So the Colt OEM that's sold with no stock (just a bare receiver extension), is that a candidate for putting a brace on with a short upper and turning into a pistol?
So the Colt OEM that's sold with no stock (just a bare receiver extension), is that a candidate for putting a brace on with a short upper and turning into a pistol?
It’s a complete rifle and is sold as such.
https://i.imgur.com/UhFIRy3.jpg
Depends on what Colt calls it from the factory. I could see it being an "Other Title I" like the Troy A4, but if it's marketed as a rifle Colt probably papered it that way and "first rifle forevermore rifle."
I would check the copy of the form that you have. You did keep the copy and stored it in an organized fashion correct? :cool:
The Brownell's Spares lower Colt P/N SP633784 from about 2017 is probably the only Colt lower that is pistol eligible.
.
https://i.ibb.co/xs4fHMy/Colt-spare-...rownells-2.jpg
I KNOW someone will correct if I'm wrong. What's written on the 4473 is "just paperwork"
IE: If you bought a pistol, or stripped lower, and it was marked as "rifle"..it doesn't matter, it was an error on paperwork.
If it didn't have a stock, and it was too long to be a pistol (26"+ OAL) then it can't be a rifle, by their definition. It's an "any other weapon", "firearm" or "title 1" if over 16" barrel installed.
Sorry, that's hard to process after reading it 13 times, re-writing, deleting it, then writing again.
"This is legal, except if that, but unless you do this, and then maybe that, but we haven't got that far" - AFT
How bad do you want a fight it in court at a later date, that's up to the owner.
Now if said lower was previously purchased as a rifle, and had a stock on + literally any functioning upper, it's always going to be a rifle. (The way the law is written) The stock is very important. "designed to be shouldered" So if one built a virgin <16" gun with a stock, it would still always be a rifle, regardless of barrel length. (Don't even get into NFA, legality, etc). Here's the real kicker...stocks don't define shit until it has a barrel installed. Complete lowers with a stock = other until pinned to a functioning upper.
If it's a functioning gun that had a stock, it's a rifle, done and done. (does it matter if the gun is functional before the stock was installed? Need a trial to decide that..the way the law is written, no, but maybe IE constructive possession, etc, etc)
The laws are ridiculous and the fact I had to edit this 17 times makes me realize it more.
To answer your question directly, if it didn't have a stock, it's legally impossible for it be a rifle by the black/white definition as you bought it, as long as it wasn't previously sold as a rifle or SBR.
This is the THING you need to know....if it is virgin, you can put a <16" barrel. If it's cherry was popped with a stock than any functional upper...it's a rifle.
So what happens if you buy a "firearm" IE no stock but over 26". I don't know. I'd assume it was never a rifle so pistol to rifle and back is GTG. I'm sure some will correct me.
Once again...the laws are silly.
Even in my best attempt, I managed to be hypocritical in my text...gerrrr...That's how the laws are written.
Back to OP. You bought a functional gun, with no stock....was it factory fresh? You need to figure that out.
Interestingly enough, without going back to view the thread, someone called Colt to inquire about the lowers sold by Brownell’s, and Colt informed they had come from complete rifles. Something along those lines.
You can make this as convoluted as you want. Remember, what any law says isn’t all it says. That’s why we pay lawyers. It’s your call whether something a simple as using a different lower as a pistol is inconvenient enough (or muh rights enough) to be the test case.
The Colt Spares P/N SP633784 from Brownell's were never a rifle.
The ATF has no sense of humor, if your lower was not transferred as something other than a rifle, no amount of "But I read it on the Internet, it has to be true.", will save your ass.
https://i.ibb.co/3zV5wJh/Colt-Pistol-Lower.jpg[
What the 4473 states does not define the weapon. The configuration of the weapon does. ATF says a rifle has a stock. ATF says a pistol does not have a stock.
There are probably other weapons that would be easier to prove were a pistol from the factory, but by ATF definition, if it's made without a stock, it's a pistol.
