Do you think the potential buyer will realize

[ray1970]

That dropping his Glock into this kit will violate federal laws unless he registers it as an SBR?

http://www.armslist.com/posts/1333957/denver-colorado-rifles-for-sale--pistol-to-carbine-conversion---for-glock-9-or-40--roni-g2

[Jamnanc]

I've wondered about this, then I wonder if its just a ATF listing.

[cofi]

I've wondered about this, then I wonder if its just a ATF listing.

perfectly legal as longas you dont own a glock

[ChunkyMonkey]

His/her own responsibility, no? I don't have Roni, BUT i have HERA... one of these days, I ll get my stamp.

[ray1970]

I imagine being in possession of the kit and a Glock would be seen as "intent" to assemble an SBR?

[cofi]

BUT i have HERA... one of these days, I ll get my stamp.
had to google that those are cool as hell monkey


I imagine being in possession of the kit and a Glock would be seen as "intent" to assemble an SBR?
yes it would be constructive possession

[ChunkyMonkey]

I imagine being in possession of the kit and a Glock would be seen as "intent" to assemble an SBR?

Depends on the kit. On Hera, you must replace the rear sight and replace the front pin for installation. Cannot say how easy it is on RONI.

[Fromk]

I'm sure it's just for airsoft guns and could never be used with a real firearm...

[XC700116]

had to google that those are cool as hell monkey


yes it would be constructive possession

So would that mean that because I own an AR Rifle I couldn't have a pistol upper without a tax stamp and registered SBR Lower??? What if I've got all the parts, upper assembled but not mounted, and waiting on my approval???

That doesn't make much sense to me. It'd be one thing if it was mounted but just posessing both IMO is BS, but honestly just wondering.

[ChunkyMonkey]

im all for anyone buying anything they want, but other than fun or coolness, what is the point of these kits? i would rather just own two guns. like the AR kits that switch barrels. why not just have two rifles? or at least two uppers.

You don't get it... I must compete with her and her shoes!

[crashdown]

I imagine being in possession of the kit and a Glock would be seen as "intent" to assemble an SBR?

So.... owning a shotgun and a hacksaw???

[asmo]

So would that mean that because I own an AR Rifle I couldn't have a pistol upper without a tax stamp and registered SBR Lower??? What if I've got all the parts, upper assembled but not mounted, and waiting on my approval???

That doesn't make much sense to me. It'd be one thing if it was mounted but just posessing both IMO is BS, but honestly just wondering.

Many people in jail for just this..

[Ah Pook]

Many people in jail for just this..
Examples? I have never seen an actual case.

[kidicarus13]

Examples? I have never seen an actual case.

Would have to agree. A lot of internet chatter but that is about it.

[brokenscout]

Were all gonna be criminals soon anyways, that looks pretty cool.

[brokenscout]

I heard from a guy its legal[Coffee]

[Skully]

Actually it is all about "CONSTRUCTIVE INTENT" right. I see that everywhere in the ATF files.

I remember there was a few cases floating across news articles where a person had a lower and a short barrel in the same vicinity, and they talked too much.

ATF somehow got wind of it and tried to prosecute as intent. A Fight in court believe it was thrown out. Still 2would cost you money in legal fees and attorneys, why risk it? Overall I think it is the individual ATF Agents "Interpretation" why they hand the ticket, court to decide to prosecute.

Still not worth it to own such a useless device, I am with HB. [Coffee]

This is fun weblink to read if you are bored;

http//www.constitution.org/2ll/bardwell/cases2.html (http://www.constitution.org/2ll/bardwell/cases2.html)

This one kind of cracked me up;

Wellborn v. Cobray Firearms Inc., 1998 WL 80236 (10th Cir. 1998) (https://www.ar-15.co/wellborn_v_cobray.txt)
In this case a man who hurt himself with a Cobray made 37mm flare launcher sues the company after his homemade flare, from Cobray's load-it-yourself kit blows up the gun, and his hand and arm. The 10th circuit upholds the dismissal of Sylvia Daniel as a defendant, but reverses the dismissal of Wayne Daniel, the owner of the manufacturer of the launcher. The court also upholds the dismissal of claims against two companies which had gone out of business.

[XC700116]

I guess I just look at the contructive intent thing and it doesn't add up to be logical to me as SBR's are concerned. Especially with the case of kit that could be put on an otherwise complete firearm like the glock kit. I mean, just because you have such a kit and the firearm, doesn't necessarilly mean you have constructive intent, like say making all the parts for a supressor and not assembling until your tax stamp comes, thats pretty clear.

