The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Guns, Politics, Gunsmithing & Reloading Single Shot Pistols Contender/Encore laws?Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Contender/Encore laws? | Login/Join |
| <WayneC> |
About the only thing you really need to be concerned with is never put a buttstock on a frame that has a barrel mounted to it that's less than 16 inches. | ||
|
Moderator |
My understanding (caviat I don't have any laws to reference) if you purchase a contender as a pistol, it can be converted to a rifle. If you purchase it as a rifle, it cannot be converted to a pistol, as it is illegal to convert a rifle into a pistol per federal firearms laws. I believe the frames when originally sold, are sold as pistols, but who knows if re-selling of the frame could have any affect on this. Now, on top of federal firearms laws are state and local laws, so, look into what your state is doing. | |||
|
| one of us |
At the risk of yet another flame war over this topic.....I'm going to attempt to explain it as I see it after spending many, many hours researching the subject, including the study of all the legal briefs in the TC Supreme Court case. A Contender or Encore that left the factory as a rifle (barrel over 16" and a buttstock) cannot be converted to handgun configuration unless it is first registered as a NFA weapon (short barreled rifle). Many people will tell you that the Supreme Court ruled that this law does not apply to the Contender or Encore.........That is ABSOLUTELY FALSE! The Supreme Court case only confirmed the legality of using a "carbine kit" to convert a Contender HANDGUN into a rifle. When the court case was first filed, TC had not yet offered a Contender in rifle form, since no factory produced rifle existed, the legality of converting one into a pistol was not considered in the case..... at that time, ALL contenders were handguns. Today, this is clearly NOT the case. Others will claim that all Contender and Encore frames are legally considered handguns when they leave the factory.....again, this is ABSOLUTELY FALSE. If this were true, no person under the age of 21 could purchase a new contender or encore. While some states require that the purchaser be at least 21, this is NOT required by federal law. Furthermore, some states that require a pistol permit to purchase a handgun (Missouri for one) do not require the permit for Contender or Encore rifles. Since state laws can be more restrictive, but not less restrictive than federal laws, if all contenders or encores were legally handguns under federal law, a permit would be required for any contender or encore purchased regardless of configuration. In addition, if all Contenders or Encores were legally handguns, it would not be legal for a non-resident to purchase an Encore rifle. As it is, if I so desired, I could drive to a neighboring state and purchase a new Encore rifle....but I can't buy an Encore pistol. Others have said that their dealers list all contenders or encores as handguns on the 4473 (yellow sheet) that is filled out at the time of purchase.....this may be a requirement of state laws in some areas......however, keep in mind, the legal classification of a firearm cannot be changed by any FFL by simply listing it a certain way on a 4473. If it left the factory as a rifle.....it will forever be a rifle under federal law.......PERIOD! If a person purchases a new bare frame, how it is first assembled determines its legal status as a handgun or rifle. Put a grip and a barrel on it first and it is legally a pistol.....put a buttstock and rifle barrel on it and it is legally a rifle. In conclusion, there is no legal difference between buying a Remington Model 7 rifle and converting it into an XP-100 or buying an Encore rifle and converting it into a pistol. Exactly the same laws apply to both firearms because they both are legally classified as rifles under federal law. Let the flames begin! | |||
|
| <pshooter> |
Forget about the listing clasification for a minute. If an official stopped you and you had either, a less than 16" bbl. on a buttstock, Or a buttstock on a "sawed-off" less than 16" rifle bbl., you better be a fast talker. Try explaining to him that it came originally as a pistol, but you changed it to a "little rifle" and see what he says. "I'm really innocent officer" LOL. | ||
|
| one of us |
So...........In essence what we have is an easily obtainable illegle handgun.Fill out the proper paperwork at a dealer and purchase an Encore rifle. Now..........Go to any Dealer or website or catolog that carries the pistol barrels and grips. Buy all you like with no paperwork involved and convert away.Does the federal government know about this loophole?  | |||
|
one of us |
GonHuntin is absolutely correct on this issue. As an FFL, I have had to puzzle over these laws, and have come to the same exact conclusions. The ease of conversion of Encore rifles to handguns Vs changing bolt action rifles to handguns does not somehow change or alter their legal status, nor does the design intent behind them change or alter their legal status. What determines their legal status is how were they numbered and shipped. Concerning whether T/C markes them all as handguns, this really sounds like an urban legend. Can anyone verify in Gustaffsen's or Pankurak's own writing that they are shipped this way? If they say yes, they are wrong, as I have recieved 209x50 T/C Encore muzzle loaders direct from Jerry's Sport Center, Camfour, Henry's, etc and they all come in with reciepts stating that they are RIFLES. There is no way an assembled RIFLE which is shipped as a RIFLE in a rifle box from the manufacturer can in any way legally be considered a handgun. Please understand that I do not like it, and consider it ridiculous, yet it is the law of the land. I'd hazard to guess that neither does Mark like it any more than I, but the bottom line is you had better not take that 209x50 