An alleged FFL writes this:
When an FFL transfers a OEM6920 to a buyer, it's recorded on the Form 4473 as "Other Firearm" on Question 16 and "firearm" (or barreled action/barreled receiver) on Question 27.
After the buyer leaves he can configure that firearm however he wants: OEM6920 with one grip= "Pistol"
I would make sure your 4473 says the right things, and you get a copy of it.
Good luck.
.
yes....
eta
It meets this definition:
(30)The term “handgun” means—
(A)a firearm which has a short stock and is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand; and
(B)any combination of parts from which a firearm described in subparagraph (A) can be assembled.
So it is a handgun, and then within handgun it is a pistol.
A BARE receiver can be designated a rifle or a handgun by the manufacturer. So absolutely it matters how the manufacturer classified it. This is why a "receiver only" designation was created so people could build as either. The determination is made at the manufacturer level, not by whatever box a FFL checks off on a 4473.
Do you really think ATF would leave it in the hands of a FFL to determine if a firearm is a handgun or a long gun?
Renegade is usually on point so I was waiting on him to check in, but if you take a rifle back to a bare receiver, it's still a rifle. And the determination is made by the manufacturer last time I checked. If he has something more current or if something changed I'm prepared to accept it.
Well I think what Renegade is saying is that the determination is made by what it is, defined by its features, irrespective of what the manufacturer or FFL chooses to call it. There are legal definitions that aren't open to interpretation. It has no buttstock and therefore can't be a rifle, it would seem.
If they came from the factory with stocks, then yes that's obviously true.
This might be a good time to mention this isn't the only place I've asked this specific question about this specific model, and Renegade seemingly isn't the only FFL to tell me what he did. I'm not 100% ready to say case closed and put a brace on one yet, but it's looking pretty close to being a settled question at this point, and the unanimous opinion of FFLs so far is that Renegade is correct.
If the receiver is NOT designated as a rifle, you are good to go. Really thought I said that earlier. But IF the manufacturer designated it as a rifle, then it's EXACTLY the same as if it came with stocks. It's a rifle. This is why everyone loves the pistols with braces, even the one's with 16" barrels. Put a stock on it and it's now a rifle.
No a bare receiver is just that, a receiver. Classifying it any other way is an error.
There are two issues being confused here
1 is what is it at time of mfg, and in this case a receiver is a receiver at time of mfg. It is not yet a rifle or handgun
2 is what it is after it has been made into something and remade into something else. This is the confusing part as some definitions have the wording “remade” which mean it is not what it appears to be since it was remade.
See definition of handgun I posted above. Handguns cannot be remade from another weapon like rifles can.
Ok, help me with my confusion.
In the past 1911 kits have allowed you to install a 16" barrel and then a stock, thus creating a 1911 rifle from a handgun.
I agree the designation begins at the time of mfg. but when Colt makes OEM models with 16" M4 barrels and M4 stock tubes, is that not a rifle even if it doesn't yet have a stock?
And finally the big one, if Colt makes a receiver ONLY but they designate it as a M4 "long arm" receiver, how can you make a handgun from that when it's been designated as a long gun by the manufacturer?
It is really possible to undue their stated configuration by how we enter the classification in our bound book?
I once had a FMP receiver and the ATF inspector really wanted me to indicate it as a handgun or long gun but I explained to her that it was neither yet and wasn't sure what the build was going to be. So I know it some cases that does happen but FMP to the best of my research didn't import them as rifle receivers.
If it is not designed to be fired from the shoulder, it is not a rifle. The "Stock Tube" is more accurately called a buffer tube, or a receiver extension tube, and is not a stock, nobody shoulders it nor is it designed to be shouldered.
No such legal designation as "long arm' receiver. Just frame or receiver. So that would be an entry error and should be corrected to just receiver.
Yes as above if it is an error, you can correct it.
Most IOIs now know this is incorrect and it is just a receiver.