Is this illegal?

>>33897597
could get hit with constructive intent if you have the receiver and parts before stamp

>>33897604
So I can get in trouble for legally buying something? What a time to be alive.

>>33897619
The key word there is can. You can but it's unlikely you will.

>>33897619
You'd get in trouble because of your intentions which you expressed in your post, not because of your purchase.
Get your stamp, don't be an asshole. Your dog will thank you for it.

>>33897604
THERE IS NO SUCH THING FUCKING REEEEEEEEEEE.

>>33897619
You can legally buy stuff to make a bomb. Its illegal to make a bomb.
You can legally buy stuff to make an sbr. Its illegal to make an sbr.

>>33897604
There is no such fucking thing you subhuman nigger

>>33897929
dont forget about meth ingredients

Ignore that dipshit. "Constructive intent" isn't a thing, what he means is being in constructive possession.

Basically it's yeah you probably could, but if you get caught after you've done it you're fucked.
If you get caught before and the reciever isn't milled or whatever, then you should be fine.

Whoever caught you would be pretty suspicious in the second scenario though.

>>33897917
Yes there is. You can deny it all you want but the ATF very clearly enforces such laws. Im in the middle of licensing up to become a manufacturer. If I start cranking out rifles before the paperwork is done it doesnt matter that im not selling them yet, its not legal.

With the ATF doing ANYTHING before the paperwork is processed is a big nono.

>>33899217
Addendum though: its not constructive INTENT its constructive POSESSION. Its difficult to get caught doing, but if you file paperwork to build an NFA item, then buy all the components to build it before the cuckstamp has been granted you could get popped.

>>33899260
bingo. the ATF says that possession indicates intent

>>33899285
Perfect example: recently a man sold an HK SP89 pistol, a vertical foregrip, and a stock to an undercover cop. None were actually attached, he just had all 3 items in the same sale. Got popped for constructive posession.

>>33897597
No, it doesn't become constructive intent until you complete the receiver.

>>33897597
Its literally the same thing as owning an AR receiver with a buttstock and an upper with less than 16" barrel.

If you don't have a rifle length upper as well, it could be constructive intent.
How the fuck would anyone find out if you're not being a retard with it? That is for you to figure out OP.

>>33899094
You mean the shit I keep under my sink?

>>33899373
Its not constructive INTENT, its constructive POSESSION.

Its a really finnicky law and I hate it, but it works like this:
>posessing 10 pounds of gunpowder, a pressure cooker, a spool of wire, and an alarm clock
>if the gunpowder is in your reloading cabinet, the wire in your toolbox, the cooker in your kitchen, and the alarm clock on your night stand its fine
>if all of those components are found on a bench in your basement you are suddenly in posession of a bomb, whether you have begun assembling it or not

Same with NFA items. Its really difficult to get caught, its really difficult to prove, but it still is something they enforce. Odds are if OP does what he says theres a 99.99% chance nothing bad happens. But god so help him if he does.

You dont have to get convicted to get fucked up either. ATF can point at you and make an accusation and even if they lose the legal costs can total out your finances and ruin your professional reputation. So you win the case and now owe a fuckload to your lawyers.

Rule of thumb that is 100% safe is to never buy the components until permission hss been granted. The old addage "easier to ask forgiveness than permission" most certainly does not apply to the ATF.

>>33899346
>cops are wasting their time with this bullshit

we must fix the ATF

>>33899569
The problem with regulatory agencies such as the ATF, EPA, DEA, IRS etc etc is that they are given power over how they interpret laws. It gives unelected officials defacto legislative power because they can pretty much just choose to interpret and enforce shit however the fuck they want, and the american people have no say in it.

>>33899217
>Have shotgun.
>Have hacksaw.
CONSTRUCTIVE INTENT!
The ATF can ONLY get you AFTER commiting a NFA violation, this isn't the 90's anymore.

>>33897597
You could build it as a pistol, since you're buiilding the receiver from scratch. As such, perfectly legal.

All this would require doing is removing the stock from the endplate prior to bending your flats and finishing the receiver.

>>33899463
or, when you buy components, have a buddy keep a few critical ones

>>33899600
Continue ignoring all the cases popping up of the ATF doing essentially that then. Your freedome and livleyhood is on the line, not mine.

Im just here to say that if you play chicken with the feds you are gonna have a bad time.

>>33899617
Theyve been trying to work on that too, theyve tried to push a few cases of "Joint Constructive Posession" recently in which a person who legally owned an NFA item was accused of such bullshit because the other individuals in the house had access to it but were not listed on the cuckstamp as owners. The ATF argued that his ownership of it had been done legally but became illegal once others had the possibility of access to and control over it. Not sure where the case went, but they are trying to establish precadent for it.

And like I said earlier, they dont have to put you in prison to win, they just gotta drag it out and make it as expensive as possible for you. Even if you dont end up in jail or fined you still just ended up in 30k to 50k of debt due to court costs. If the local media jumps on it ypu could lose your job. Marraige might tank, etc etc.

Its easier to play it safe than to play chicken.

>>33899669
pls show us one single case where an individual was found guilty of constructive possession

>>33900847
https://www.google.com/amp/s/blog.princelaw.com/2009/09/01/florida-man-arrested-for-constructive-possession-of-an-sbr/amp/

>>33897604
When will you niggers learn?

>>33897597
>>33897597
Why does an mp5 qualify as an sbr when it isnt even a rifle and it fires a pistol cartridge?

>>33901982
nogun retard detected.

>>33901982
It is rifled, has a stock, and has a barrel under 16 inches. Bredy simple

>>33897929
Bomb parts have other uses though, Gun parts don't.

Constructive posession wasnt MEANT to apply to this scenario, but the ATF has redefined their interpretation of it to fit.

Way its SUPPOSED to aplly:
>felon on parole
>parole officer finds guns, drugs, and booze at his house
>parolee says "not mine, my roomate owns those"
>constructive posession laws state that having access to and control over them still constitutes ownership.

The ATF has been very blatantly redefining how they interpret laws though.
>have 80% glock giggle switch?
>legal, since its not finished and thus is not an autosear yet
>have glock? Totally legal.
>have glock and 80% autosear? Constructive intent. You are in control of items which could be used to readily create a machinegun.

Anons saying such laws dont exist are idiots. They are just rareley enforced because its almost impossible to detect. Its a stupid law that only exists for them to lock people up on a technicality, and its almost impossible to detect or prove, but rest assured constructive posession is a thing, you can be fined or jailed for it. Its really hard to get caught, its a stupid fuckin grey area, its unconstitutional, but not liking it or believing in it isnt going to protect you.

Why can I own an 18 round 9mm pistol but an mp5 is not okay without a stamp because it's too short? How do these laws make any sense?

>>33903631
They don't.

>>33903631
They arent designed to make sense. Theyre designed to
A) restrict freedom
B) generate revenue for the ATF