Encore frame you purchased as a rifle, and then convert it into a handgun. Again, those are sent as Muzzle loading rifles, and due to their ability to be converted to other centerfire rifles, are also treated the same as any centerfire rifle in terms of the 4473 and here in VA, the SP-65. You may make it into a rifle of another caliber (barring an unusual state or country code) but you may NOT make it into a pistol W/O the necessary paperwork and tax. Big time NO NO with the B A T F. This is not an issue of "well, who would know" but an issue of what the law actually states, and what you can be charged with. I hate to say it, but many of my FFL peers are absolutely ignorant concerning this and other firearms regulations. Best to read the regs for yourself, and then also interpret them in light of the actual language, and also in light of how an ACLU lawyer will look at it and try to prosecute you. Not trying to start a flame war either, but convey an accurate understanding of the law and pertinant regulations. ------------------ "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin, 1759 | |||
|
| one of us |
Even if Pancurak or Gustaffsen or the Pope himself tells you they are all handguns..... don't believe it for one second! I have seen e-mail from Pancurak that also says the TC Supreme Court case settled the matter.... doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that he either hasn't studied the case or doesn't understand the ruling. The Supreme Court is NOT going to look into the future to decide a case, which is exactly what they would have had to do because factory produced TC rifles did not exist when the case was first filed. Sean is correct, I think the law is stupid, neverless, it IS the law. 1-pointer didn't ask what the chances were of getting caught or if the BATF would seek to prosecute (they will).... he asked about the law. We are all adults here and I wouldn't begin to try to tell anyone what to do.....but the law is very clear on the matter......if it was born a rifle.....it is always a rifle....if you shorten the barrel to less than 16".....you have an NFA regulated weapon, a short barreled rifle......doesn't matter if you cut the barrel off with a hacksaw, unscrew the long one and screw in a shorter one or knock a pin out and slap the pistol barrel on....the end result is legally the same....and you better have the proper paperwork when the batmen come knocking! If not.......bubba is gonna love his new girlfriend! Just an FYI: Punishment for a first conviction of violating the National Firearms Act is up to 10 years in a federal pen and up to $250,000 in fines.....not to mention the legal cost to try to keep your butt out of jail....and first offenses ARE prosecuted! | |||
|
one of us |
GonHunting and Sean are right on the money. And I have to agree with Sean that many FFL holders are not familiar with the actual laws. WHen I first started purchasing some of my guns over the internet, I hade a heck of a time explaining how an INDIVIDUAL could legally send a gun to an FFL holder. SOme insisted that a gun could only go FFL to FFL. And then there was UPS...to be kind, let me just say that many of the employees, supervisors included, had no idea of their own shipping regulations. I once had to insist that they pull out their own regulations and read them then and there. Finally, after nearly 90 minutes, I got the package accepted. | |||
|
| <Yote Hunter> |
Sean Gonhunting Bobby all three are on the money. I have always read and listen to the same thing you have posted. If it came out as a pistol you could put a rifle bbl. on it if it came out as a rifle it had to be registered with FFL before you can put the short bbl. on it. | ||
|
| <1_pointer> |
SO, in essence if I want to use it for both configurations I need to buy it as a pistol and then convert it to a rifle??? Sorry, I got kinda lost in the above discussion. I didn't realize this was such a hot topic. | ||
|
| one of us |
Exactly! The other option is to buy a new bare frame and assemble it first as a pistol. If you go this way, be certain the FFL lists it as a "frame only" on the yellow sheet (4473). | |||
|
| <pshooter> |
So guys, If I own a legal listed as such pistol, and put a non-folding buttstock on it with the >16"bbl, aren't I illegal ? Or am I missing something. Just trying to understand. Thanks,mvm | ||
|
| one of us |
pshooter Under federal law, it is legal to convert your contender HANDGUN into rifle configuration. You would need a barrel at least 16" long. It is also legal to use a folding stock with a 16" barrel because the 26" overall length minimum is measured with the stock in the normal firing position, in this case, unfolded. Federal law says that any firearm, made from a rifle, having a barrel less than 16" long, is, by definition, a Short Barreled Rifle. Short barreled rifles are regulated by the National Firearms Act and require payment of a one time (per owner)$200 transfer tax and registration with the feds. This is the same process that is required to purchase a machine gun. | |||
|
| <Paul Dustin> |
GonHuntin You are right on the money about the law for making a rifle in to a handgun. But most people and dealer do not know this. | ||
|
| <pshooter> |
Forget about the over 16" bbl., any grip/stock is legal for it. But If I get stopped with a less than 16" bbl. on a fixed stock and they dont run the frame #'s, I'm still illegal right? Were only talking about less than 16" configs. mvm | ||
|
| one of us |
quote: pshooter, Let me try to summarize the possible combinations, keeping in mind a shooter residing in the USA who does not possess any special NFA license or have unusual state/local laws: Pistol grip, pistol frame, with barrel 1" to over 16", YES Pistol grip, carbine/rifle frame, with any length barrel, NO! Buttstock, carbine/rifle or pistol frame, with barrel over 16", YES Buttstock, carbine/rifle or pistol frame, with barrel under 16", NO!
