to the section that explicitly bans it...
Use case scenario: The Ciener .22 conversion kit replaces the bolt and does not require a buffer extension tube.

 

[jdubois]

As long as it's got a barrel that's greater than 16", and the lower was never registered as a pistol, it still qualifies as a rifle as far as MA is concerned, and is fine. But you have to make sure the total length of the gun is at least 26" or the feds consider it a short-barreled rifle and it's subject to NFA rules.

 

[vellnueve]

If it doesn't have a stock, doesn't it get in to AOW territory?

 

[EasyD]

An AR-15 that started as a unassembled Title I lower, which has never had a stock, doesn't need to have a barrel over 16" and 26" overall length... It's not a rifle.

The firearm described by the OP is a pistol under Federal law, again, assuming it was made from an unassembled lower. The problem is, in MA, it needs to be AWB compliant.

If someone where to take an AR-15 lower that's a rifle, and remove the stock, that's fine, but now the Rifle requirements come into play, as that lower it's self is a rifle with or without a stock. It must have a barrel over 16" and an overall length over 26", or if shorter, be registered as an SBR.

If it doesn't have a stock, doesn't it get in to AOW territory?

Nope... Not an AOW. It's not a combo gun with barrels under 18". It's not a smooth bore pistol. It's not a covert/gadget gun.

--EasyD

 

[jdubois]

Quite right, EasyD. I was thinking in terms of taking a buttstock off, not starting with a fresh lower.

 

[vellnueve]

An AR-15 that started as a unassembled Title I lower, which has never had a stock, doesn't need to have a barrel over 16" and 26" overall length... It's not a rifle.

The firearm described by the OP is a pistol under Federal law, again, assuming it was made from an unassembled lower. The problem is, in MA, it needs to be AWB compliant.

If someone where to take an AR-15 lower that's a rifle, and remove the stock, that's fine, but now the Rifle requirements come into play, as that lower it's self is a rifle with or without a stock. It must have a barrel over 16" and an overall length over 26", or if shorter, be registered as an SBR.



Nope... Not an AOW. It's not a combo gun with barrels under 18". It's not a smooth bore pistol. It's not a covert/gadget gun.

--EasyD

So, if you had a piston upper or .22 upper (something not requiring the buffer tube) with a full length barrel, you wouldn't be required to have a stock? Never realized that. Not that it has much practical use, but that's nice to know.

 

[EasyD]

So, if you had a piston upper or .22 upper (something not requiring the buffer tube) with a full length barrel, you wouldn't be required to have a stock? Never realized that. Not that it has much practical use, but that's nice to know.

That's an interesting question under MA law. Under Federal law, no problem. Also depends on the origin of the lower.

In MA, any firearm needs to be AWB compliant. So, it can't be a pistol and weight more then 50 ozs and have a mag that is outside the pistol grip. The firearm you describe is a "pistol" under Federal law, if made from a unassembled lower. If the lower is a rifle, then none of the "assault pistol" crap comes into play.

This really calls into question the definition of a "rifle", "firearm", etc under MA law and its interaction with the AWB. One of the reasons I can be convinced sometimes that a SBR doesn't have to be AWB compliant is that MA law says a rifle has to have a 16" or longer barrel. Just cause something is a rifle under Federal law, but MA has a different definition (I believe a SBR is a "firearm" under MA law), what happens when you then go back and reference some piece of repealed Federal law? Who knows...

Case law? We don't need no stinking case law!

--EasyD

 

[jdubois]

So, if you had a piston upper or .22 upper (something not requiring the buffer tube) with a full length barrel, you wouldn't be required to have a stock? Never realized that. Not that it has much practical use, but that's nice to know.

Well, if it really can be defined as a pistol according to federal law as EasyD states, than it likely has to follow the pistol rules for the MA AWB (I'm assuming this because MA doesn't define 'pistol', and would likely defer to the definition in 27 CFR § 478.11). That means using a standard upper would likely be above the 50 ounce weight limit and have a no-no barrel shroud.

 

[jdubois]

Just cause something is a rifle under Federal law, but MA has a different definition, what happens when you then go back and reference some piece of repealed Federal law?

Exactly. Putting in the reference to the federal statute instead of copying out the text for themselves was an extremely retarded move. My best guess is that you have to follow the federal definitions because the MA law states, "'Assault weapon', shall have the same meaning as a semiautomatic assault weapon as defined in [the federal law]" and further § 121 says that it's own definitions are only for use starting from § 122.

I have always been quite confused as to why they did copy the specific weapons section but not the other stuff.

 

[vellnueve]

But in other states, such a firearm is legal?

 

[kristo]

So, if a start with a stripped lower, then build a complete rifle, register it on with an FA-10 and finally remove the stock... I have complied with all he laws and I have a legal rifle with a 16' barrel and 26" full length?

 

[EasyD]

But in other states, such a firearm is legal?

In a state without an AWB, everything becomes much simpler. You would only have to worry about the Federal definitions of "rifle", "pistol", etc.

A pistol could be made with an otherwise unassembled AR lower, with whatever barrel length/configuration you desire. No stock allowed, or it goes into the rifle family.

