PDA

View Full Version : Legality of Hera Arms Glock Conversion in CA


Adog5
07-24-2009, 11:18 PM
I searched the forums, but haven't found the answer to my question.

Basically, I've heard there are state and federal laws regarding constructive possession of SBR's. So, if I own a Glock pistol, can I have LanWorld send me the Hera Arms stock (as it is), without assembling them together until I'm able to extend the barrel to 16", add a BB, and make sure overall length is over 30".

If I have the Hera Arms stock sitting in my house by itself do I have constructive possession?

2nd, if Hera puts a fake can to extend the barrel, can it be considered part of the 16" barrel? Or does it have to be welded to the Glock barrel to be considered part of the barrel?

ke6guj
07-24-2009, 11:34 PM
you have to have 16" barrel before you have the stock. And if you are trying to add a barrel extension, it must be permanent, such as silver soldered or preferably blind hole pinned with the pin welded over. That is to avoid federal and state SBR regs as you mentioned. Yes, having both the pistol and the stock, without the 16" barrel, is constructive possession of an SBR.

Then, you have to comply with the rifle AW regs.

Once you assemble your rifle, you can never go back to a pistol. And just removing the stock with the 16" barrel may still trigger SBR status if it is fireable while under 26".

BigMac
07-25-2009, 5:57 AM
You say you can never shange it back, and yet the Thompson Center Contender and Encore can and do.

This is permitted and is settled law. Why can it not be applied to the Glock?

1JimMarch
07-25-2009, 8:15 AM
Once you assemble your rifle, you can never go back to a pistol.

You say you can never shange it back, and yet the Thompson Center Contender and Encore can and do.

Yeah, what's happened is, BATFEderalidiots have an issued opinion out on BOTH the first and second quotes above. The first is purely their opinion, the second is what they had to admit in court.

There's no logical way both can be right. BATFE will get challenged on this point eventually and lose.

Upshot: if I had a handgun with the parts to convert it to a legal rifle, I'd go back and forth (completely) on a whim. But that's ME. BATFE currently says that's illegal.

kap
07-25-2009, 8:29 AM
The insanity of the laws around this subject are just amazing. Here is a letter posted on the THR written bythe DOJ to a person who was inquiring about doing a similar thing with an UZI pistol. The last two paragraphs sum up the DOJ position.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=5738383&postcount=15

ke6guj
07-25-2009, 1:42 PM
You say you can never shange it back, and yet the Thompson Center Contender and Encore can and do.

This is permitted and is settled law. Why can it not be applied to the Glock?As Jim March mentioned, that is the position that BATFE is taking, as can be seen in the link above.

IIRC, the actual TC decision does not say that it is legal to go from a rifle to a pistol, just that the combination of parts that could give you both legal and illegal configurations could not be deemed illegal since there was a legal use for all the parts.

thatrogue
07-26-2009, 4:06 AM
When I'm gone to work this would be perfect for my girlfriends BUMP IN THE NIGHT house clearing, and lock checking.

slappomatt
07-26-2009, 8:21 AM
I thought once a pistol always a pistol. now its once a pistol you can make it a rifle but cant go back to a pistol? :turned:

ScottB
07-26-2009, 8:35 AM
I have two Contenders and the usual assortment of barrels and stocks. One was originally DROS'd as a handgun and the other as a long gun. My understanding is that I can configure the handgun T/C as a carbine or rifle but that I cannot configure the rifle as a handgun. Since the frames look absolutely identical, this is difficult to keep straight - and I suppose that without running serial numbers, a LEO would have at least as much dificulty. Also, I believe at least part of the distinction that the DOJ draws between a T/C and a Hera conversion, at least in practice, is the fact that T/Cs are single shot, break-open guns

Josh3239
07-26-2009, 1:48 PM
Pistols can change to rifles, rifles cannot change to pistols. For example, a lot of guys in the free states will actually build AR pistols to "dance around" the SBR wait, once their SBR paperwork goes through they then just put a stock on it and call it a rifle. It can never go back to an AR pistol though.

Freagan
07-27-2009, 7:08 AM
I know this would never fly here in California but jeez this thing looks like fun! It's conversion for various glock models.


http://www.hera-arms.com/images/articles/gcc/large_001.jpg

http://www.hera-arms.com/images/articles/gcc/large_002.jpg

Could you imagine of these with a glock 20 :eek:

kenjimatic
07-27-2009, 7:15 AM
repost..
FMG-9 from magpul uses the glock slide/upper.. :D

edit:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=201684&highlight=fmg9

Freagan
07-27-2009, 7:30 AM
Actually no these are a different product all together. It doesn't fold into a little carrying case, instead its just a fun little tactical add-on to a glock. But that means it would no long be classified as a pistol so we will never get to see such fun.

69Mach1
07-27-2009, 7:33 AM
They are discussing it here:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=206319&highlight=hera+arms

Possible, maybe. Sexy.....hell yeah!