------------------ "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin, 1759 | |||
|
| <pshooter> |
Thats what I thought. Thanks, mvm | ||
|
| one of us |
Not meaning to muddy the waters, but I have a question. I understand the law: pistol to rifle - Okay . . . rifle to pistol - NOT Okay. Don't agree with it, but it is the law. Now the question, used frames ... many of the frames have been around for years and traded hands several times. How can you have any idea what the original configuration was (rifle or pistol) to stay legal? How do you dealers handle frames when they are traded in? If you buy one used from a dealer in pistol form that was originally sold as a rifle several years and owners ago where do you stand legally? If you fall into the same circumstance on a private treaty deal are you just hosed?? Just curious as used guns sell every day. Thanks, Mike | |||
|
| one of us |
MBK, Good question, and one which I have given much thought. Therein lay a problem that I have no concrete answer for. I can tell you what I do: I list a used frame in my books as whatever configuration it is in when I purchase it. This is a bit easier for me, as I have always purchased used frames from out of state, and simply designate the frame according to the reciept of the sending FFL, providing it does not contradict the actual configuration of the frame as it arrives (never has to date). Frames I order new are listed as whatever they were listed as on the reciept from the distributer, as this reflects how they were listed in the distributers bound book. How can you tell regarding a Contender frame? It is easier to do with these, as before a certain date, no Contender frames were offered as Carbines strait from the factory. So if you have a frame with a serial number that indicates a date of manufacture before they ever offered a carbine direct from the factory, it MUST have started life as a handgun frame. With the Encore, due to all the 209x50 Muzzle loaders out there shipped in rifle configuration etc, it is very hard to tell if a frame may have started out life as one of these. However the B A T F would go about running a trace of the serial Number would be how you would be able to follow it to it's original point of sale, and in other words, I am not entirely sure how a private citizen could do this or if you could do this, as for example I do not offer out any info from my bound books other than that required by law. Maybe Mark would have a better idea? I do not know if the factory has a database to be able to tell you how a given frame (due to serial #) was originally shipped, or if they do, whether or not they would be willing to look up such a thing, but this might be the best place to start, with a call to T/C. I may just do this on Monday and see what they say ------------------ "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin, 1759 | |||
|
| <centerpunch> |
cricker One Of Us Member # 5488 Email me, see my profile. I am curious whether Bill Thomas is still running North Creek, Smith's restaurant is open and whether the Barton family home is still a B&B. ![[Smile]](images/icons/smile.gif){kind=icon} | ||
|
| <Fireball221> |
Hey guys...It may be legal to use a carbine barrel on our pistols..but have you thought about this.A rifle as defined by our feds..must be a minium of is it 26" long??? How is it we get bye with this??? Just another thought fireball | ||
|
| <centerpunch> |
gonhuntin: quote:Wrong ! I don't know where you got your citation for the above. Here's mine� Title 26, United States Code INTERNAL REVENUE CODE CHAPTER 53 -- MACHINE GUNS, DESTRUCTIVE DEVICES, AND CERTAIN OTHER FIREARMS Subchapter D -- Penalties and Forfeitures Section 5871. Penalties Any person who violates or fails to comply with any provision of this chapter shall, upon conviction, be fined not more than $10,000, or be imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. That being the cae, your other comments are questionable as well. | ||
|
| one of us |
Well Centerpunch, since you have publicly questioned my credibility and integrity......... Try going to the BATF website: http://www.atf.treas.gov/firearms/faq/faq2.htm#m7 Look under section M: "Firearms - National Firearms Act" Scroll down to question M8 and it will read: (M8) What can happen to someone who has an NFA firearm which is not registered to him? [Back] Violators may be fined not more than $250,000, and imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both. In addition, any vessel, vehicle or aircraft used to transport, conceal or possess an unregistered NFA firearm is subject to seizure and forfeiture, as is the weapon itself. [49 U. S. C. 781-788, 26 U. S. C. 5861, 26 U. S. C. 5872] Does that satisfy your doubts about my other comments? Now, some questions for you: How many NFA firearms do YOU own? How many hours have YOU spent researching NFA law? What kind of sauce do YOU like with your crow ![[Big Grin]](images/icons/grin.gif){kind=icon} | |||
|
| one of us |
