Home
So I bought a new stripped lower from a gun shop the other day. While filling out the paperwork, the ffl dealer guy said that the Virginia State Police told them to fill out the state form as a rifle because the VA state form only has designations for pistols and rifles. No "receiver" designation.

The federal form however has pistol, rifle, receiver, and I believe he said other as well. So he filled out the federal form as Receiver.
He being prior law enforcement told me it was clean and clear to build whatever I want. But upon asking several other gun shops they all said a pistol would be illegal.

So, state form says rifle. Federal form says receiver. Can I build a pistol or not?
Thanks
my understanding is that a new lower can be built into a rifle or a pistol. if built into a rifle, it must remain a rifle, forever. if built into a pistol, it can be built into a rifle at anytime in the future, BUT, must remain a rifle after that, forever.

disclaimer: i'm not a lawyer, ATF agent, and i didn't stay in a Holiday Inn last night.



Lol,Holiday Inn...
Thanks Keith.
After some research, that's kinda how I took it too.
As long as it was never built as a rifle, you can make a pistol.
It just worries me that there is conflicting info in the paperwork. It seems too easy for a county mounty to run the numbers on it for whatever intruding reason and really give me a hard time.
I may even call the state boys in Richmond just to be absolutely sure.
I'll post their answer if I get one.
Originally Posted by SteveO1911

As long as it was never built as a rifle, you can make a pistol.


Unless it was originally transferred as a rifle. Not sure how your state paperwork affects that.

Why didn't he just transfer it as a pistol, instead of rifle? That would have eliminated any question. Maybe time for a different FFL...
Originally Posted by keith_dunlap
it can be built into a rifle at anytime in the future, BUT, must remain a rifle after that, forever


This is false. A pistol may be configured as a rifle, then back into a pistol. For further clarification, look up the lawsuit Thompson won against the BATF.

Since the receiver in question was sold as a rifle, it cannot legally be configured as a pistol
i stand corrected

https://blog.princelaw.com/2011/08/02/batfe-ruling-2011-4-pistol-to-a-rifle-and-back-to-a-pistol/

thanks for clearing that up
You're welcome. Glad to be of service to a fellow shooter
© 24hourcampfire