Freagan
07-27-2009, 7:34 AM
They are discussing it here:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=206319&highlight=hera+arms

Possible, maybe. Sexy.....hell yeah!

ahhhh ok my bad i missed that post!

bombadillo
07-27-2009, 8:32 AM
I brought up the FMG-9 and it was Bad!

swerv512
07-27-2009, 2:30 PM
only in my dreams...
:drool5:

Scratch705
07-27-2009, 2:48 PM
we can't ever have the stuff here in CA..... :(

SCMA-1
07-27-2009, 6:02 PM
The insanity of the laws around this subject are just amazing. Here is a letter posted on the THR written bythe DOJ to a person who was inquiring about doing a similar thing with an UZI pistol. The last two paragraphs sum up the DOJ position.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=5738383&postcount=15

There was a similar issue with the Uzi Carbine back in the Pre-1989 AW ban days. The Uzi carbine came imported with a 16" barrel which was federally legal but Commiefornia in particular required that "rifle" be at least 26" long with the stock folded so we had to purchase a special 18" barrel to be in compliance in Kommiefornication.:rolleyes:

Josh3239
07-27-2009, 6:20 PM
There was a similar issue with the Uzi Carbine back in the Pre-1989 AW ban days. The Uzi carbine came imported with a 16" barrel which was federally legal but Commiefornia in particular required that "rifle" be at least 26" long with the stock folded so we had to purchase a special 18" barrel to be in compliance in Kommiefornication.:rolleyes:

26'' for rimfire. 30'' if the Uzi Carbine was in a pistol caliber.

ke6guj
07-27-2009, 6:25 PM
26'' for rimfire. 30'' if the Uzi Carbine was in a pistol caliber.

That 26" limit is for all rifles, lest they be considered an SBR and a felony. He wasn't talking about the 30" rule for sem-automatic centerfire rifles. Note that he was talking about pre-89 AW ban days, and way before the 2000 AW amendment.

NeoWeird
07-27-2009, 6:41 PM
When he says file a Form 1, I assume he means file for SBR status on the handgun so that a stock can be legally added. But he doesn't mention SBR, even though he quoted SBR/NFA law at the start of the response. Is there a separate way or registering a firearm made from a rifle? I'd assume if there is that it would not have the liberties of SBR status, but rather just convertability of pistol and rifle. Or did I miss something.

ke6guj
07-27-2009, 6:45 PM
Yes, they mean a Form 1 for an SBR.

ScottB
07-27-2009, 8:32 PM
Are there exceptions for old historically significant handguns like artillery Lugers or Mauser broomhandles? These came with holsters that were also shoulder stocks. The Lugers have 10" barrels and I believe the stocked Mausers are 8".

ke6guj
07-27-2009, 8:36 PM
yes, there are some exemption for certain shoulder-stocked handguns. ATF has exempted some of them from the NFA, and CA has an exemption for SBRs that are properly possesed per federal law. The problem then becomes that a shoulder stocked handgun could also be a rifle AW, and the CA SBR exemption does not exempt you from the AW regs.

NeoWeird
07-27-2009, 9:22 PM
yes, there are some exemption for certain shoulder-stocked handguns. ATF has exempted some of them from the NFA, and CA has an exemption for SBRs that are properly possesed per federal law. The problem then becomes that a shoulder stocked handgun could also be a rifle AW, and the CA SBR exemption does not exempt you from the AW regs.

It should also be noted that only original, or in some cases original reproduction, stocks may be used. Just because some Lugers came with stocks doesn't mean you can have a machine shop make a stock to attach to your Luger.

vandal
07-27-2009, 9:42 PM
I researched it and concluded that the combination of CA, ATF, pistol and rifle definitions and assault rifle and assault pistol definitions make the proposition nearly unachievable and definitely worthless in CA.

I concluded that under CA law the resulting weapon would be a rifle (>16" barrel, shoulder-fired) and also a pistol (barrel designed to be interchanged with a barrel <16"). So one would have to comply with both pistol and rifle AW regs, meaning you wind up with a mag-locked 10-round gun + a non-pistol grip mod (Solar Tactical fin for example.) The pistol would also have to be dedicated to this, no going back.

Never mind that there have not been any reliable 16" barrel Glock conversions so far.

One could get an M1 carbine and have a much more functional and powerful weapon.

ScottB
07-27-2009, 10:10 PM
So, if someone has a WWII "bringback" artillery Luger with the original holster-stock, 32 round snaildrum magazine - the whole kit. Would that be illegal in CA?

ke6guj
07-27-2009, 10:17 PM
So, if someone has a WWII "bringback" artillery Luger with the original holster-stock, 32 round snaildrum magazine - the whole kit. Would that be illegal in CA?

These specific lugers are excluded from the NFA, and would be exempt from the CA SBR regs as well.