Gonhuntin', Sean, Paul(s), I, for one, truly appreciate your investigating this issue and providing the results on this forum. I had my doubts on the legalities of converting an Encore rifle to a pistol, and the information that you provided definitely completed the puzzle for me, the missing pieces fit perfectly. Thank you!, Bill | |||
|
| <centerpunch> |
Gonhuntin: quote: quote:Actually, no� it doesn�t. Here are the citations for ATF FAQ #M8 shown above: TITLE 26 Subtitle E CHAPTER 53 Subchapter C Sec. 5861. Sec. 5861. - Prohibited acts It shall be unlawful for any person - (a) to engage in business as a manufacturer or importer of, or dealer in, firearms without having paid the special (occupational) tax required by section 5801 for his business or having registered as required by section 5802; or (b) to receive or possess a firearm transferred to him in violation of the provisions of this chapter; or (c) to receive or possess a firearm made in violation of the provisions of this chapter; or (d) to receive or possess a firearm which is not registered to him in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record; or (e) to transfer a firearm in violation of the provisions of this chapter; or (f) to make a firearm in violation of the provisions of this chapter; or (g) to obliterate, remove, change, or alter the serial number or other identification of a firearm required by this chapter; or (h) to receive or possess a firearm having the serial number or other identification required by this chapter obliterated, removed, changed, or altered; or (i) to receive or possess a firearm which is not identified by a serial number as required by this chapter; or (j) to transport, deliver, or receive any firearm in interstate commerce which has not been registered as required by this chapter; or (k) to receive or possess a firearm which has been imported or brought into the United States in violation of section 5844; or (l) to make, or cause the making of, a false entry on any application, return, or record required by this chapter, knowing such entry to be false U.S.C. TITLE 26 - INTERNAL REVENUE CODE Subtitle E - Alcohol, Tobacco, and Certain Other Excise Taxes CHAPTER 53 - MACHINE GUNS, DESTRUCTIVE DEVICES, AND CERTAIN OTHER Subchapter D - Penalties and Forfeitures � 5872. Forfeitures (a) Laws applicable Any firearm involved in any violation of the provisions of this chapter shall be subject to seizure and forfeiture, and (except as provided in subsection (b)) all the provisions of internal revenue laws relating to searches, seizures, and forfeitures of unstamped articles are extended to and made to apply to the articles taxed under this chapter, and the persons to whom this chapter applies. (b) Disposal In the case of the forfeiture of any firearm by reason of a violation of this chapter, no notice of public sale shall be required; no such firearm shall be sold at a public sale; if such firearm is forfeited for a violation of this chapter and there is no remission or mitigation of forfeiture thereof, it shall be delivered by the Secretary to the Administrator of General Services, General Services Administration, who may order such firearm destroyed or may sell it to any State, or possession, or political subdivision thereof, or at the request of the Secretary, may authorize its retention for official use of the Treasury Department, or may transfer it without charge to any executive department or independent establishment of the Government for use by it. Transportation of Contraband 49 U.S.C. Section 781 Substantive offenses 49 U.S.C. Section 782 Forfeiture of faciliatating vehicle n.b. specific text for the citations following; Transportation of Contraband 49 U.S.C. Section 781 Substantive offenses and 49 U.S.C. Section 782 Forfeiture of faciliatating vehicle � cannot be found because the Code has been modified in some way and to be truthful, I am not going to spend the time searching for something when I can�t know what I am looking for. quote:My response to your NFA questions: Since the enabling NFA legislation SPECIFICALLY classifies your requested information as private, I take the position that I do not have to share that information with ANYONE, so, I will not. The IRS knows. That�s all that�s necessary. You made a common error. You believed what somebody "said." And you insist that the INTEPRETATION of an IRS regulation is correct. Please provide caselaw which substantiates a $250,000 fine for a single �prohibited possesion� of an NFA firearm since that is the PROOF you are right in believing what someone �said.� I will post the full letter from the Firearms Technology Branch of the ATF as regards this issue, when it arrives. Unless of course,gonhuntin already has it, then he can do so. Until then I will continue to disbelieve posts on this matter which are based on hearsay and innuendo. [ 06-05-2002, 05:28: Message edited by: centerpunch ] | ||
|
| one of us |