Same as owning an AR pistol and a rifle, takes 10 seconds to make a really long barreld pistol and an SBR from them with zero modification of the serial numbered parts. It doesn't mean that you have intent to construct an SBR.

But i have to agree, the whole glock stock thing is an answer without a question, but I'm a little freaked out of the possibilities of the SBR thing if you own a pistol upper and a rifle, or even a complete AR pistol and rifle.

[Skully]

I guess I just look at the contructive intent thing and it doesn't add up to be logical to me as SBR's are concerned. Especially with the case of kit that could be put on an otherwise complete firearm like the glock kit. I mean, just because you have such a kit and the firearm, doesn't necessarilly mean you have constructive intent, like say making all the parts for a supressor and not assembling until your tax stamp comes, thats pretty clear. Same as owning an AR pistol and a rifle, takes 10 seconds to make a really long barreld pistol and an SBR from them with zero modification of the serial numbered parts. It doesn't mean that you have intent to construct an SBR. But i have to agree, the whole glock stock thing is an answer without a question, but I'm a little freaked out of the possibilities of the SBR thing if you own a pistol upper and a rifle, or even a complete AR pistol and rifle.

That is the thing, "INTENT", up to the agent and prosecutor to prove your intent. Having a RONI and owning only one Glock in the same case the ATF agent might say your intent is to use them together without the proper TAX stamp, having the RONI in storage and not running your mouth off there is no way they would know.

Having a stripped lower and a shorter than 16" barrel in the same area might be construding your "Intent" to build an SBR without the proper "TAX" stamp.

If you run your mouth off on the internet or show the two togther in a picture an ATF agent might have enough "INTENT" to come knock at your door. In any case it would be up to them to prove your "INTENT" and up to you to disprove that intent.

Words of wisdom from many in the past dont run your mouth off, and if you have those questionable parts, seperate....................

[Coffee]

[spqrzilla]

Constructive possession (not "constructive intent" which makes no sense).

And for those people who keep claiming that this is some sort of internet hoax, here is an eleventh circuit case affirming conviction (http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19978425.MAN.pdf) of defendant based on finding a short barrelled upper and a assembled normal AR 15 in defendant's apartment.

[Skully]

Constructive possession (not "constructive intent" which makes no sense).

And for those people who keep claiming that this is some sort of internet hoax, here is an eleventh circuit case affirming conviction (http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19978425.MAN.pdf) of defendant based on finding a short barrelled upper and a assembled normal AR 15 in defendant's apartment.

I was looking for that, I knew I read that somewhere. In my mind I think "Constructive possession and intent" are the same. You have the parts near and what your "intent" is to do with them. Read that in many of those excerpts.


What spqrzilla said though, it is for real, no hoax that you can get a unwanted visit and court appearance if you brag too much.

[Great-Kazoo]

Examples? I have never seen an actual case.

Just because you have not "seen an actual " case means they have not happened. I know of 1, it did happen. Names, dates, time etc are not for public viewing. However rest assured if you read the papers say 15-20 yrs ago, or were old enough to read, it was in the paper.

[Clint45]

"Constructive possession" is nothing more than "access to." For example, a prohibited person who visits a gun owner's home may be deemed in "constructive possession" of any unsecured firearm therein . . . if they actually live together in the same house the prosecution's case would be far stronger.

"Presumptive intent" means the arresting agency/prosecution thinks they have reasonable cause to believe you may have intended to unlawfully assemble a restricted firearm at some future time due to the fact that you constructively possessed the necessary components. Usually this would only apply to full-auto drop-in conversion parts. It would be a stretch to apply it to a SBR when you have a pistol lower. I have heard of a case where a guy was busted for having two VZ-70 pistols and two shoulder stocks with selectors, but only had one pistol registered as Class III. His argument was that the additional shoulder stock was not intended for the semi-pistol, but was an extra for the Class III pistol. Charges were eventually dropped.

[10mm-man]

Many people in jail for just this..

Ok, so not just what you are saying but others as well; isn't there a supreme court ruling saying intent to assemble doesn't apply?

[Circuits]

Ok, so not just what you are saying but others as well; isn't there a supreme court ruling saying intent to assemble doesn't apply?

There is a quirk of firearms laws which states that possession of all the parts is possession of the assembled gun - it constitutes a firearm in "disassembled condition" or something to that effect.

