Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply |
one of us |
I disagree. I can find no court case or judicial action to support this contention. If you know of one I'd like to see it. And if you read the judicial decisions on this (both post and pre Supreme court) owning a handgun version or a carbine version is OK, making one or the other out of the parts is OK, as long as you don't make a regulated firearm (i.e. short barreled rifle will cost you $200 to register IF it is allowed by BATF, Pistols are not required to pay the $200 tax. If they were you wouldn't be able to buy a contender or encore NEW for $252). Now the New York issue is totally different, now you're dealing with state, city, and county laws of registration. And taking an Encore or Contender in a pistol version will be no different than me taking my P90T as I drive through the city. I'm in trouble. NOT from BATF, but from NYCPD. Bill Oh and by the way, T/C DID offer the carbine version of the Contender prior to the Supreme court case. It was the offering of the one and only Carbine conversion kit that sparked the case, done on purpose by T/C. Read the link. [ 02-15-2003, 08:05: Message edited by: Helicopter Bill ] | |||
|
one of us |
Bill Have you looked at the date that this case was FIRST filed? Not the SC case, but the case that started it all......it was filed well before TC ever produced the first factory assembled contender carbine! The SC case ONLY decided the legality of converting contender handguns..... Please show me in the court case documents where there is a mention of converting a factory produced rifle???? | |||
|
one of us |
Don't you guys have anything better to do with your time? Like Maybe load & shoot?? Rich Jake | |||
|
new member |
I can't remember where I read it(some forum some where),but I do remember reading that t/c manufacters all frames as handguns regardless of how it leaves the factory | |||
|
one of us |
Hey Rich Don't you have something better to do with your time than to tell us how to spend ours? | |||
|
one of us |
quote:You guys are really boring that's why I commented on the string. If you have nothing better to do fighting about a NON issue that is your perogative. I'd rather spend my time more constructively & either reading about something that could benefit me in the future or do something that could possibly help others rather than just waste time & space spewing a lot of drival! Rich Jake | |||
|
one of us |
Rich If that's the way you feel about it......then why aren't you doing it instead of wasting your time telling us what we should be doing? That's the thing I don't understand about people who complain about this type of discussion....... who asked them to read and comment on it? If they think it's a waste of time......why do they get involved? Maybe they just want to gripe???? When I see a thread that doesn't interest me......I don't read it.......simple, huh? [ 02-15-2003, 20:15: Message edited by: GonHuntin ] | |||
|
one of us |
quote:I'm not looking to gripe I just see no possible benefit to discuss something that is just a hypothetical. You are right about one thing though & I've spent much too much time on BS & I'm going to load some bullets to shoot which is by far more constructive than this thread!!!!!! By the way we are truley lucky that we don't get charged for the amount space we use!! Rich Jake | |||
|
<Fireball> |
[ 02-17-2003, 04:23: Message edited by: Fireball ] | ||
one of us |
I sent the question to the BATF. Figure they'll send an answer in a couple weeks. I'll post it when I get it. Only reason I entered the discussion was my reading of the rulings and decisions says making a contender or encore to/from a carbine/pistol and back is not a violation of the NFA. But we'll get the answer from the folks that would do the prosecuting. Helicopter Bill | |||
|
one of us |
quote:Looking forward to the response..... | |||
|
one of us |
fireball Last time I checked, neither you or Rich owned this forum.....has that changed? If you find this discussion so irritating, then WHY DO YOU KEEP READING IT??? The only folks bitching around here are the ones that don't want to read this thread......but they continue to read it and then bitch about it!!! If you or anyone else doesn't like it......then don't read it!!! Maybe you would feel more comfortable over at the pond? | |||
|
one of us |
Now, now boys, lets play nice. | |||
|
one of us |
RJ, now do ya still think it was a bad call for my little sister to move to Long Island?? lol See what kinda BS she had to put up with there. LOL | |||
|
<Fireball> |
[ 02-17-2003, 04:24: Message edited by: Fireball ] | ||
one of us |
Ya'll got a shot at 150 posts but I don't think your gonna make it | |||
|
one of us |
55 posts and the almighty hasn't spoken. Wonders will never stop. | |||
|
one of us |
