NY Legal "SBR" or "AR Pistol" without having a Pistol Permit

S

stanj0

.38 Special
Messages
37
Reaction score
14
Location
NY
Now that the title has caught your attention...I would like to explain my recent thoughts.

Before you read any farther please read the Mossberg Shockwave legality letter so you can understand my thought process.

https://www.dark-storm.com/images/promo/0/SCPD-Shockwave-Letter-5-19-2017.pdf

So this would be the process below...

1. Buy a stripped AR-15 lower with installed fixed magazine
2. Put an upper receiver on it with a barrel less than 16 inches
3. Complete rifle (without stock) and ensure its length is over 26 inches
4. Install Sig Arm Brace (or equivalent) on rifle
5. Install any evil features you want due to the fixed magazine and the fact it is over 26 inches

Now...imagine this rifle. And keep the Mossberg Shockwave letter in mind...

A. It's not a rifle because it is not intended to be fired from the shoulder (arm brace)
B. It is not a "firearm" according to PL 265.00(3) because it is not a rifle and is over 26 inches in length
C. It is not a "firearm" according to PL 265.00(3) because it is not a pistol due to its over 26 inch length
D. It is not a "any other weapon" because it is not legally capable of being concealed on the person (OAL is +26 inches)

So in theory we have basically the same exact weapon as the Mossberg Shockwave (legally) but in AR-15 form...looks like common citizens in NY can own a AR-15 with a barrel less than 16 inches without a pistol permit after all...

Or maybe not?
Please post your thoughts below.
 
G

gqllc007

.45 acp
Messages
331
Reaction score
213
Location
Albany
I thought the reason you can't is that the barrel isn't smoothbore like the shotguns...I also can't remember for the life of me where I remember hearing that from
 
S

stanj0

.38 Special
Messages
37
Reaction score
14
Location
NY
gqllc007 said:
I thought the reason you can't is that the barrel isn't smoothbore like the shotguns...I also can't remember for the life of me where I remember hearing that from
Click to expand...

I don't think it matters because the weapon I am outlining is not a rifle or shotgun because it is not meant to be shouldered. Let's see what others say.
 
S

stanj0

.38 Special
Messages
37
Reaction score
14
Location
NY
stuck in ny said:
Nobody knows. If it would work, then I would want one in 9mm.
Click to expand...

To be honest I see this as almost the exact same thing as the Mossberg Shockwave. I think you could have one in 9mm (good luck buying the ammo without a pistol permit though).
 
Eddie Gunks

Eddie Gunks

.338 Win Mag
Messages
5,354
Reaction score
9,817
Location
Bangkok
Yes. It is an other.

It should work just like the shockwave.....but look at all the gun owner fear mongering that is going on regarding the shockwave......their heads will explode for sure with an ar15 “other”

It is an other. If the govt/leo pulled their heads outta their ass it would be fine. But the cant/wont.

It is an other, therefor not included in the safe act.

You will get off easily.....IF NEEDED.

Go for it. Many have already done....including me before i was an FFL

Edit to add: if it is an “other” over 26 inches you would not beed a fixed mag
 
Last edited:
enigma

enigma

.45 acp
Messages
339
Reaction score
540
Location
New York
If a person bought a stripped lower some time ago with the intention of using it for a Rifle (yet never did build it) but the ATF form lists that purchase of the receiver as a "rifle", would that pose a problem for using it to build (for the very first time) an Other?

I don't know what the ATF procedures are for lower manufacturers, but is there any worry of them not listing their receivers with ATF as Other? Is it possible a manufacturer could classify a lower as a rifle receiver and mess this all up from the start?
 
S

stanj0

.38 Special
Messages
37
Reaction score
14
Location
NY
enigma said:
If a person bought a stripped lower some time ago with the intention of using it for a Rifle (yet never did build it) but the ATF form lists that purchase of the receiver as a "rifle", would that pose a problem for using it to build (for the very first time) an Other?

