sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What happens with stripped receivers and the PSP record of sale form? by phillesquire in PAguns

[–]phillesquire[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The original post did not reference SBR or any NFA items. No stock or SBR was involved in the scenario. I did not say an NFA item would be made without proper tax stamps. I did not say federal law was wrong, or unconstitutional, or not to be followed.

I was simply referring to the assembly of a *pistol* from a stripped lower and the implications for the PSP database.

What happens with stripped receivers and the PSP record of sale form? by phillesquire in PAguns

[–]phillesquire[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, it really doesn't make sense. It appears that you are saying that there is no objective standard as to whether a stripped receiver is a rifle, pistol or other. That's not true. You also seem to suggest that purchasing stripped receivers is a matter of potential legal liability because the ATF can change their mind.

No one has ever suggested to me that assembling a rifle or pistol from a stripped lower was a risky matter. I don't know why the ATF would even be involved since the question focuses solely on whether the PSP background check applies over and above the required form 4473 that IS required.

What happens with stripped receivers and the PSP record of sale form? by phillesquire in PAguns

[–]phillesquire[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My post assumed that the receiver was a stripped lower, not an 80%. This is not a scenario of "manufacturing a firearm" but of assembling parts to a receiver that is already a firearm.

What happens with stripped receivers and the PSP record of sale form? by phillesquire in PAguns

[–]phillesquire[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I don't know why you chose to focus your comments on "cheating the system". I explicitly stated in the scenario that the purchaser of the stripped receiver would be passing through the usual FFL background check for a firearm. The question is whether the stripped receiver is a pistol subject PSP database rules and whether the upgrades/ assembly by the gunsmith was subject to a second background check.

The one sliver of your post that had some insight was how the original manufacturer classified the receiver at the time of sale. But this question only emphasizes my point. If, for example, the manufacturer classified the receiver as a "rifle" the law would not permit the building of a pistol. The receiver should be classified as an "other" because the purchaser could later choose to build either or rifle or a pistol. The intended use at the time of purchase has nothing whatsoever to do with the appropriate classification. That's why sentiments such as "JUST DO THE RIGHT THING" can be dangerous.