OK Centerpunch You're right, I shouldn't believe what I read on the BATF's own website............ Even though the BATF is responsible for interpreting and enforcing firearms laws and regulations, they probably don't have a clue as to the consequences of violating the laws they interpret and enforce......and all the legal information posted on their website is just questionable opinion... If the "interpretation" or "what someone said" that I quoted from the BATF's own website doesn't prove anything to you...... then why would you believe an "interpretation" in the form of a letter from the Technology Branch? After all, any answer to your letter is going to be just "what someone said" or an "interpretation", by the person at the Tech Branch that writes the response! You asked me to provide case law to "prove" that someone had been fined $250,000. First, I never said that anyone had actually been fined that amount, I said the fine could be up to $250,000 and/or 10 years in prison, which is true according to BATF's own website. Even if that large of a fine has never been imposed, that doesn't mean it can't be! So, searching case law to see if it has actually been imposed doesn't "prove" anything! By the way, what hearsay and innuendo are you referring to? Are you questioning the legality of converting a factory shipped contender or encore RIFLE to handgun configuration? Do you believe that converting a Remington Model 7 rifle to XP-100 configuration, without registration as a SBR, is legal? Why is that conversion any different than converting a 209X50 encore rifle? I will be interested to see a scanned copy of your letter to the Tech Branch and a scanned copy of their response (if you really do follow through). Personally, I absolutely couldn't care less about what you believe. I'm more interested in what the BATF has to say and I'll believe their published info over anything you have to say! [ 06-05-2002, 07:36: Message edited by: GonHuntin ] | |||
|
| one of us |
Just for my own clarifaction. What makes it a rifle? The buttstock or the barrel? The only reason I ask is beceause I bought mine in the frame buttstock kit. It didn't come with a barrel at all. So is it a considered a rifle or a pistol? ![[Confused]](images/icons/confused.gif){kind=icon} [ 06-06-2002, 09:09: Message edited by: outlawsix ] | |||
|
| one of us |
Just talked to the guy where I bought my frame/buttstock. He told me that on the atf paperwork he listed it as a receiver only so does that mean I'm now safe to put a pistol barrel on it? | |||
|
| one of us |
In the state of Va. Contenders are sold as handguns no matter what form there in. You CAN NOT... use a barrel less then 16" with a buttstock. [ 06-07-2002, 05:34: Message edited by: Jules ] | |||
|
| one of us |
That's a good question! Technically, when shipped as a bare receiver, the legal classification of the frame is determined by how it is first assembled. For instance, if it was first assembled with a stock and rifle barrel, it will always be a rifle. If the frame & stock were shipped from the TC factory having never been assembled with a barrel, the assembly is not, by definition, a rifle. If it is a frame and you remove the buttstock and assemble it first as a pistol, them it is legally a pistol. Keep in mind, regardless of how the dealer lists a firearm on the form 4473 (yellow sheet), the legal status of the firearm doesn't change. In other words, the dealer can't change the legal classification by simply listing it a certain way on the yellow sheet. Hope that helped? | |||
|
| one of us |
Just thought some folks might want to see this: -------------------------------------------------- October 1, 1992 Firearms Technical Branch Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms 650 Mass. Ave., NW Washington, DC 20226 Dear Sirs: The Greensboro, NC BATF Compliance Office suggested that I write to you for information on the following point. I am interested on whether it is possible to have a commercially manufactured rifle receiver changed to be legally considered to be a handgun receiver, and how this can be done. The Compliance Office said that this might be possible via a "Letter of Determination", but advised me to write to you about the criteria and procedures. For example, if a person has a rifle receiver and wishes to have it built into a rifle-caliber handgun suitable for steel silhouette target shooting, comparable to the bolt action Remington XP-100 handgun. I understand that the serial number of this receiver is recorded as being for a rifle. Could this person have this receiver's serial number considered to be a handgun receiver? If so, what procedures and paperwork would be necessary. Sincerely, ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Oct 29 1992 Dear Mr. XXXXX: This refers to your letter of October 1, 1992, in which you inquire about the legality of manufacturing a handgun which utilizes a rifle type receiver. 26 U.S.C. Chapter 53 # 5845(a)(4), the National Firearms Act (NFA), defines the term "firearm" to include a weapon made from a rifle if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length. Utilizing the receiver of an existing rifle for the purposes of manufacturing a handgun would constitute the making of a firearm as defined above. Individuals desiring to make such a firearm must first submit an ATF Form 1, Application To Make And Register a Firearm and pay the applicable $200 making tax. If an individual were to obtain a rifle type receiver that had not previously been utilized in the assembly of a rifle, a handgun could be made and not be subject to the provisions of the NFA. Verification must be obtained from the manufacturer of the receiver to establish its authenticity. We trust the foregoing has been responsive to your inquiry. If we may be of any further assistance, please contact us. Sincerely your, (signed) Edward M. Owen, Jr. Chief, Firearms Technology Branch ------------------------------------------------- [ 06-07-2002, 06:10: Message edited by: GonHuntin ] | |||