I don't know what the ATF procedures are for lower manufacturers, but is there any worry of them not listing their receivers with ATF as Other? Is it possible a manufacturer could classify a lower as a rifle receiver and mess this all up from the start?
Click to expand...

I thought stripped lowers were always transferred as an "other" unless the FFL made a mistake?
 
dsdmmat

dsdmmat

Donut Master
Moderator
Messages
10,902
Reaction score
24,300
Location
Alpha Quadrant, Sector 001
enigma said:
If a person bought a stripped lower some time ago with the intention of using it for a Rifle (yet never did build it) but the ATF form lists that purchase of the receiver as a "rifle", would that pose a problem for using it to build (for the very first time) an Other?

I don't know what the ATF procedures are for lower manufacturers, but is there any worry of them not listing their receivers with ATF as Other? Is it possible a manufacturer could classify a lower as a rifle receiver and mess this all up from the start?
Click to expand...
Once a rifle always a rifle. all of the lowers I have bought were transferred as "other." If yours was transferred as a rifle get another lower to play with.
 
enigma

enigma

.45 acp
Messages
339
Reaction score
540
Location
New York
dsdmmat said:
Once a rifle always a rifle. all of the lowers I have bought were transferred as "other." If yours was transferred as a rifle get another lower to play with.
Click to expand...

This is what I was thinking, and the reason I brought it up. It may be an FFL screw-up if the stripped lower is transferred as anything other than an Other, but it's ultimately something that would bite the weapon's owner in the ass if it was wrong.

That said, if the manufacturer listed it with ATF as an Other upon it's creation, I wonder how much affect a form error could have. I don't imagine an FFL has the Federal authority to re-classify a firearm receiver. Perhaps the form and it's manner of completion are irrelevant?

If so, the remaining gotcha would be if a manufacturer did not register their stripped lower as an Other. Would anyone do that, and how would we know?
 
Marine Cpl

Marine Cpl

.577 Tyrannosaur.
Messages
22,054
Reaction score
20,649
Location
Orange County
It's all nonsense. So hypothetically if you bought a stripped lower and put a stock on it and attached an upper, measured it and decided it was too long for your uses and took the stock off and added a brace, it would be ILLEGAL.

Yet if you put the brace on first, didn't like the brace, took that off, and added a stock, it would be perfectly LEGAL.

How would they ever know?
 
S

stuck in ny

Guest
enigma said:
This is what I was thinking, and the reason I brought it up. It may be an FFL screw-up if the stripped lower is transferred as anything other than an Other, but it's ultimately something that would bite the weapon's owner in the ass if it was wrong.

That said, if the manufacturer listed it with ATF as an Other upon it's creation, I wonder how much affect a form error could have. I don't imagine an FFL has the Federal authority to re-classify a firearm receiver. Perhaps the form and it's manner of completion are irrelevant?

If so, the remaining gotcha would be if a manufacturer did not register their stripped lower as an Other. Would anyone do that, and how would we know?
Click to expand...
They couldn't do that, otherwise all the free peoples ar pistols would be federal sbrs.
 
enigma

enigma

.45 acp
Messages
339
Reaction score
540
Location
New York
Willjr75 said:
It's all nonsense. So hypothetically if you bought a stripped lower and put a stock on it and attached an upper, measured it and decided it was too long for your uses and took the stock off and added a brace, it would be ILLEGAL.

Yet if you put the brace on first, didn't like the brace, took that off, and added a stock, it would be perfectly LEGAL.

How would they ever know?
Click to expand...

That's correct - absolute and total nonsense. I don't have to agree with it, but we are bound by their rules (like it or not). And they wouldn't know about it... unless they already know. That's my concern. I don't know if this is even possible, but if the stripped receiver is already "listed" with ATF as a Rifle or Pistol, you're screwed building an Other with it. For the same reason Remington can't take a shotgun receiver and build a Tac-14 from it.

It is all hair-splitting bullshit, but if we're going to push the boundaries, we'd better be experts in the details.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top