Question about AR pistol / lower

imported post

FE are you the retarded one? we are not talking about configuring a rifle into a pistol. if you would pay attention you would see i never said that was legal. if you want to put words in my mouth start with stfu.

people following your advice I hope get locked up

imported post

I hate to stir the pot, but someone might actually be trying to get some useful info from all this name calling. When you purchase a stripped AR-15 lower receiver in a FFL licensed shop you have the choice of filling out only the 4473 and registering the lower as an "other firearm". In the state of Washington this would only allow you to legally build that receiver into a rifle only. You also have the option of filling out the state application to transfer a pistol as well. If you choose to fill out this form as well the receiver would be marked as a "frame only". This would allow you to build the receiver into a pistol or a rifle. As far as building the receiver into a pistol then into a rifle then into a pistol again that is perfectly legal. If you read the whole second paragraph of the ATF letter sent to FE you will see the important part of the sentence is that you need to obtain certification from the "manufacturer of the receiver" that it was never built into a rifle configuration. When you bought the receiver it had never been built into a rifle configuration therefore that rule doesn't apply to the end user unless you are trying to use the receiver from an AR that left the factory as a rifle. The question you asked to elicit the letter from the ATF either did not pertain to this specific situation or the question was not properly understood by the agent that sent the letter.

imported post

ElJefe1911 wrote:

I hate to stir the pot, but someone might actually be trying to get some useful info from all this name calling. When you purchase a stripped AR-15 lower receiver in a FFL licensed shop you have the choice of filling out only the 4473 and registering the lower as an "other firearm". In the state of Washington this would only allow you to legally build that receiver into a rifle only. You also have the option of filling out the state application to transfer a pistol as well. If you choose to fill out this form as well the receiver would be marked as a "frame only". This would allow you to build the receiver into a pistol or a rifle. As far as building the receiver into a pistol then into a rifle then into a pistol again that is perfectly legal. If you read the whole second paragraph of the ATF letter sent to FE you will see the important part of the sentence is that you need to obtain certification from the "manufacturer of the receiver" that it was never built into a rifle configuration. When you bought the receiver it had never been built into a rifle configuration therefore that rule doesn't apply to the end user unless you are trying to use the receiver from an AR that left the factory as a rifle. The question you asked to elicit the letter from the ATF either did not pertain to this specific situation or the question was not properly understood by the agent that sent the letter.


This is correct,people have been building TC Contenders and later Encores into pistol and rifle configurations back and forth for years,as long as it is a legal pistol or rifle configuration,I have never,ever heard of it being questioned

Click to expand...

imported post

I need to clarify that I did not send that letter in but found it online.

The TC Contenders and Encores are not applicable in this instance because that case was ONLY about whether the possession of the parts meant intent to assemble a SBR and in no part of the ruling did it address assembling it into a rifle then a pistol again later. This aspect has never been taken to court to be proven legal but as the law reads now it is not legal. In the instance of NFA weapons just because it hasn't been questioned does not automatically make it legal. An example of this is the recent updated understanding about the serialized portion of suppressors, people wanted to believe that they could do whatever they wanted to with them even though the law and precedent already indicated otherwise.



Next point. Since there seems to be confusion about the letter of the law:

RCW 9.41.010 defines:
Rifle: "Rifle" means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed metallic cartridge to fire only a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of the trigger.
Short-barreled rifle: "Short-barreled rifle" means a rifle having one or more barrels less than sixteen inches in length and any weapon made from a rifle by any means of modification if such modified weapon has an overall length of less than twenty-six inches.
Pistol as: ""Pistol" means any firearm with a barrel less than sixteen inches in length, or is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand."
And Firearm as: ""Firearm" means a weapon or device from which a projectile or projectiles may be fired by an explosive such as gunpowder."

So again, in Washington state law once what was purchased as a "firearm" the bare receiver has been made into a "Rifle", it can only be a weapon made from a rifle or a SBR whether the shoulder stock is attached or not. A Short barreled rifle does not need to have a shoulder stock after it has had one put on the receiver is a SBR until it is removed from the NFA Registry even if completed in a pistol configuration.


Can anyone point to any place where Washington state law requires a INDIVIDUAL to register the manufacture or transfer of a pistol? Dealers yes for the transfer, but a individual purchasing a bare receiver is purchasing what is defined as a "Firearm" and no pistol registration is required, the individual then changes the serialized portion of the "Firearm" to a "Pistol" by how he assembles it and it remains a pistol until the serialized portion is assembled as a "Rifle" at which point when completed in another configuration it is:"weapon made from a rifle by any means of modification if such modified weapon has an overall length of less than twenty-six inches." which is defined as a Short Barreled Rifle


Can ANYONE else CITE law instead of opinion, everyone who's trying to discredit what I've shown from the the letter of the law has not cited anything just provided their opinion. Someone please show REAL proof.

imported post

There is an easy way around this. If you are going to build an AR pistol then buy a pistol receiver. They are manufactured to completely eliminate this issue as they are marked by the manufacture as a pistol and are sold by the FFL in the same manner as a pistol.

FE427 is correct that, in Wa., once a firearm is built into a rifle configuration it is unlawful to build it back into a pistol configuration. Look at the definition of a rifle carefully;

"Rifle" means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder.

This means any firearm that has had its configuration changed into that is intended to be fired from the shoulder regardless of what the original configuration was.