--EasyD

 

[EasyD]

So, if a start with a stripped lower, then build a complete rifle, register it on with an FA-10 and finally remove the stock... I have complied with all he laws and I have a legal rifle with a 16' barrel and 26" full length?

I believe you'd be legal, as long as your rifle is AWB compliant. Also, I think your barrel will have to be longer then 16" to meet the overall length requirements, assuming to stick to the AR platform.

--EasyD

 

[vellnueve]

In a state without an AWB, everything becomes much simpler. You would only have to worry about the Federal definitions of "rifle", "pistol", etc.

A pistol could be made with an otherwise unassembled AR lower, with whatever barrel length/configuration you desire. No stock allowed, or it goes into the rifle family.

--EasyD

Ah, OK, that's what I thought. So even with a rifle length barrel, a lower that has never been assembled into a rifle and lacks a stock is a pistol.

 

[kristo]

So, if you had a piston upper or .22 upper (something not requiring the buffer tube) with a full length barrel, you wouldn't be required to have a stock? Never realized that. Not that it has much practical use, but that's nice to know.

I am new to this, but my understanding is the the AWB exists because someone decided that AR type weapons are not "practical" for civilian use...

 

[type911]

That's an interesting question under MA law. Under Federal law, no problem. Also depends on the origin of the lower.

In MA, any firearm needs to be AWB compliant. So, it can't be a pistol and weight more then 50 ozs and have a mag that is outside the pistol grip. The firearm you describe is a "pistol" under Federal law, if made from a unassembled lower. If the lower is a rifle, then none of the "assault pistol" crap comes into play.

This really calls into question the definition of a "rifle", "firearm", etc under MA law and its interaction with the AWB. One of the reasons I can be convinced sometimes that a SBR doesn't have to be AWB compliant is that MA law says a rifle has to have a 16" or longer barrel. Just cause something is a rifle under Federal law, but MA has a different definition (I believe a SBR is a "firearm" under MA law), what happens when you then go back and reference some piece of repealed Federal law? Who knows...

Case law? We don't need no stinking case law!

--EasyD

So does that mean.... If I build a SBR on a ATF form 1 and register it as an SBR with them. I can have a flash Supr. vice muzzle brake?

 

[jdubois]

So does that mean.... If I build a SBR on a ATF form 1 and register it as an SBR with them. I can have a flash Supr. vice muzzle brake?

I can see where EasyD is coming from, but it's not clear to me that the definition of 'rifle' as it relates to the AWB is the same as the definition of 'rifle' in § 121. You're well into legal gray area here. It's another situation where it would be nice if we could get official clarifications from the state like you used to be able to get from ATF during the federal AWB.

 

[securityboy]

The firearm described by the OP is a pistol under Federal law, again, assuming it was made from an unassembled lower. The problem is, in MA, it needs to be AWB compliant.

The OP never stated barrel length, so under what federal standard are you using to say this would be a pistol...

Frankly I don't think the OP originally gave enough info to say what it is, ie we needed to know barrel length and the "status" of the reciever (ie. is it just taking the stock off an existing rifle, or is this a new build). Once he said:

So, if a start with a stripped lower, then build a complete rifle, register it on with an FA-10 and finally remove the stock... I have complied with all he laws and I have a legal rifle with a 16' barrel and 26" full length?

Then yes I concur that is a rifle (and as noted be careful with overal length)

So does that mean.... If I build a SBR on a ATF form 1 and register it as an SBR with them. I can have a flash Supr. vice muzzle brake?

That seems to be what EasyD is suggesting. I wouldn't want to risk my toys to be the test case in that one though...

 

[jdubois]

The OP never stated barrel length, so under what federal standard are you using to say this would be a pistol...

27 CFR § 478.11. Barrel length does not enter into the federal criteria for determining if the firearm is a pistol or rifle.

 

[securityboy]

27 CFR § 478.11. Barrel length does not enter into the federal criteria for determining if the firearm is a pistol or rifle.

I understand the federal definitions, however in practice barrel length and O.A.L. do play into the standards used today...

I shall use a similar example (simliar to say a stockless AR type rifle built on a "virgin" reciever w/ 20 inch BBL)...a semi-auto (copy) of the 1919A4 BMG, are simply "firearms" they are not pistols yet unless and until an "A6" stock is put on it isn't a rifle, it is just a firearm.

 

[EasyD]

I understand the federal definitions, however in practice barrel length and O.A.L. do play into the standards used today...

I shall use a similar example (simliar to say a stockless AR type rifle built on a "virgin" reciever w/ 20 inch BBL)...a semi-auto (copy) of the 1919A4 BMG, are simply "firearms" they are not pistols yet unless and until an "A6" stock is put on it isn't a rifle, it is just a firearm.

If its simply a Title I firearm, or a pistol, it doesn't actually matter, under Federal law. Under MA law, you'd have to worry about AWB compliance, etc.

The 1919A4 clearly isn't a pistol under 11 CFR 478.11. The AR without a stock is certainly closer to the definition...

Pistol. A weapon originally designed, made, and intended to fire a projectile (bullet) from one or more barrels when held in one hand, and having (a) a chamber(s) as an integral part(s) of, or permanently aligned with, the bore(s); and (b) a short stock designed to be gripped by one hand and at an angle to and extending below the line of the bore(s).

--EasyD