Luger, Artillery model, pistols having chamber dates of 1914 through 1918 or 1920, having
German Weimar Navy markings consisting of the letter M over an anchor and a German Navy property number accompanied by original Artillery Luger flat board stocks, bearing German Weimar Navy markings of the letter M over an anchor with or without Navy property numbers.
Luger, the 1920 Commercial Artillery model, pistols as mfd. by DWM or Erfurt, having undated
35
SECTION III
chambers, commercial proofmarks, and bearing the inscription Germany or Made in Germany on the receiver and accompanied by original, German mfd., artillery type, detachable wooden shoulder stocks.
Luger, DWM Pistol, model 1900, 1902, or 1906, in 7.65 Luger or 9mm parabellum cal., having the
American Eagle chamber crest, and barrel lengths of either 4" or 4-3/4", with original
detachable Ideal shoulder stocks and Ideal frame grips.
DWM Luger, Original models 1904, 1906, 1908, 1914, and 1920. Naval pistols in 9mm
parabellum or 7.65mm cal., in both the Commercial and Naval military varieties; in both altered and unaltered barrel lengths in the model 1904 and in both altered and unaltered safety markings in the model 1906; with original board-type detachable shoulder stocks bearing brass or iron discs, with or without markings, or, if without brass or iron discs, being of the Navy flat board-type. This exemption applies only to the listed Naval Luger pistols if mated to the Naval Luger stock and will not apply if the Naval Luger pistol is mated to the Artillery stock. The Naval stock has an overall dimension of 12-3/4", a rear width of 4-5/8", a front width of 1-1/2", a rear thickness of 9/16", and a front thickness of l-3/16".
Luger, DWM Stoeger model 1920 and 1923, semiautomatic pistols in 7.65mm or 9mm parabellum
cal., in barrel lengths of 8, 10, 12, and 12-1/2", having either American Eagle chamber crests and/or Stoeger frame and/or upper receiver marks, having either standard, Navy or artillery rear sights, having extractors marked either "Loaded" or "Geladen" and having frame safety markings of either "Gesichert" or "Safe," together w/original commercial flat board stocks of the artillery type, which bear no S/Ns or military proof marks; may include a "Germany" marking.
Luger, DWM Pistol-Carbine, model 1920, 7.65mm or 9mm parabellum cal., with accompanying
original commercial type shoulder stock, with or without forearm piece, having barrel
lengths of 11-3/4" to less than 16".
Luger, German model 1914, Artillery model pistol, mfd. by DWM or Erfurt, having chambers dated
1914 –1918, bearing Imperial German military proofmarks & accompanied by original,
German mfd., artillery type, detachable wooden shoulder stocks.
Luger, model 1902, Pistol-Carbine, 7.65mm Luger with original commercial type shoulder stock and
forearm and 11-3/4" barrel.
Luger, Persian (Iranian) Artillery model, pistols, as mfd. by Mauser prior to 1945, accompanied by the
original artillery type, detachable wooden shoulder stock, bearing a S/N in Farsi characters stamped into the wood on the left side.
Luger, semiautomatic pistol, certain variations with Benke-Thiemann folding shoulder stock.

ATF has further ruled that some reproduction stocks are allowable for some of these firearms.

Now, if you installed the shoulder stock, you'd be making a rifle AW in CA, which would be illegal. Pistol grip with detachable magazine and OAL under 30".


So, legally, you should be able to possess the kit, and not have an illegal SBR, but would not be able to assemble it in CA.

ScottB
07-27-2009, 10:32 PM
Interesting. Thanks.

dfletcher
07-28-2009, 8:34 AM
You say you can never change it back, and yet the Thompson Center Contender and Encore can and do.

This is permitted and is settled law. Why can it not be applied to the Glock?

The only firearms ATF concedes - and the only firearms brought before SCOTUS in 1992 - were "kits" sold by T/C which included (IIRC) a shoulder stock and a handgun stock and a less than 16" bbl. Unfortunately folks want to include the regularly sold T/C handguns and handgun frames in this decision and that's not the case - SCOTUS and ATF ruled very narrowly on this and stated only those few T/C kits from many years ago have an exemption to the "no rifle to pistol" reconfiguration. A critical read of the ATF letter clearly shows they concede on the T/C kits only.

Common sense says if it's OK for the kit Contender, it should be OK for a plain old Encore and Contender handgun frame. It would unfortunately probably require a return trip to court to establish "common sense".

Thomas74
08-11-2009, 9:05 PM
Spikes put a Full Auto Glock in this..... :28:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1fdt6uVpe4

djbooya
02-24-2010, 3:19 PM
Bringing this back to life because of a recent sale of one of these:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=3860297

Statement of seller here:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=3860297&postcount=16

Is declaring a part "for airsoft" good enough to avoid constructive SBR possession? Since the manufacturer of the weapon makes it for real firearms I don't know how just saying "this is for airsoft" makes it suddenly ok. The sold part doesn't look like it came with a barrel and I don't know why someone would say NFA Rules apply if they claim it's for an airsoft part. If indeed this was an NFA weapon who gets in trouble? The buyer or seller? And what if neither of them really knew? In this case it would be hard for the seller to say they didn't know, but the buyer. What if they didn't do the NFA paperwork (I'm assuming they did) and just purchased it?

I'm assuming also that any NFA transactions need to go through a dealer that has an SOT as well, correct?

This thread isn't meant to flame the seller, I'm just trying to get clarification. If I had purchased this and it's in my car when I'm heading to the range to shoot my Glock am I hosed unless I have the relevant NFA paperwork and the 16" barrel attached? I'm not even sure if the buyer understands the ramifications of what they purchased. I sure as heck don't.