quote:Gonhuuntin I have no problem with the idea of a discussion on a subject that has merrit. This subject crossed from that, to a pure guess on a hypothetical situation. Which has been discussed to the point of being ridiculous. Most law enforcment people have no clue to this subject matter nor would they ever care unless it was an unfound source of ovetime for them. I look at the thread because it is amazing that you seem to get so irratated that people seem to disagree with your position. Soon the Batf will answer the question & maybe it will put the thread to sleep where it belongs! I don't own this forum & like it very much here. I also know when it is time to let a certain point of view end & rest.I am content to just be one of the many personalities here. Now that I see you are the type of guy that has to have the last word I'm going to leave it at that. I will not reply any futher to the ravings of a person who is stressed out. Why are you so angry ??? Rich Jake | |||
|
one of us |
Fireball The reason this subject continues to re-appear is because of the pooling of ignorance that occurs when the subject of gun law is discussed. I have read everything I can find on this matter including the briefs and decisions of the TC Supreme Court case and NFA law......I haven't based my position on what I heard from somebody at a gunshow or what some ignorant dealer says or what I read on some forum.....I based it on study of the laws that apply. I find it interesting that nobody who claims I'm wrong can provide proof to back their opinion.......I'd be willing to bet that 95% of those that disagree with me have never read the TC case documents or the National Firearms Act...... instead, they rely on what they have heard..... not what they have researched for themselves. I have contacted TC and asked the question....they gave me the same song and dance they gave everyone else..... but....when I ask technical questions about the law and how it applies to their product....they clam up! Read the first post in this thread, even old MSSMagnum agrees that I'm correct on what the law says..... I disagree with your assumption that this thread has contributed nothing.......how do you know that? All you can truthfully say is that you don't like this thread or what I've posted here. I can assure you that I haven't posted anything here just to please or displease you! Frankly, I don't care what you think...... As far your statement "I will enjoy being your PAIN in the ASS for as long as you keep this thread up.", just exactly how is that going to contribute anything of value to the thread or the forum (that is your concern, right?)? That statement is rather childish don't you think? And, just FYI, it takes more than a lightweight like you to irritate me......If you can't read, understand and rationally discuss this subject, then may I suggest you do something more in line with your abilities.......like watching football or hockey or reality TV......or, maybe you can start a thread about which is better, 30-06 or 270......or maybe one of those "if you could only have one _____" I'm sure that would contribute more to the forum! ... (I'm enjoying this ) [ 02-16-2003, 04:10: Message edited by: GonHuntin ] | |||
|
one of us |
jsh, sorry to here your little sis moved to NYC. But if you think that is sad, mine moved to Oklahoma. Maybe she can find me some deer hunting down there. Should be some big deer down there now that all the okies are up here hunting in KS. mbk | |||
|
one of us |
Hey Rich I thought you were going to go do something constructive???? I know, I know, this thread is like a bad car wreck..... you just have to look! | |||
|
one of us |
quote:All the cops I know prefer to arrest people for crimes what they don't gotta do six weeks of research on to determine whether a crime was committed or not. Mostly, they don't arrest people for kite flying, swearing in public, or anal sex either, irrespective of the underlying supreme court decisions. Moreover, the thing to do with stupid laws, or in this case, laws which simply didn't consider TC switch-barrel firearms when they were written, is not to develop some sort of weird compliance cult wherein you gotta throw salt over your left shoulder and turn around twice, counterclockwise before you change barrels, but rather, to simply ignore 'em. If we start coming across too many idiot police officers with nothing better to do than bust people for stupid ass stuff, it'll be time for a tax cut, but in the meantime I wouldn't spend a lot of time worrying about whether your TC frames started out as pistols or rifles, or whether you can prove it one way or another. Peace, land, bread! Mark Dumais | |||
|
<Thumper> |
[ [ 02-17-2003, 08:37: Message edited by: Thumper ] | ||
new member |
Before T/C shut down their e-mail services I asked the question about the legal aspect of pistol/rifle frame configurations, and the response was as follows: Dear Sir: The information listed below is in response to your letter checking on the legality of switching Encore components between rifle and pistol or vice versa. Thompson/Center Arms Co. went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court to establish the lawfulness of the Contender pistol and carbine (including the carbine kit), and won. The Supreme Court opinion also establishes the legality of the Encore system, which has similar interchangeable parts. With these systems, a receiver may be assembled either with a pistol grip and pistol barrel, or with a shoulder stock and rifle barrel (minimum length 16 inches). A barrel under 16 inches in length must never be assembled onto the receiver when the shoulder stock is attached. Within that parameter, the consumer may use the parts to make a pistol or carbine, and may change the configuration at will. In 1988, Thompson/Center Arms filed suit against the United States alleging that the pistol and carbine kit as used above do not constitute a rifle with a barrel less than 16 inches in length, a weapon made from a rifle with overall length less than 26 inches, or a restricted "firearm" as otherwise defined in the National Firearms Act. The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the US Supreme Court agreed with Thompson/Center Arms. Their opinions are cited as United States v. Thompson/Center Arms Co., 504 U.S 505 (1992), affirming 924 F.2d 1041 (Fed. Cir. 1991). Thus, the sale, possession, and use of the Contender or Encore pistol and carbine as described above are fully in accord with federal law. The use of these products in all of the States is likewise lawful, except that certain restrictions may apply in California. Very Truly Yours, Tim Pancurak PO Box 5002 Rochester, NH 03866-5002 | |||
|
new member |
1st things 1st...I have no..NO intentions of ever setting foot in New York again..with or without a handgun. Would prefer just to stay beneath the Mason-Dixon if at all possible! | |||
|
one of us |
quote:HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.......... | |||
|
one of us |
WOW !!!!!! IT'S OVER !!! YEAH !!!!!!! Rich Jake | |||
|
one of us |
quote:Rich, Sadly, this is why it continues, because the T/C case did not address the question at hand, of coverting an existing carbine or rifle into a handgun without the NFA approval to do so. The T/C Case addresses converting an existing pistol into a carbine or rifle and BACK AGAIN as many times as one wants. These are separate legal questions, and Mr Pancurak's letter does not address the question at hand with any solid information which serves our purposes and answers the pertinant legar questions. Notice that in the letter, he: 1. Does not specify that all frames which leave the T/C plant (including the Encore frames sent out as assembled rifles) start out as pistol frames, and 2. Refer's to a case which did NOT deal with the specific question at hand? Notice his statement that "Thus, the sale, possession, and use of the Contender or Encore pistol and carbine as described above are fully in accord with federal law." Well, that is fine, but NOT the question at hand! Like I have said many times, I wish it were all so simple and solved by T/C's case, but it is not. [ 02-18-2003, 05:19: Message edited by: Sean VHA #60013 ] | |||
|
one of us |
Thanks Sean Now I don't have to repeat myself to people who either can't or don't want to understand when someone explains the situation. | |||
|
new member |
In order for one to become penalized with a maximum sentence for illegal activity, one must act in an illegal manner to cause suspicion to be arrested. If your T/C frame from a rifle has a pistol grip and a rifle barrel mounted to it while hunting, you deserve the attention of an arresting officer. I was checked by a team of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources officers just as I completed dragging my deer out of the woods this past season. One officer asked to see my gun and wanted to know what caliber I was using. I was confident that I was legal and gave them full lattitude and answered all their questions. By the postings at this forum I was technically illegal because my Encore frame had a .357 Maximum barrel and legal grip/forearm. There was no reason for them to get technical and ask what frame was I using. I have never known anyone to get arrested for an offense such as what is being tossed about on this forum. Has anyone in this forum had the experience of being arrested for frame switching? Has anyone known of an individual that has been arrested for frame switching? Maybe someone that has can shed some light on this beat up subject for us all. | |||
|
<Fireball> |
Has anyone in this forum had the experience of being arrested for frame switching? Has anyone known of an individual that has been arrested for frame switching? NO its all BS at this point. Some just have to ALWAYS be right even in their make believe worlds. Maybe they are correct MAYBE! but they can show no more proof on their side of the argument than the ones on the other side. You have had the best reply yet...WHO do you know that has been Busted for it? NO ONE In the USA Shooting over a water way is illegal also...who do you know that has been busted for that? Fireball | ||
