[HTML1]

Yesterday, we ran a review of the Crosman M177: a pellet-firing upper for your bog-standard AR receiver. Nice piece too (both the article and the kit). But there is that little issue of the resulting firearm looking exactly like an honest-to-God bullet firing modern home defense black sporting assault rifle. In fact, one of our commentators pointed out that some local police consider an M177-equipped AR a “real gun,” with all the potential crap that could follow. That’s because it is. Crosman’s social media maven Chip Hunnicutt told TTAG that the ATF consideas an M177-equipped AR a firearm. Period. Which means any laws against firing a gun in you ‘hood (or basement) still apply. Something to keep in mind.

12 Responses to What Could Possible Go Wrong: Crosman M177 Edition

  1. Ya see, there’s the problem with relegating the power to “define” to an inefficient and ineffective beuracracy like the ATF. They invariably define things as “firearms” that are decidedly not firearms, like a lower reciever or a 14-inch shoestring. By the way, steel wool (you know, the kind you buy to scrub your kitchen sink) is a “silencer.”

    Edit: this comment was intended as a reply to Nick’s.

  2. An easy fix is to paint a portion of the barrel etc bright orange like the toy guns sold in stores. I am not saying this is deceptive in any way but if you are legally shooting pellets in your back yard I would think it is a small price to pay to not get shot or something. Just a thought.

    • Painting the MAR is not recommended. For that matter, if you’re “legally shooting pellets in your backyard” it’s not even necessary. Federal law requires AIRSOFT guns to have orange tips so law enforcement can instantly recognize them from firearms. Because ATF considers the MAR, when attached to a lower, as a firearm, you may be putting yourself in a worse position by painting it.

      • Chris, in my area, discharge of a firearm within 300 feet of a building is illegal. Since the MAR uses a real lower, thus a firearm, I am guessing that using the MAR is considered discharging a firearm even though the upper is an airgun. Am I correct?

  3. “Yes 911, there is a scary man with a scary looking black rifle shooting in his back yard please help!”

    *Cops show up and cap your ass in your own backyard*

    Yeah..what could go wrong.

  4. If it mounts onto a serialized AR lower, it legally IS a firearm.

    The stripped lower itself counts as the gun.

    And because its a firearm, and it is shooting projectiles, it is not legal to shoot in most peoples backyards: You can get nailed for shooting it in your back yard just as hard if you were popping off 5.56 rounds.

  5. Not sure why this is an issue. A Red Rider is considered a firearm in most cities and towns when it comes to the rules about discharging a firearm within city limits. Learned that the hard way when I was a kid. That said, my dad made his own plinker wherein he loads 5.56 brass with just a primer and a .22 pellet. Now THAT is a pellet rifle. If it’s going to be considered a firearm by the gubment, it might as well really shoot, right?

  6. The funny thing is that there are actually jurisdictions, like Philadelphia, where this is the only way that you could legally own an air rifle.

  7. I don’t see any problem with this at all. Its still an AR lower, so it’s still a gun no matter what. The fact that it shoots pellets has no bearing on it. I would not shoot a gun in a place I’m not allowed to. So what could go wrong?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *