Jump to content
Melancholia

Legal Status of Non-NFA Firearm AR Build?

Recommended Posts

On 5/22/2018 at 0:05 PM, JT Custom Guns said:

That being said, unless that is a smooth bore weapon, I don't think NJ will accept it as a "Firearm" unless there is previous review and acceptance by AG / NJSP (as in the Shockwave, TAC & Aces firearms).   JMO

The shockwave review by the NJSP already acknowledges the legality of “firearms.”

Quote from the letter: 

Firearms with similar design and structure must fall within this definition of a firearm and must not have been manufactured as a “shotgun” (NJSA 2C:39-1n) or meet the Federal requirement of “any other weapon (AOW)” which measures less then 26 inches in overall length. The firearm must also comply with all BATF requirements.”

We have to treat “firearms” as a class of weapons just as we do rifles, shotguns, and pistols. The ATF letter for the Franklin Armory XO-26 clarifies all of this. If we could get a NJSP letter on the Franklin Armory model, then I would say we would be way safer, I agree. I’ve attached the ATF letter that is shipped with every XO 26 firearm. 

AD1D29D0-283B-47CE-96E2-D8DC1968C237.jpeg

6E06AAEE-A38F-4374-A91F-688870854C0C.jpeg

194ACD9D-2FBF-4E04-95B1-7DC8D8B31518.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've figured a few things. 

The shockwave is legal because it is not a modified shotgun, and doesnt meet the criteria of a rifle pistol or shotgun.

Those firearms with short barrels are not sbr's, even with stocks, because they lack rifling. 

The firarms with pistol braces, are not rifles, with vfg are not pistol, and They exceed 26" not NFA

NJ requires that they cannot originate as rifles, or shotguns, else they be considered a sawed off. 

 However, nothing says, that I can find, that you cannot modify a pistol into a non nfa. Unless that falls under a manufacturing restriction.

So this could very well be legal if it originated as a pistol, with a P2P. Or you could convince your FFL to sell the recieved as a "firearm".(edit, they are sold as "other", reciever, not rifle)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really hope this catches on. Many in the NJ 2A community remain dubious (and with good reason), this shows me that we have some time before this can become somewhat normative in NJ, which is expected. 

To clarify on the Franklin Armory XO-26 model one more time: this is not the smooth bore model that Franklin Armory released. The smooth bore model is the Franklin Armory Reformation model, which is considered a firearm because of the lack of traditional rifling. The Franklin Armory XO-26 model on the other hand, is considered a "firearm" not because of a smooth bore (it has rifling), but because it exceeds 26", has a VFG, and has a brace. This makes it not a pistol, because it is designed to be used with two hands (VFG), but not a rifle because it is not designed to be shouldered (brace).

17 hours ago, JackDaWack said:

So this could very well be legal if it originated as a pistol, with a P2P. Or you could convince your FFL to sell the recieved as a "firearm".

Technically, aren't frames/receivers supposed to be transferred as "other" anyways?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Afaik, they should be. However, when I buy ar15 lowers, they are always marked as rifles on form 4473.
WTF?
[emoji85][emoji86][emoji87]

Sent from an undisclosed location via Tapatalk

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edit,

 

NVM, i read deeper into the laws and found everything. I figured filling out a COE would make it transferred as a rifle.

 

13:54-3.12 Requirements for sale of rifle, shotgun, antique cannon or receiver

Every purchaser, other than a licensed or registered retail or wholesale dealer or manufacturer, or law enforcement agency as provided by this chapter, must present a valid firearms purchaser identification card to the dealer who is required to confirm the identity of the purchaser. The purchaser must also sign a certificate of eligibility (NJSP 634), filled out by the dealer or his licensed employee, for each rifle, shotgun, antique cannon or receiver purchased. The certificate shall indicate that the purchaser presently complies with all of the requirements for obtaining an identification card, and shall set forth the purchaser's name, address and identification card number. The certificate shall be retained by the dealer. Prior to completing the sale or transfer of a rifle, shotgun, or receiver, the retail dealer shall initiate a NICS check with the Division of State Police.

 

So if you buy a lower receiver you should technically be able to build it into a non-nfa, following those guidelines. Since it never transferred to you as a rifle, and is documented on form 4473.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I purchased a receiver from a FFL, but it was accompanied by a COE. Does that legally make it a rifle? I don't know if I can use that receiver. You can use one purchased on a pistol permit, but I haven't been able to find a FFL that will transfer one to me. 
It's not a lack of support. The problem is that in NJ there are many police that will arrest you and let the judge sort it out. Personally I don't have the financial resources to play that game. 
NJ doesn't play by the rules. You might be legally correct, but that doesn't mean you're not going to jail. 
Please let us know if you have any success with Evan Nappan. Most people don't even get a return phone call. 
 


Either he is very optimistic, doesn’t know that Nappen only returns calls that are high profile and client has money to burn, or he is a personal friend of Nappen’s. I am curious how it turns out. If a personal friend ask Nappen what happened to him taking Pantano’s Case to SCOTUS. He talked a big game in the press.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, capt14k said:

 


Either he is very optimistic, doesn’t know that Nappen only returns calls that are high profile and client has money to burn, or he is a personal friend of Nappen’s. I am curious how it turns out. If a personal friend ask Nappen what happened to him taking Pantano’s Case to SCOTUS. He talked a big game in the press.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

On the 16th at ANJRPC, he will be there for a gun law seminar. I intend to ask him there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On the 16th at ANJRPC, he will be there for a gun law seminar. I intend to ask him there. 
Can you please ask him about Pantano Case as well. He talked a big game but my understanding is he wanted another $100k to continue case to SCOTUS and ANJRPC wasn't putting in any money.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@e92m3allday Don't contact them. It's not going to work out like you think it will. We previously had something that was perfectly legal become illegal because a bunch of people just had to call the NJSP until an anti picked up and ruined it for everyone. Please, don't do it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, capt14k said:

Can you please ask him about Pantano Case as well. He talked a big game but my understanding is he wanted another $100k to continue case to SCOTUS and ANJRPC wasn't putting in any money.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 

Well, damn. If only we had a pro-2A version of George Soros funding these things. Money talks, man.

I’m learning a lot about Evan Nappen these days, sheesh. I will ask him about the Pantano case for sure, I just hope he shows up and gives reasonably thorough answers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, damn. If only we had a pro-2A version of George Soros funding these things. Money talks, man.
I’m learning a lot about Evan Nappen these days, sheesh. I will ask him about the Pantano case for sure, I just hope he shows up and gives reasonably thorough answers


Thank you. We do have the equivalent of Soros x 2, The Koch Brothers. If you can slip a question in to ANJRPC, “if they have applied for Koch grants?” that would be even better.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I attended the event today. I asked Evan Nappen about the legality regarding firearms, including the Franklin Armory models. He said he loves Franklin Armory and regarding the firearms "i love it, it's like loopholes extraordinaire," however he advised to wait for a letter from NJSP, because basing it on the ATF( which changes things on a whim), is not as strong a defense as having NJSP if it lands in a courtroom.This is exactly what I expected him to say. 

Regarding the Pantano case, he kind of gave me a general reply. He didn't hear the Koch grant part of my question, because he started to answer my question immediately.  He basically said what we already know, that the NJ supreme court granted cert, then the Drake decision took place and got what they wanted so they decided not to hear it. The Q&A portion of the event was kind of rushed a bit, so I couldn't redirect him to answer about taking it to SCOTUS. He then described how the timing of getting a conservative replacement in the high court may be perfect with the timing of one of the NRA backed CCW lawsuits being granted cert, including the one recently filed by ANJRPC. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nappan has always been on the WAY safe side of NJ law. As a lawyer I don't blame him, because NJ will do what it wants to when it comes down to it. IMO the ATF letters apply to to all states, as they clarify federal law, which supercede state laws. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@JackDaWack 

I agree. 

Well, I’ll tell you what. After attending his gun law seminar today, I actually truly understand the extent to which NJ treats you guilty until proven innocent when it comes to guns. It’s not just a NJ proverb, it’s actually their legitimate litigation process for firearms. The burden of proof is literally on the innocent gun owner. If you are pulled over and an officer sees a rifle case, an asshole cop can literally get you for possession. You must now prove your innocence to the judge because a cop didn’t want to take your word that you were “coming back from the range”. We live in a state where if you commit murder, the state must prove that you’re guilty. But if you own a gun lawfully, you must prove to them that you’re not guilty. It’s despicable. 

The way I see it, if I need to prove my innocence in the first place for any reason, then I’m already jammed up. Might as well fight for something that’s worth it. There’s no law defining these firearms as illegal no matter which way you put it. Call me stupid, but it’s worth the risk to me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So I attended the event today. I asked Evan Nappen about the legality regarding firearms, including the Franklin Armory models. He said he loves Franklin Armory and regarding the firearms "i love it, it's like loopholes extraordinaire," however he advised to wait for a letter from NJSP, because basing it on the ATF( which changes things on a whim), is not as strong a defense as having NJSP if it lands in a courtroom.This is exactly what I expected him to say. 
Regarding the Pantano case, he kind of gave me a general reply. He didn't hear the Koch grant part of my question, because he started to answer my question immediately.  He basically said what we already know, that the NJ supreme court granted cert, then the Drake decision took place and got what they wanted so they decided not to hear it. The Q&A portion of the event was kind of rushed a bit, so I couldn't redirect him to answer about taking it to SCOTUS. He then described how the timing of getting a conservative replacement in the high court may be perfect with the timing of one of the NRA backed CCW lawsuits being granted cert, including the one recently filed by ANJRPC. 


Thank you for trying to ask. I figured he wouldn't answer since he boasted to the papers how he was taking the case all the way to the Supreme Court after NJ Supreme Court reversed their decision to hear the case.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
[mention=2380]JackDaWack[/mention] 
I agree. 
Well, I’ll tell you what. After attending his gun law seminar today, I actually truly understand the extent to which NJ treats you guilty until proven innocent when it comes to guns. It’s not just a NJ proverb, it’s actually their legitimate litigation process for firearms. The burden of proof is literally on the innocent gun owner. If you are pulled over and an officer sees a rifle case, an asshole cop can literally get you for possession. You must now prove your innocence to the judge because a cop didn’t want to take your word that you were “coming back from the range”. We live in a state where if you commit murder, the state must prove that you’re guilty. But if you own a gun lawfully, you must prove to them that you’re not guilty. It’s despicable. 
The way I see it, if I need to prove my innocence in the first place for any reason, then I’m already jammed up. Might as well fight for something that’s worth it. There’s no law defining these firearms as illegal no matter which way you put it. Call me stupid, but it’s worth the risk to me. 


I agree. This is still America and it is still innocent until proven guilty.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bumping this thread, as @Franklin Armory poked the bear, me.

I whole heartedly agree with @e92m3allday on this. As per Federal Law, one may acquire a stripped AR receiver, install the lower parts, add an arm brace, slap on a front vertical grip to a 10.5" upper, then hook the upper and lower together. Woola!! You've built a 26" firearm.

It is not a pistol, as it is designed to be fired with two hands. It is not a rifle, because it does not have a stock which is designed to be fired from the shoulder. It is not an AOW, as it is over 26" and not concealable.

In fact, it does not need to comply with the NJ AW Ban because that pertains only to rifles, pistols and shotguns.

Okay, so who can word a letter properly to the NJSP or NJAG to address this legal issue, ie the shockwave approval letter. @JasonSeidman :stir:

  • Like 5
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2019 at 2:18 PM, e92m3allday said:

Whoever does reach out, direct it to Det. Sgt. Brett Bloom, #5239. Not only is he educated, but he is a supporter of our  2A rights.

 

He's also retiring real soon..........

 

Problem with all this is the NJSP FIU is not going to make any decisions about the legality of a firearm. That will be left up to the NJ AG's office - which, considering the current administration, I can't see approving anything controversial.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, nondisclosure said:

is this actually possible?

WOW.

 

So, I can buy a 12.5" barrel, use a brace, and put on a vfg and be g2g!

How awesome would this be?

 

Yup. 11.5” is good to go also. 10.5” is good to go too, in my opinion. 

The only why reason Connecticut’s non-NFA (“other”) firearms have 12.5” barrels is because their AWB statute defines semi-autos with detachable magazines that are less than 30” in OAL as assault weapons.

NJ does not have such a law, yet. (It is one of the laws Murphy is trying to pass.) What this means though is that you can have a shorter barrel, as long as the firearm is is 26” OAL. 

Now I must mention that there is some debate and controversy on how to properly measure OAL. Some people feel it is safer to measure from buffer tube. Some measure from the brace in the extended most position, and I believe this is the correct way. The ATF has always extended the brace (as well as stocks) when taking measurements of firearms. The Franklin Armory XO-26 letter I posted in this thread earlier says to extend and measure from the rearmost position. There is also another email from the ATF, explicitly instructing to extend the brace when measuring. This matters because if you want a 10.5” barrel, following their way is good to go. But If you want to play it safe and measure from buffer tube for whatever reason, 10.5” will be just shy of 26” unless you pin the muzzle device. 

Another thing I wanted to mention, because these are firearms and not rifles, pistols, or shotguns, they do not follow AWB’s. So flash hiders are good to go. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...