|
| one of us |
So if I understand , which I hope I do, If I recieved only the frame and the first barrel I put on it was a barrel shorter than 16" with a pistol grip. Then at any point in the future I could legally put on a barrel longer than 16" with a buttstock. However if the first barrel on the reciever is longer than 16" with a buttstock, I could not put on a shorter barrel with a pistol grip beceause the gun would have been classified as a rifle first. If this is the case then the first barrel on the frame was a <16" one with a pistol grip. Ah legal at last. | |||
|
| one of us |
Outlawsix, One clarification...any length barrel would be OK, as long as you put the pistol grip on FIRST. There's no fed regulation on max barrel length for a handgun, that I know of. I understand some states regulate barrel length for hunting, though. | |||
|
| one of us |
Thank you fellas I can now sleep easier knowing that since I put a pistol grip and barrel on it first I can now put a rifle barrel on it and be perfectly legal. I'm now only leary of buying a used frame, what if it was a riffle first. For that matter what about all those guys whose first experience was with a ml barrel now want to try it as a pistol. Boy I hope they don't get in trouble. | |||
|
| <centerpunch> |
1_pointer posted on 3:19;2002 quote:GonHuntin then posted a "warning" that his reply would start a flame war. He ultimately posted on 06-07-2002 at 06:06 a detailed response, in the form of a "letter" from ATF to an "apples" question. Isn't it too bad that the issues is oranges and NOT apples. There remains a question about that recent posting of a purported letter from ATF dtd 10/92 since it is not a scan of the original document with the appropriate letterhead, etc clearly in evidence. As an aside, I guess meeting certain conditions� the scanned document requirement of gonhuntin� applies ONLY to those who might disagree w/ him. Evidently he feels no impetus to comply with stipulations which he imposes on others because he doesn't expect them to be truthful. Sort of like replying to a BBBruce tirade. They both believe they are above the fray. To those who might be interested in a scanned document revealing the position of ATF on the Contender/Encore issue, look for a new post since their reply is not expected to be timely. | ||
|
| one of us |
Hey Centerpunch I don't know where you get the apples/oranges garbage, the letter I posted is about converting a rifle receiver. I can't begin to imagine why you think a TC receiver is any different from a Remington, Savage, Winchester, etc receiver. Look up the legal definition of a rifle and then compare it to what you get when you open the box of an Encore that was shipped from the factory as a rifle! By the way, it would have been very difficult for me to post a scanned copy of the document above since it isn't mine! So pull your foot out of your mouth and click on this link: http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/law.html It will take you to the website of a very well known attorney, Mr. James Bardwell, who is a firearms law expert. The site is a collection of letters and rulings concerning firearms laws. scroll down to atf letter7.txt There you will find the info I posted and you can see for yourself that I made no changes to the document. (An intelligent person would feel really stupid about now) I have had just about enough of you inferring that I am a liar (I don't take that lightly). I can post links to back up every claim I have made. If you disagree with what I say, fine, that is your right, but inferring that I'm a liar is uncalled for! If, for some reason, you just don't like me, that's fine too, I can assure you, because of your conduct on this thread and many others, the feeling is mutual. Now, if you want to debate the issue logically, let's roll! However, you have never even stated your position on the matter. You just jumped in telling me I was wrong (as you frequently do to other posters) and questioning my honesty, without saying why you think so. (does the quote "That being the cae, your other comments are questionable as well." ring a bell?) So, give it your best shot.......without any garbage, tell us all exactly why you think TC products, that were shipped from the factory as a complete assembled rifle, can legally be converted to handguns without registering them as NFA weapons..... I await your response............. [ 06-07-2002, 23:34: Message edited by: GonHuntin ] | |||
|
| <centerpunch> |
Gonhuntin: quote:PLEASE refresh your memory about inferences by reading this� which you posted on 06-05-2002 @ 07:30: quote:If that is NOT an inference as regards MY honesty in this matter, what is it� an invitation to a masked ball ? quote:and I might surmise that you feel kinda stupid about now. Maybe not, tho. I am guilty I suppose of letting your snide remarks affect me to the degree where I countered with the same expectations you revealed. But, I'll tellya� I am not going to apologize for giving back what you gave me. I do believe you will find any and all inferences and a not so subtle change in my attitude FOLLOWED your posting re: scanned copy(s). As regards a civil discussion, it is clear in my mind that your initial posted response which addresses rifle receivers is not on topic. My discussions with ATF agents in their Minneapolis District Office confirms the issue is one of frames, not receivers� as well as one of "original design." Both points, as your posts reveal, you missed. I have found that most critical decisions often are based on what the ordinary "citizen" would call minutiae. That small characteristic which is generally overlooked, because it is � so small and inconsequential appearing. Ultimately, the Firearms Technology Branch will settle the issue� regardless of the level of intensity of anyone's research that is not on point. You may be right� insisting you are doesn't make it so. | ||
|
| one of us |
[/QUOTE]PLEASE refresh your memory about inferences by reading this… which you posted on 06-05-2002 @ 07:30: quote:If that is NOT an inference as regards MY honesty in this matter, what is it… an invitation to a masked ball ? ________________________________________________ Fair question, I wanted to see a scanned copy for two reasons, first, so I could see the exact wording of your questions and the BATF answer. Second, simply because of your past arguementative history on other threads, I really believe you would change the wording to win an arguement. I don't trust you because of your past history on this board. Now, just to refresh your memory, it was you who questioned my honesty in your second post to this thread....."That being the cae, your other comments are questionable as well." Ring any bells? _______________________________________________ I am guilty I suppose of letting your snide remarks affect me to the degree where I countered with the same expectations you revealed. But, I'll tellya… I am not going to apologize for giving back what you gave me. I do believe you will find any and all inferences and a not so subtle change in my attitude FOLLOWED your posting re: scanned copy(s). _________________________________________________ If you really believe that, you better go back and read your second post on the thread, you know, the one that starts like this: "Wrong ! I don't know where you got your citation for the above. Here's mine…". That's not exactly a friendy request for info, it's more of a, you're an idiot and don't know what you are talking about, statement (which isn't unusual in your posts). __________________________________________________ As regards a civil discussion, it is clear in my mind that your initial posted response which addresses rifle receivers is not on topic. My discussions with ATF agents in their Minneapolis District Office confirms the issue is one of frames, not receivers… as well as one of "original design." Both points, as your posts reveal, you missed. _______________________________________________ I am not the least surprised that you received questionable answers from a district BATF office. Those folks are field agents and generally lack the technical knowledge to answer specific legal questions of this type. The fact that they (you?) draw a distinction between a "frame and a "receiver" tells me right away that they (you?) don't have the technical knowledge to answer the question we have been discussing. There is NO legal distinction between a frame and a receiver, both are simply terminology referring to the "controlled" part that makes a firearm a firearm. On a Contender it is a frame, on an XP 100, a Striker or a Winchester Model 70 etc it is a bolt action, on a Competitor it is a cannon breech action, on an AR 15 it is the lower receiver and on an FAL it is the upper receiver. They are of different design, but they are all legally what makes a pile of parts a firearm. Original design has no bearing on this issue as can easily be seen in the relationship between the Remington Model 7 and the XP-100R. Although they both share a common action, the Model 7 is legally a rifle (and proceeded the XP-100R) and the XP is legally a pistol. The same is true for a Contender handgun and a factory configured Contender carbine, they are legally different and fall under different regulations. ________________________________________________ I have found that most critical decisions often are based on what the ordinary "citizen" would call minutiae. That small characteristic which is generally overlooked, because it is … so small and inconsequential appearing. Ultimately, the Firearms Technology Branch will settle the issue… regardless of the level of intensity of anyone's research that is not on point. ________________________________________________ I have corresponded with several gentlemen who have previously asked this question of the Tech Branch, the answer has been the same so far.....if it left the factory as a rifle, it will always be a rifle..... ________________________________________________ You may be right… insisting you are doesn't make it so. _______________________________________________ Never said it did, however, you jumped into this discussion (as you have done in several others) with what you thought was a "gotcha". You weren't interested in learning anything or providing information to further the discussion, you just wanted to prove somebody wrong (as evidenced by one of your statements on another thread in a different forum)! You didn't post asking about my statements regarding the legallity of converting rifle to handgun, instead, you researched just enough to find something that appeared to show a flaw in a very small part of one of my posts, but you didn't do enough homework. You didn't like the info I posted, so you tried to discredit it by posting something that seemed to contradict what I posted about how large a fine could be imposed for violating the NFA. The problem is, you ended up looking stupid and couldn't admit that you just might be wrong! In fact, you even tried to make it seem like my response was based on some worthless interpretation (and now we find out that you have been relying on the "interpretation" of a field agent instead of someone who actually understands the technicalities of the law, imagine that) ! I have repeatedly asked you direct questions and you have consistantly avoided answering them. You don't even have the guts to put your neck out and tell us why you think you are right! No, you would rather snipe at me with little phrases like: "That being the cae, your other comments are questionable as well." "Until then I will continue to disbelieve posts on this matter which are based on hearsay and innuendo." "There remains a question about that recent posting of a purported letter from ATF dtd 10/92 since it is not a scan of the original document with the appropriate letterhead, etc clearly in evidence." "Sort of like replying to a BBBruce tirade. They both believe they are above the fray." So, centerpunch, how about some answers? Have you even read the TC vs. BATF court briefs and judges opinions? Have you read and studied the National Firearms Act of 1934? Have you studied the specific regulations that pertain to class 3 firearms? Have you read and studied the Gun Control Act of 1968? What is it, in your personality, that makes you feel the need to catch someone in a mistake or prove someone wrong (I can quote examples if you would like)? Does it make you feel "superior" to other people? And, finally, why do you believe a factory configured contender carbine is any different, legally, than a Remington model 700, Winchester 70 or NEF Handi Rifle? And why is it legal to convert a factory configured Contender carbine into pistol configuration but it's not legal to convert any of the other mentioned rifles without first registering them as NFA weapons? Come on Centerpunch, it's time to put up or shut up! [ 06-10-2002, 08:45: Message edited by: GonHuntin ] | |||
|
| <centerpunch> |
Gonhuntin: quote:YES and discussed it personally with Tim Pancurak of Thompson Center at an IHMSA Nationals. quote:YES, in part. quote:Relevance ? But like the NFA, in part. quote:YES, and the subsequent court cases thru Emerson. quote:IS there something written somewhere which states a poster is prohibited from pointing out that which they believe to be in error. You do, and I must not ? quote:That's obvious. I do. And you proved they are different when you wrote the second half of your question, which is: quote:Gonhuntin�� If you write that it is OK to convert a carbine Contender to a pistol and ATF supports you, as they appear to do���� BUT not OK���� to convert a Rem 700 etc. to a pistol� w/o "approval"��� fer christsakes� that distinction, BY ITSELF makes a Rem 700 etc. "conversion" DIFFERENT from a Contender "conversion." It can't be that hard to see. They are different. ATF says they are different. You don't. That makes you, wrong. In error� unable and/or unwilling to acknowledge that ATF views them differently. Which is a substantial part of your disagreement with me. ATF sees them differently. I know that. Show me where I am wrong. | ||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia
| View $GS_USERNAME's Public Profile |
| Add $GS_USERNAME to my Buddies |
| Add $GS_USERNAME to my Ignore List |
| Invite $GS_USERNAME to a Private Topic |
| View Recent Posts by $GS_USERNAME |
| Notify me of New Posts by $GS_USERNAME |
