The following originally appeared at the Defense Firearms Blog and is reprinted here with permission.
An SBR, or short barrel rifle is a category of firearm that is regulated by the National Firearms Act or NFA. Basically speaking it’s a rifle with a barrel shorter than 16″ or smaller than 26″ overall length. Another type of firearm that is similar is the Short Barrel Shotgun, or SBS, but we’ll focus on the SBR for now . . .
In order to legally own an SBR, one must first identify what the specifications of what the SBR will be. Specifically, you will need to actually identify what firearm you will turn into an SBR in order to register the serial number and the actual overall length of the firearm, make, model, caliber, etc. As an example, if you own an AR rifle (a rifle with a barrel 16″ or greater) and you want to shorten the barrel, you will need to have a serial number and decide how short you want the barrel.
For example, let’s say you want to change your barrel from 16″ to 10″, you will need to first measure the overall length. The overall length should include the size of the stock fully extended (for those that have adjustable stocks). Additionally, you will measure the length of the actual barrel tip and not include the flash hider, suppressor. The reason for this is that the flash suppressor is NOT considered a part of the barrel unless it is welded and pinned to the barrel.
Once you measure the entire length of the firearm, let’s say it’s 30″ for arguments sake, you will then subtract 6″ from that measurement (16″ minus 10″ equals 6″). Take away the 6″ measurement from 30″ and you have 24″ as your new “desired” length of what you will want when your SBR is legally assembled. Remember, you CANNOT legally assemble the SBR and take these measurements, and you CANNOT legally be in possession of all the materials to assemble an SBR until you have your approval from the BATFE, doing so is called constructive possession. In lieu of measuring the actual SBR, you will have to do the math above.
Once you have your serial number, make, model, caliber and measurements of your firearm you will fill out a Form 1 (http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-5320-1.pdf). After filling out the Form 1, you will mail it along with a check for $200 to the BATFE and wait for you tax stamp approval.
Different states have different restrictions on owning an SBR. In other words, some states simply require you to get your fingerprints and get approval from your local Police Chief/Sheriff in order to complete the Form 1. Basically, the BATFE requires you get approval from your local law enforcement in order to get approval from them. I will blog about some of the different regulations per state as all states/counties have different laws.
Once you receive your tax stamp back from the BATFE, you are good to go (return times vary, contact the NFA Branch to get an estimated timeframe). Remember, ALWAYS have copies of your tax stamp paperwork with your SBR at all times, this will save you extreme amounts of trouble.
I hope this helps, if anyone has questions or see corrections/clarifications that can be made, please let me know. Also, as a disclaimer, this article is not legal advice. To get specific information on laws and regulations regarding NFA or firearms, please contact the BATFE or legal council.
Is there any particular reason for the various state and federal regulations?
It seems needlessly complicated. And while I won’t claim Canadian laws are less complicated (they are much, much worse), I at least only have to deal with Federal sillyness.
Trust us, we would much rather have a system in which some States are Texas or Arizona, and some are Massachusetts and New York, than one in which every state is California…
I believe a fairly common route is to build a pistol to play with while you wait on your Form 1 approval. That way you have a working, fun bangstick in the meantime. Keep in mind that as noted above, you cannot legally be in possession of the parts to make your pistol into an SBR until you have the Form 1. The most common way to do this is to purchase all the parts to build your SBR EXCEPT the buttstock. Assemble the firearm, put a pistol buffer tube on it, and you’re good to go. Remember to leave off any forward vertical grip, as well, as that will also put you afoul of the law.
What if you had an AR rifle, a second stock for it, and an AR pistol? Would that be legal?
…and on the other hand, what if you have a complete, non-SBR AR-15, and a second short-barreled upper? As I understand it, the lower is considered ‘the firearm’, so what is the upper considered legally when not assembled?
All academic in my case, as the state I live in (WA) does not allow SBR/SBS for individuals, but I am curious.
Note: I am not an NFA attorney. I’m simply an amateur who’s done a lot of reading.
My understanding to both of the above questions is that if you have all the parts to make [illegal without papers thing], it doesn’t matter what stage of assembly or dis-assembly said thing is, that’s constructive possession. However, it’s one of those situations where (1) you’d have to get caught, and (2) intent may (or may not!) come into play.
For instance, let’s say you had a pistol (short barrel and pistol buffer) and you wanted to make it a full sized rifle (not an SBR). That means you’re changing both the buffer/stock and the barrel. In theory, you could technically break the law depending on the order you did the conversion. If you changed the barrel first, then the buffer/stock, then in the “construction” phase you’d simply have a really unwieldy rifle. If you changed the buffer/stock first, then during the time it took you to get the short barrel off the now-stocked action, you would (not technically, you would) be in possession of an illegal SBR. God help you if the ATF walked in mid-transition in the second case.
In Sam C’s example, I think you’d be on dangerous ground, because of the “spare” stock. It would take literally single-digit minutes to swap that spare stock in place of the pistol buffer. I’d loan that spare stock to a buddy ’til your paperwork came through on the SBR.
In rosignol’s example, we run hard into the limit of my knowledge. Popping that SBR upper onto the lower of the complete rifle is two pins and <60 seconds. However, I'm sure people who already own an AR buy/build SBR's, but how they go about it I just really don't know. Consult your gun shop/attorney.
Matt in FL’s reply below is correct. Having the components is all that is necessary to make this illegal. Constructive possession. You don’t have to like the law, but that is the law.
Does having an AR, two Magpul VFG’s, and a Glock give you ‘constructive possession’ of an AOW?
Does having a shotgun and a hacksaw give you ‘constructive possession’ of a SBS?
Heck even having a full auto FCG but no third hole receiver is legal.
Constructive possession is often mis-applied to SBRs. Matt in FL, please link to any law, or related court cases if you can prove it..
AK: I love it when people challenge me to back up my statements, because it makes me do research, which helps turn me into the “well-read amateur” that I mentioned above.
Here’s what I found: Intent does seem to matter. It’s not a guaranteed thing, and you could potentially get jammed up for a while even if it’s later thrown out or you’re acquitted, but it seems that you have to be shown to have done, or have intended to do something wrong.
One interpretation of this is if the parts you have can be assembled into both a legal and illegal variety, unless there is proof that you did do it illegally, the presumption is that you intended to do it the right way. The Rule of Lenity says, “In construing an ambiguous criminal statute, the court should resolve the ambiguity in favor of the defendant.”
Two examples: First, in 1992, the U.S. Supreme Court decided United States v. Thompson-Center Arms Company in favor of T-C. The ATF’s position was that a carbine conversion kit of the Contender pistol that came with an accessory 16″ barrel and a stock consisted of a short-barreled rifle pursuant to the NFA. The Court held that the kit did not constitute an SBR, because (1) the kit contained both the stock and the rifle barrel and (2) the stock had instructions carved into it explicity telling the user to not attach the stock to the receiver when the 10-inch barrel is attached to the receiver or vice versa.
Second, the case of Jesus Amador, who wanted to sell his H&K SP89 pistol along with the accessories he had collected for it, which included a vertical foregrip and a shoulder stock. He advertised it on Craigslist, and ended up attempting to sell it to an undercover cop. He was charged with attempting to sell an SBR over the internet. The vertical foregrip would alone necessitate the firearm being registered under the NFA as an AOW. The mere possession of the shoulder stock meant the weapon would have to be registered as a short-barreled rifle, pursuant to the NFA. Both of those registrations should have happened PRIOR to purchasing either/both of those accessories. In his ad, Mr. Amador posted a picture of the SP89 with all the accessories in a case. Most damning for Mr. Amador, other than being caught in possession of the SP89 with the shoulder stock and vertical grip is the fact that the case has a cut out for the SP89 to be placed in the case WITH the vertical foregrip, which would seem to connote, contrary to his position, that the SP89 was fitted with the foregrip at one point.
Based on these two examples, and some other reading I did, I stand by my comments above. In Sam C’s example, an AR pistol with a “spare” shoulder stock, you could very likely be in trouble if caught because there’s no legal way to assemble all the parts on hand. The possession of a rifle barrel in addition to the “spare” shoulder stock would effectively negate the “badness” of the spare stock, unless there was proof that you had, at some point, assembled it illegally. This is one point where Mr. Amador ran afoul of the law. There was proof (sorta) that he’d done it wrong.
On the flip side, regarding the T-C Contender, while the mere possession of all those parts does not constitute an SBR, if you assembled them the right way (shoulder stock + pistol barrel) you would, not theoretically, not technically, you would be in possession of an SBR, while they were assembled in that manner. Whether or not you got in trouble would depend on whether you got caught, maybe a little intent, maybe whether the prosecutor was having a bad day, or if you’d slept with his wife.
Yay, long post. Thanks for the opportunity to improve my knowledge.
Thanks for the detailed post Matt.
The H&K SP89 is the example that comes up most often. That was actually a Florida state law, and not in violation of any federal law.
I think we agree, intent plays a big role and simply having the means to do something illegal is different than actually doing something illegal.
I’d rather have the extra length on the rifle than fill our a federal form. Call me paranoid.
I’m with you. It sounds like a lot of work and a lot of invasion of privacy to reduce the effectiveness of the rifle.
My view is that if someone wants a short-barreled rifle, the person should be able to have one. I just don’t have much desire to own one myself.
You can buy 11.5″ uppers with a welded flash-hider if the need suits you. Close enough for most and no registration or even NICS required.
I’m with you guys. I don’t see the benefit of ruining a perfectly good rifle and turning it into a stocked pistol.
Voluntary gun registration and I get to send in my fingerprints to the man!?! Where do I sign?!! Anyone with an SBR or silencer is first on the list for confiscation. At least that will warn the rest of us.
What about a short barreled shotgun? Seems more practical, especially when you factor in the close quarters nature of home defense.
If Romney wins in November, maybe we can use Paul Ryan’s pro-gun attitude to push for a deregulation of SBR’s and SBS’s. It’s such a stupid and arbitrary regulation. So are mag capacity limits and assault weapon bans. We let those expire at the federal level and nothing bad happened. Lets try doing away with the barrel and overall length requirements of the NFA.
Get rid of all NFA requirements and let us buy what we choose. Instead of artificially inflating prices on class 3 weapons. We should be able to buy them new now, not just be able to buy ones made before 1986. Of course I’m speaking on full-auto.
Wouldn’t a bullpup design address the issues without having to jump through the extra hoops and expense? The thought of giving 2oo bucks to the G when I don’t have to is a bit off putting.
Yeah, but then you run into overall-length issues. Have you seen the ridiculous barrel they had to put on the FN P90 to turn it into the PS90? Ugh.
Thanks for the great discussion regarding the blog post. I see that someone reccomended owning a bullpup as a safe and quick alternative. In my opinion, bullpups are underrated and deserve a good look and a fair chance.
Also a good idea to put NFA items in a special firearms trust. No CLEO signature required.
As long as the NRA is the most powerful gun lobby GCA 68 and NFA 34 aren’t going anywhere.
You are not “good to go” until you engrave the firearm. I know you found this article, but the actual process is a bit more involved than “fill out his form and measure this.” For example, decisions about whether or not to use a trust and advice on listing as many calibers and lengths as possible on the form so that you can freely modify the firearm in the future and sell the old barrel without more hoops to jump through. I trust you guys can put together a proper, step-by-step, resource for your readers.
Listing multiple calibers will get your form denied today. The Form 1 is to manufacture a SBR and you must list its original configuration at the time its made.
Ok, I read the “Part II” blog post on Defense Firearms Blog and it covers most of what I mentioned was lacking – that important information should be added to this post (it does, however, leave out the multiple caliber/length advice as of this comment).
Derek,
I don’t really understand your point here. Are you saying that it’s in the interests of the NRA to not change/repeal the GCA and NFA? And if so, what actions of the NRA have led you to this conclusion?
Remember what the NRA tried to do to Heller? McDonald? Where was the NRA when David Olafson was being persecuted? Lets go way back. The NRA didn’t provide any support to Miller, a case that was decided WITH NO OPPOSING COUNSEL.
The NRA endorsed Harry Reid. They even supported the NFA and GCA!!!
No thank you, make mine GOA.
You know what victory looks like? Ordering a select-fire AK-47 through the mail from Russia and being able to open carry it in all 50 states.
Pingback: Daily Firearms News | Gunmart Blog