As long as you have a legal way to use the parts in your possession, though, constructive possession does not apply. The courts may not presume you intended to make an illegal configuration from those parts if you have a legal way to use them - hence the guy who could keep a spare stock for his pistol/SBR. You can have a thousand short uppers as long as you've got an SBR or pistol lower to use them on, even if only one at a time, but doing so would probably start inviting unwanted attention if you also had a slew of other rifle lowers around, and no legal uppers to put on them.

[kidicarus13]

I never claimed internet hoax, just requesting a citation(s), which were provided- thank you for that. Just tired of the typical internet "I heard...", "My friend's dad...", "Back in the day...". There is good info in this thread that we can refer to in the furture should this topic ever come up again ...and it will.

[10mm-man]

I never claimed internet hoax, just requesting a citation(s), which were provided- thank you for that. Just tired of the typical internet "I heard...", "My friend's dad...", "Back in the day...". There is good info in this thread that we can refer to in the furture should this topic ever come up again ...and it will.


I called my ATF industry specialist to ask for the law directly dealing with intent to assemble. She said she will send me something over tomorrow, I couldn't find it and I didn't want to source my "uncle said" or as you stated above. I will update as soon as I get it back...........

[10mm-man]

There is a quirk of firearms laws which states that possession of all the parts is possession of the assembled gun - it constitutes a firearm in "disassembled condition" or something to that effect.

As long as you have a legal way to use the parts in your possession, though, constructive possession does not apply. The courts may not presume you intended to make an illegal configuration from those parts if you have a legal way to use them - hence the guy who could keep a spare stock for his pistol/SBR. You can have a thousand short uppers as long as you've got an SBR or pistol lower to use them on, even if only one at a time, but doing so would probably start inviting unwanted attention if you also had a slew of other rifle lowers around, and no legal uppers to put on them.


Actually I think that is were the conversation came up; having a pistol lower, a couple short barrels and a fully operational assembled AR-15 rifle. Which in this case would not be "intent" even though you had a couple short barrel uppers. Not 100% sure so I am awaiting clarification.

[davsel]

Actually I think that is were the conversation came up; having a pistol lower, a couple short barrels and a fully operational assembled AR-15 rifle. Which in this case would not be "intent" even though you had a couple short barrel uppers. Not 100% sure so I am awaiting clarification.

[Coffee]

[fitz19d]

In a rush so didn't read whole thing, but as far as constructive possession and things like those kits. I think what is worse is this new idiot craze of "pistol" rifles of assorted types. I see the purpose for states that don't allow SBR, but now that it's widespread I hate to think about the number of ignorant people out there that have slapped on stocks or otherwise made SBR's without realizing it. (Also made it easier for people that take the do it, and don't talk about it, chance of catching = low, crowd.)

[KestrelBike]

In a rush so didn't read whole thing, but as far as constructive possession and things like those kits. I think what is worse is this new idiot craze of "pistol" rifles of assorted types. I see the purpose for states that don't allow SBR, but now that it's widespread I hate to think about the number of ignorant people out there that have slapped on stocks or otherwise made SBR's without realizing it. (Also made it easier for people that take the do it, and don't talk about it, chance of catching = low, crowd.)

I've seen it myself at gun stores, dude is checking out the way awesome AR pistol, says "gee kinda hard to aim this thing holding it out in front of me, can I just buy that stock [points down to stock assembly in glass counter case] and pop it on there?" *cue gun store employee face palm*

[blacklabel]

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/05/foghorn/the-truth-about-sig-sauers-ar-15-pistol-arm-brace/

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/P1260625-900x601.jpg

You could never shoulder this...

[fly boy]

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/05/foghorn/the-truth-about-sig-sauers-ar-15-pistol-arm-brace/

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/P1260625-900x601.jpg
You could never shoulder this...Have you never seen how short a midgets arm is?
[LOL]

[theGinsue]

Haven't there been many successful prosecutions of folks with semi-auto AR's but also having somewhere in their possession an auto-sere (sear)?

[ray1970]

You could never shoulder this...

Why not? Doesn't look any shorter than a carbine stock in the collapsed position.

[Dingo]

Have you never seen how short a midgets arm is?
[LOL]

BAN MIDGETS!!! FOR THE CHILDREN!!!

[fitz19d]

Sarcasm..


Why not? Doesn't look any shorter than a carbine stock in the collapsed position.

[ray1970]

Sarcasm..

[facepalm]

(Sorry, sometimes sarcasm doesn't come across well in type.)