one of us |
There are people who comit crime for years without getting caught.....doesn't mean it's legal....... So, are you saying it's alright to break the law as long as you don't get caught? OK...one more time..... ************************************************ From The Gun Control Act of 1968, Public Law 90-618. Sec 921 Definitions (7) The term "rifle" means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade 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. (8) The term "short-barreled rifle" means a rifle having one or more barrels less than sixteen inches in length and any weapon made from a rifle (whether by alteration, modification, or otherwise) if such weapon, as modified, has an overall length of less than 26 inches. ************************************************* Now, you can either argue that all contenders/encores are handguns (we have "proven" they aren't by the paperwork that a dealer receives when he purchases a new Encore rifle from a distributor)......or you can argue that the TC court case provided an exception to the National Firearms Act of 1934, for rifles made by TC (we have "proven" the case doesn't grant an exception for TC rifles because the case only addresses the legality of converting an existing contender HANDGUN through the use of a "carbine kit"). | |||
|
<Fireball> |
GonHuntin Here is the problem. You have YOUR belief. That is Good and Very acceptable...Infact you are RIGHT! But you REFUSE to see any other opinion and YOU have worn your OPINION out on this thread. people have passions and THIS is yours. You someway feel the NEED to preach the LAWS of owning a contender. OK on Sunday you had the Congregation with open ears. Now until next sunday you must just PRAY for your Congregation and hope they come around. Dang it may be the law...AS YOU interpret it. OK and with the respect... you deserve have been heard. It is good that you make sure the new people understand the law. But now it is OVER until a NEW pERSON asks for advice. I just wish we had someone like you in the republican arena fighting for our gun rights. No harm or foul intended Now let talk about Sean Shooting turtles? Is this Legal?........lol....Just kidding Sean Fireball......Lets MOVE ON | ||
one of us |
GonHuntin, sounds like you should be the attorney for the prosecution. Defense attorneys like to read the broad implication of the decision not the narrow view. BATF sent me a reply saying they don't answer technical questions via e-mail, so I've put it in writing and am sending it off in the morning... However, two weeks ago when my new Contender frame came in, it was up to me to tell the dealer whether it was a rifle or pistol frame (and wait the appropriate cooling off period). I think the better question is, how does a dealer deal with a guy that wants to buy a carbine and a pistol barrel and grips all at the same time. Any of you FFL's out there know how to handle this? Helicopter Bill | |||
|
one of us |
Bill A frame is a frame....neither a rifle or pistol, until it is assembled the first time. If you look at a form 4473 (yellow sheet) that you and the dealer fill out when you buy a firearm, there is a place to list the firearm as a handgun, long gun or frame/receiver only. If you buy just a new, bare frame, that is how the dealer should list it.....as a frame only. Regardless of any other parts you buy at the same time, when you buy a new bare frame, it should be listed as a frame only on the yellow sheet because that is how it came to the dealer. When the frame is assembled the first time, it then legally becomes either a rifle or pistol depending on the configuration of assembly. [ 02-19-2003, 08:03: Message edited by: GonHuntin ] | |||
|
one of us |
Fireball Please don't take this as a flame.....it really isn't meant to be. My question to you is, why do you care how much I post about this topic? If you are so tired of reading about it, then why do you continue to read it? If it irritates you, then why would you continue to visit the thread? Why not just "move on"? If someone is holding a gun to your head forcing you to read this....please let us know and we'll call out the swat team! It's a simple question but I'd seriously like an answer.......I'm not kidding, I really do want to know!!!!! | |||
|
<Fireball> |
You are just a PAIN in the ASS about it. | ||
one of us |
Fireball Well, if you would take your ass to another thread then this one wouldn't cause you any pain! The solution to your discomfort is really very simple.....don't read what you don't like! ????any questions???? | |||
|
one of us |
Whatever you do...DONT read the "how did you get started...." post. talk about a waste of time | |||
|
Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 |
Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia