Swapping into a chassis kit /changing the stock

[Dbk]

What is the legality of swapping out a rifle stock and dropping it into a commercially manufactured and freely available for purchase chassis kit? E.g krg, MDT and any other similar product?

From reading the wapol website, since the 2022 amendments, it would seem this is illegal and may require approvals and licencing?? I see widespread practice of this at the local range where pretty much everyone has done this.

What is the procedure to get this done?

It would seem simply possessing a stock (which is a 'major firearm part') requires approval??

Anyone can describe your experiences with this issue?

I should add that nothing of the action, barrel, bolt etc.. Will be changed. Simply unscrewing the 2 screws, removing old stock and dropping it in.

[JohnV]

Yeah WA , a whole different World of anti social and dictatorial type gun Policing . So I wish I could help but not sure what WA's laws actually are . I think they make them up as they go along . In NSW a stock is not a firearms part as far as I know and you can buy one without a licence , just like a scope . Ring a gunsmith or firearms dealer in WA they should know . Claremont Firearms is a big dealer in WA (08) 9494 1380 enquiries@claremontfirearms.com.au

[Dbk]

Yes I will do that. But would be good to see people experiences with the situation. Ie what licensing said to them etc.

[Luftballons]

Hey mate,

I wanted to do the same so I emailed WAPol.

They said this:

"The difference between a stock and a chassis. A STOCK is a unit that has no working parts required to be removed from the working unit to disassemble the firearm.
Simply remove the two screws and removing the working unit. Not classed as a major part, ( you may change it over yourself )

If a CHASSIS require any further removal or separation of parts, safety lever, mag release, trigger housing, then it would have to be done via Dealership / repairer."

Also have a look at the definition of major firearm part in section 4 of the Act: https://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/vie ... 02/s4.html. The definition does not include a stock.

I would email WAPol yourself so that you have a record that applies to exactly what you are trying to do. I have always found them to very helpful.

Cheers

[Bazz]

Edit - missed the reply above

[Dbk]

Hey mate,

I wanted to do the same so I emailed WAPol.

They said this:

"The difference between a stock and a chassis. A STOCK is a unit that has no working parts required to be removed from the working unit to disassemble the firearm.
Simply remove the two screws and removing the working unit. Not classed as a major part, ( you may change it over yourself )

If a CHASSIS require any further removal or separation of parts, safety lever, mag release, trigger housing, then it would have to be done via Dealership / repairer."

Also have a look at the definition of major firearm part in section 4 of the Act: https://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/vie ... 02/s4.html. The definition does not include a stock.

I would email WAPol yourself so that you have a record that applies to exactly what you are trying to do. I have always found them to very helpful.

Cheers

Great. That's very helpful. I did email wapol licencing but they have not responded as yet. My question to them was the requirement for approvals. I presume a change of stock into a chassis such as a krg whiskey 3 does not require it from my reading of your response, given that no other parts need to be separated or fiddled with.

The magazine will need changing I presume magazines are OK to do.

[JohnV]

That's good help , however I would be be very suspicious that none of that is consistent with the actual firearms act .

[Dbk]

Im not a lawyer but surely a govt website with information and advice and an actual response from licencing in black and white would be sufficient 'protection'.

A bit like the time when everyone was going nuts about reloading ammo being banned etc. It's clear on the wapol website that reloading ammo you are licenced to use for only personal use is fine. How would it hold up on court if they decided to prosecute people for reloading ammo just because it was written in what we perceive to be a vague way. If you were reloading ammo and giving or selling it to the bikie next door.. Then that would be a big problem....

[alexjones]

Im not a lawyer but surely a govt website with information and advice and an actual response from licencing in black and white would be sufficient 'protection'.

A bit like the time when everyone was going nuts about reloading ammo being banned etc. It's clear on the wapol website that reloading ammo you are licenced to use for only personal use is fine. How would it hold up on court if they decided to prosecute people for reloading ammo just because it was written in what we perceive to be a vague way. If you were reloading ammo and giving or selling it to the bikie next door.. Then that would be a big problem....

No. You would think so but that is incorrect. The police are not legal advise. Their information is their interpretation. It should be read and evaluated but not accepted as gospel.

[JohnV]

Im not a lawyer but surely a govt website with information and advice and an actual response from licencing in black and white would be sufficient 'protection'.

A bit like the time when everyone was going nuts about reloading ammo being banned etc. It's clear on the wapol website that reloading ammo you are licenced to use for only personal use is fine. How would it hold up on court if they decided to prosecute people for reloading ammo just because it was written in what we perceive to be a vague way. If you were reloading ammo and giving or selling it to the bikie next door.. Then that would be a big problem....

That's not what I am saying . Police Commissioners can make extra provisions that add to the overall firearms act but any such regulation has to have some connection with the wording of the act . Otherwise it's making new Laws and the Police can't make new laws . Any new regulation has to have some foundation from within the firearms act the actual Law to be legal .

[Dbk]

An update for those who may be asking the same thing.

A bit of back and forth with one of the licensing officers came to this conclusion

Ultimately they don't want you fiddling with taking apart any major firearm parts eg trigger mechanism etc when changing over stocks or 'chassis' systems. An approval doesn't seem to be required. It's who is allowed to do it ie DIY or someone with a 'repairers licence'.

Taking the 2 action screws out, detaching stock and replacing barrelled action into a stock completely untouched is fine. You can do it yourself. Anything require more fiddling will require someone who is licenced.

Folding stocks and detachable stocks with pistol grips are a no no. If you look carefully at some of the products out there, you it seems you could unscrew the butt stock and be left with the pistol grip in a firearm that can be fired... Better be careful when buying such a chassis or stock

[bladeracer]

An update for those who may be asking the same thing.

A bit of back and forth with one of the licensing officers came to this conclusion

Ultimately they don't want you fiddling with taking apart any major firearm parts eg trigger mechanism etc when changing over stocks or 'chassis' systems. An approval doesn't seem to be required. It's who is allowed to do it ie DIY or someone with a 'repairers licence'.

Taking the 2 action screws out, detaching stock and replacing barrelled action into a stock completely untouched is fine. You can do it yourself. Anything require more fiddling will require someone who is licenced.

Folding stocks and detachable stocks with pistol grips are a no no. If you look carefully at some of the products out there, you it seems you could unscrew the butt stock and be left with the pistol grip in a firearm that can be fired... Better be careful when buying such a chassis or stock

My Ruger Americans dropped into the MDT LSS chassis with no effort at all, it's a five-minute job at most (don't even have to remove the scope). But from what you're saying they probably aren't legal in WA as you can unscrew the buffer tube. Some of MDT's other options don't use buffer tubes but I think the stocks are still removable. Is the Ruger Precision Rimfire legal over there? You can remove half of the butt stock without tools. Are rifles illegal over there without a butt stock even if they still exceed the minimum overall length?

[alexjones]

Nothing to do with so called 'community safety' but just creating more red tape.

[Faedy]

Ruger Precision Rimfires are legal here but the butt stock is fixed.
In saying that, I know of a dealer selling other brands that use buffer tube so go figure.

An update for those who may be asking the same thing.

A bit of back and forth with one of the licensing officers came to this conclusion

Ultimately they don't want you fiddling with taking apart any major firearm parts eg trigger mechanism etc when changing over stocks or 'chassis' systems. An approval doesn't seem to be required. It's who is allowed to do it ie DIY or someone with a 'repairers licence'.

Taking the 2 action screws out, detaching stock and replacing barrelled action into a stock completely untouched is fine. You can do it yourself. Anything require more fiddling will require someone who is licenced.

Folding stocks and detachable stocks with pistol grips are a no no. If you look carefully at some of the products out there, you it seems you could unscrew the butt stock and be left with the pistol grip in a firearm that can be fired... Better be careful when buying such a chassis or stock

My Ruger Americans dropped into the MDT LSS chassis with no effort at all, it's a five-minute job at most (don't even have to remove the scope). But from what you're saying they probably aren't legal in WA as you can unscrew the buffer tube. Some of MDT's other options don't use buffer tubes but I think the stocks are still removable. Is the Ruger Precision Rimfire legal over there? You can remove half of the butt stock without tools. Are rifles illegal over there without a butt stock even if they still exceed the minimum overall length?

[bladeracer]

Ruger Precision Rimfires are legal here but the butt stock is fixed.
In saying that, I know of a dealer selling other brands that use buffer tube so go figure.

Fixed doesn't make it non-removable though, and it leaves the pistol grip intact for shooting. Is there something in this legislation about it being fine to remove the buttstock as long as it requires use of a tool?

Did you get this discussion with Licencing in writing or is it just an officer's opinion?

[Faedy]

You've lost me.
The RPR in WA have a 1 piece stock. Ir butt stock is also part of for end.
All gin shops sell them so bo need to talk to Police.

As for the shop selling firearms with removable butt stock. I think he is flouting the rules as it simply unscrews with a gland spanner.

quote="bladeracer"]

Ruger Precision Rimfires are legal here but the butt stock is fixed.
In saying that, I know of a dealer selling other brands that use buffer tube so go figure.

Fixed doesn't make it non-removable though, and it leaves the pistol grip intact for shooting. Is there something in this legislation about it being fine to remove the buttstock as long as it requires use of a tool?

Did you get this discussion with Licencing in writing or is it just an officer's opinion?[/quote]

[bladeracer]

Yes, it can be pinned to be non-adjustable just as they do for NSW. But you can still remove it with an allen key or screwdriver. I don't think I have any photos of mine with the buttstock removed, but it leaves a stubby "thing" sticking out the rear of the receiver. It can certainly be fired as I did this when I was testing my eyesight - it allowed me to shoot right-handed using my left eye. I'd have to measure it but I'm sure it would still be well over our 750mm minimum overall length requirement.

Screenshot 2023-12-29 182120.jpg (133.93 KiB) Viewed 1278 times

You've lost me.
The RPR in WA have a 1 piece stock. Ir butt stock is also part of for end.
All gin shops sell them so bo need to talk to Police.

As for the shop selling firearms with removable butt stock. I think he is flouting the rules as it simply unscrews with a gland spanner.

quote="bladeracer"]

Ruger Precision Rimfires are legal here but the butt stock is fixed.
In saying that, I know of a dealer selling other brands that use buffer tube so go figure.

Fixed doesn't make it non-removable though, and it leaves the pistol grip intact for shooting. Is there something in this legislation about it being fine to remove the buttstock as long as it requires use of a tool?

Did you get this discussion with Licencing in writing or is it just an officer's opinion?

[/quote]

[Dbk]

Ruger Precision Rimfires are legal here but the butt stock is fixed.
In saying that, I know of a dealer selling other brands that use buffer tube so go figure.

Fixed doesn't make it non-removable though, and it leaves the pistol grip intact for shooting. Is there something in this legislation about it being fine to remove the buttstock as long as it requires use of a tool?

Did you get this discussion with Licencing in writing or is it just an officer's opinion?

This was an email exchange between a licensing police officer and myself. Words to the effect that folding stocks are banned and stocks or chassis with detachable stocks and pistol grips are also banned.

Looking at the available chassis or stock systems out there, I personally would avoid ones where the butt stock can be detached with or without tools. From what I can see, the krg whiskey 3 has the butt stock integrated with the pistol grip. Ie if it was removed, the pistol grip would be removed as well... Leaving pretty much no grip. I guess this would be fine. Some as you say can be simply unbolted leaving a stub and intact pistol grip.

You can read the act itself with the amendments made last year or 2.

[JohnV]

A 303 Lee Enfield has a removable butt , would that rifle be illegal in WA ?

[bladeracer]

A 303 Lee Enfield has a removable butt , would that rifle be illegal in WA ?

I used precisely that question to the ACT Registry and they said provided it requires tools to remove then it's fine. I doubt WA even thought about it.

The Henry H001 series of lever-action .22's are also fully functional with the buttstock removed.

[JohnV]

I still say that the WA Police Commissioner is making up the regulations off the top of his or her head and some are not consistent with the act .