I want to build a 1911 Carbine, why can't I get a frame?

[bdsmchs]

What, exactly, is the law that prevents me from getting my FFL to receive a 1911 frame into the state and transferring it to me so that I can legally build a 1911 carbine?

I'm really starting to get sick of this roster business. Last I checked, the roster applied to HANDGUNS. If we can't get 1911 frames (which ARENT handguns or rifles) then why can we get AR receivers (which also ARENT handguns or rifles)???

I really don't understand this.

There shouldn't be any law or regulation actually preventing FFL's from importing and transferring so-called "pistol frames" to CA civilians.

I'm dead serious. I'd like to build a 1911 carbine. Which FFL wants to import the frame and transfer it to me to test this out? :)


Frames and receivers, regardless of pattern, ARE NOT :
- Rifles
- Pistols
- Shotguns
- "Long guns"
- SBR's
- SBS's
- AOW's
- DD's
- MG's

[Slayer]

Frame is the serialized part of a handun...

[bwiese]

Also, once that frame is on a rifle it can't go back to being a handgun.
(Awhile back I'd thought the Thomson/Center case allowed it, but I was wrong: ATF regards it as being brand/gun specific and not generalizable.)

I will add that bright people think it does appear handgun frames are importable into CA but the DOJ (or at least one party) does not agree.

[bdsmchs]

Also, once that frame is on a rifle it can't go back to being a handgun.


This part is perfectly reasonable. And that's why I've got this posting up to begin with. Why are 1911 frames not importable AT ALL, while AR receivers are, when BOTH could be used to build (legally) either a pistol or a rifle configuration.


I will add that bright people think it does appear handgun frames are importable into CA but the DOJ (or at least one party) does not agree.

Should we draft up a letter? :)

I'm dead serious. I really want some answers on this. If the DoJ doesn't agree, I want to see their reasoning and the law.

[bdsmchs]

Frame is the serialized part of a handun...

What's your point?

[ke6guj]

That question did come up when I asked if the new 4473's would change anything in CA.

Would CADOJ have a problem with a 1911-pattern frame if it was DROSed as a long gun, and maybe said RIFLE on the frame? Because, you're correct in that a frame is just a frame, it isn't a pistol or a rifle.

[Slayer]

What's your point?

A frame wont pass a drop test, does not have a LCI, etc.

[ke6guj]

A frame wont pass a drop test, does not have a LCI, etc.We know that, but a stripped virgin frame is not a pistol, so it doesn't have to do that. Its not a rifle either. A frame is just a frame. Because a 1911-pattern frame is more likely to be build up as a pistol instead of rifle, its assumed to be a pistol frame? Why can an AR-pattern receiver be sold? Because its assumed to be built up as a rifle?

[bwiese]

I think it may be time for another statewide mass purchase with very cooperative FFLs.

Let's not go off half cocked yet however.

[ke6guj]

I think it may be time for another statewide mass purchase with very cooperative FFLs.

Let's not go off half cocked yet however.
That would be sweet. And some of us are of the opinion that even a Long gun DROS/ old 4473 dros not forever taint the frame as a rifle. Long gun does not equal Rifle, it has to have a shoulder stock attached for that. AFAIK, there is no law preventing one from converting a firearm that is not a rifle or shotgun into a pistol.

[sorensen440]

A frame wont pass a drop test, does not have a LCI, etc.

think of the 1911 frame the same you would think about an AR lower receiver.

The lower is not a rifle nor is it a pistol

[Slayer]

think of the 1911 frame the same you would think about an AR lower receiver.

The lower is not a rifle nor is it a pistol

I didnt make the law, I fully understand. Rifles are not subject to the laws handguns are, there is no roster of long guns for sale. The dummies who make the laws need to learn their roster does nothing.

[nat]

I think it may be time for another statewide mass purchase with very cooperative FFLs.

Let's not go off half cocked yet however.

I would be interested in that :43:

[JDay]

I'm really starting to get sick of this roster business. Last I checked, the roster applied to HANDGUNS. If we can't get 1911 frames (which ARENT handguns or rifles) then why can we get AR receivers (which also ARENT handguns or rifles)???


Get one of these, no FFL required and they ship it to your door.
http://www.diyguns.com/html_catalog/Frames+and+Part+Kits__80_25+Castings+_2F+Forgings. html

[JDay]

think of the 1911 frame the same you would think about an AR lower receiver.

The lower is not a rifle nor is it a pistol

You do know that the AR pistols that get into the state come in as a single shot pistol to get around the law right? That is the only way you can get them into CA without putting them on the roster.

[bdsmchs]

I didnt make the law, I fully understand. Rifles are not subject to the laws handguns are, there is no roster of long guns for sale. The dummies who make the laws need to learn their roster does nothing.

You clearly are not reading what we are saying.

An AR receiver *IS NOT* a rifle. A 1911 frame *IS NOT* a handgun.

Do you understand that? I'll say it again, a 1911 frame *IS NOT* a handgun. If it is not a handgun, how does the drop test, LCI, and other roster requirements apply to it?

The roster applies to HANDGUNS. Not frames/receivers/longguns/shotguns/anything else.

Now, again, tell me why the roster applies to me if I want to import a 1911 FRAME (NOT a 1911 handgun like a Kimber Custom II) for the purposes of building a CA AWB-compliant carbine?

[tgriffin]

tagged

[bdsmchs]

I think it may be time for another statewide mass purchase with very cooperative FFLs.

This would make me so happy.

Something to ring in the new year perhaps? :)


Let's not go off half cocked yet however.

I agree. I think we should go fully cocked ;)



But seriously, I would love to see the ball rolling on something like this. Federally, it appears that it's just fine to buy a stripped receiver and build a pistol or a rifle from it. As long as it started life out as a stripped receiver/frame. CA law appears to also be in line with this, even if the DROS system is not readily compatible. But DROS not being compatible does not make it automatically illegal, only confusing.

Since legally at the Fed and state levels there is no actual difference between stripped receivers/frames, whether they are AR pattern or 1911 pattern (or Glock, or Sten, or whatever), and CA law appears to agree, then we are in an interesting situation. The DoJ has flat out stated that the transfer into the state of AR pattern receivers is legal. Since there is no legal difference between an AR receiver and a 1911 frame, how can one be legal while the other is not?

Either all stripped receivers/frames are legal, or they are all illegal. DoJ has accepted and stated that AR receivers/frames are legal. Therefore 1911 frames should also be legal by default.

[Slayer]

You clearly are not reading what we are saying.

An AR receiver *IS NOT* a rifle. A 1911 frame *IS NOT* a handgun.

Do you understand that? I'll say it again, a 1911 frame *IS NOT* a handgun. If it is not a handgun, how does the drop test, LCI, and other roster requirements apply to it?

The roster applies to HANDGUNS. Not frames/receivers/longguns/shotguns/anything else.

Now, again, tell me why the roster applies to me if I want to import a 1911 FRAME (NOT a 1911 handgun like a Kimber Custom II) for the purposes of building a CA AWB-compliant carbine?


I'm trying to E-X-P-L-A-I-N it to you, as in tell you why. I am not supporting the stupid law. You clearly do not know, so I'm trying to make it clear. Apparently, somewhere between my keyboard and your monitor it is being lost in translation. I (Slayer) UNDERSTAND A 1911FRAME IS NOT A HANDGUN, BUT THIS IS CALIFORNIA! THIS STATE HAS NONSENSE LAWS. Remind me to never respond to one of your questions, and realize I know the differnce. For all intents and purposes, unless the AR lower is marked "PISTOL" it is a rifle....you cant build it into anything else. Stripped lowers are still considered rifles...hence why they must be drosed. That's all 50 states, chief...not just CA,

[bohoki]

I'm trying to E-X-P-L-A-I-N it to you, as in tell you why. I am not supporting the stupid law. You clearly do not know, so I'm trying to make it clear. Apparently, somewhere between my keyboard and your monitor it is being lost in translation. I (Slayer) UNDERSTAND A 1911FRAME IS NOT A HANDGUN, BUT THIS IS CALIFORNIA! THIS STATE HAS NONSENSE LAWS. Remind me to never respond to one of your questions, and realize I know the differnce. For all intents and purposes, unless the AR lower is marked "PISTOL" it is a rifle....you cant build it into anything else. Stripped lowers are still considered rifles...hence why they must be drosed. That's all 50 states, chief...not just CA,

yea the argument always falls apart because there is some part which doesnt understand that the laws/rules if tested they leave glaring exceptions

the big question is is a ar type lower fresh from the factory naked (because stripped implies that it once had parts)
able to be assembled into a pistol or rifle?

if so why not with a 1911 frame since if once a rifle always a rifle if you were to assemble your 1911 into a rifle compliant with california laws can it be ppt as a long arm?

because obviously if converting it back to a pistol makes an sbr you cannot legally sell it as a pistol ever again

back to the grits
the atf says a naked lower it is an "other" which requires one to be 21 what does the atf call a naked frame?
if it is also an other than the game is on

but the california dros system only has options for long arms and pistols

which is really just a registered or not registered selection
which also alerts on more than one handgun per 30 days and wants a hsc number

[bdsmchs]

I'm trying to E-X-P-L-A-I-N it to you, as in tell you why. I am not supporting the stupid law. You clearly do not know, so I'm trying to make it clear. Apparently, somewhere between my keyboard and your monitor it is being lost in translation. I (Slayer) UNDERSTAND A 1911FRAME IS NOT A HANDGUN, BUT THIS IS CALIFORNIA! THIS STATE HAS NONSENSE LAWS.


Where is the law that says a 1911 pattern frame is a handgun and is therefore subject to the roster requirements?


For all intents and purposes, unless the AR lower is marked "PISTOL" it is a rifle....you cant build it into anything else. Stripped lowers are still considered rifles...hence why they must be drosed. That's all 50 states, chief...not just CA,

For all intents and purposes, the AR lower can be marked anything you want it to be marked and at both the Federal and State level it still doesn't make it anything but a Title 1 firearm receiver. You can build one into a rifle, pistol, shotgun, or AOW.

The reason you can build it into an AOW is because it never had a stock attached, and is therefore NOT considered by any law to be a rifle/long gun. You can also build a stripped receiver into a pistol for the same reason. It's a title 1 firearm. You need to be 21 to buy them. If an AR receiver was a "rifle" as you say, then you would only need to be 18 to legally purchase one. AND you would not legally be allowed to build an AOW from one.

Again, you are wrong. And you're failing to point out the actual laws that back up what you are saying. This is what this thread is about. We're trying to find the laws (that don't seem to exist) that would prohibit an FFL from importing into this state a 1911 frame and transferring it to an individual who is 21yo or more for the purposes of building a 1911 carbine (or single-shot exempt pistol).

These laws don't appear to exist. You keep stating that they do. Please cite some PC now. Thanks.

[White Rose]

but a stripped virgin frame is not a pistol

i believe that this might be incorrect, i currently own a new 1911 frame that i bought in 1998. when it drosed, it certainly had to be registered as a handgun.

[bdsmchs]

Get one of these, no FFL required and they ship it to your door.
http://www.diyguns.com/html_catalog/Frames+and+Part+Kits__80_25+Castings+_2F+Forgings. html

Those are cool :)

However, they defeat the whole purpose of what I'm trying to accomplish. I want to walk into an FFL and have them transfer to me a bare 1911 frame.

I can't find any reason or law that is preventing this from happening. I think the same fear that prevented (and still does prevent) so many FFL's from initially bringing AR receivers into the state is at work here.

If I get my way, the 1911 (and Glock, and whatever else) is going to be the next OLL :)

[Slayer]

i believe that this might be incorrect, i currently own a new 1911 frame that i bought in 1998. when it drosed, it certainly had to be registered as a handgun.

Shh dont make sense, this thread doesn't like it ;)

[bdsmchs]

i believe that this might be incorrect, i currently own a new 1911 frame that i bought in 1998. when it drosed, it certainly had to be registered as a handgun.

The only reason for that that we can find is that the DROS system (and the older 4473) was and is incompatible with the idea of a bare frame/receiver.

In the DROS system, you have two options for firearms. Long guns and handguns. But there are many more types of firearms out there than long guns and handguns, and many of them are in fact CA-legal. A stripped frame or receiver is CA legal by our own DoJ's admission (all of the OLL letters).

Since you bought a frame for the purposes of building a 1911 handgun, they just went ahead and DROS'ed it to you as a handgun.

But what if you want to buy one for the purposes of building a .45 carbine? Do you still DROS it as a handgun? Of course not, it's not a handgun. It's a receiver/frame. It's just a naked lil Title 1 firearm :)

[JDay]

Those are cool :)

However, they defeat the whole purpose of what I'm trying to accomplish. I want to walk into an FFL and have them transfer to me a bare 1911 frame.

I can't find any reason or law that is preventing this from happening. I think the same fear that prevented (and still does prevent) so many FFL's from initially bringing AR receivers into the state is at work here.

If I get my way, the 1911 (and Glock, and whatever else) is going to be the next OLL :)

Before you do that you should call the ATF and ask them what their definition of a handgun is.

[White Rose]

The only reason for that that we can find is that the DROS system (and the older 4473) was and is incompatible with the idea of a bare frame/receiver.

In the DROS system, you have two options for firearms. Long guns and handguns. But there are many more types of firearms out there than long guns and handguns, and many of them are in fact CA-legal. A stripped frame or receiver is CA legal by our own DoJ's admission (all of the OLL letters).

Since you bought a frame for the purposes of building a 1911 handgun, they just went ahead and DROS'ed it to you as a handgun.

But what if you want to buy one for the purposes of building a .45 carbine? Do you still DROS it as a handgun? Of course not, it's not a handgun. It's a receiver/frame. It's just a naked lil Title 1 firearm :)

i'm not sure, but are not the oll's drosed as normal long guns based on what their model numbers say, my 1911 was done that way as were all my lowers back in the free days of california.

anyway i'm curious, because i've seen those kits. i wonder how one would get around the pistol grip? fixed mag 1911?

[bwiese]

Before you do that you should call the ATF and ask them what their definition of a handgun is.

Which may or may not align with California's definition.

And which may or may not have relevance here to CA Roster etc.

[bdsmchs]

i'm not sure, but are not the oll's drosed as normal long guns based on what their model numbers say, my 1911 was done that way as were all my lowers back in the free days of california.


The DROS has only two options when it comes to guns. Long guns and handguns. There is no option for "bare frame/receiver". This is why the FFL has to choose one of them, even though both selections are "wrong" in regards to any kind of receiver.

Just because an OLL is DROS'ed as a long gun, doesn't make it a long gun. It's still a bare receiver.

This is not law, it's just an incompatibility with reality. The ATF has even acknowledged this incompatibility and has issued a new 4473 that specifically addresses "other" firearms.

Also, the way a firearm is transferred (4473, DROS, etc) does not in any way make the firearm something that it is not. At the federal level a frame is just a frame. It's not a handgun until it's built into a handgun. It's not a rifle until a shoulder stock is attached. Once a rifle, then it's always a rifle. So just because a bare AR lower is transferred as a "long gun", that doesn't put any requirements on the transferee to only be allowed to build it up as a rifle. If it left the manufacturer as a bare receiver, it will always be a bare receiver in the eyes of the feds until parts are installed. It is only at that point that the receiver becomes a handgun or a long gun (or something else).


anyway i'm curious, because i've seen those kits. i wonder how one would get around the pistol grip? fixed mag 1911?

Bullet button.

While assembling the frame, you install a mag release that does not have a protruding button. The mag button sits flush with the frame (or just a millimeter below) and you must use a "tool" to then drop the mag. With this setup, you would have a CA AWB-compliant semi-automatic 1911-pattern .45 carbine. You could even put a flash suppressor and threaded barrel on it :)

[dfletcher]

Also, once that frame is on a rifle it can't go back to being a handgun.
(Awhile back I'd thought the Thomson/Center case allowed it, but I was wrong: ATF regards it as being brand/gun specific and not generalizable.)

I will add that bright people think it does appear handgun frames are importable into CA but the DOJ (or at least one party) does not agree.

Not to get sidetracked, but to expand a bit on the above important information, with regards to T/C I've come to believe (though I wish it were otherwise) that ATF is stricter than gun type or brand specific. I think a critical reading of their letter shows the only "handgun to rifle & back OK" guns are those specific T/Cs that were sold in kit form about 1990 or so.

Regarding frames and the approach that an AR receiver can be made into a legal handgun, so why can't a 1911 frame come in?

Why can't I import a 1911 frame, DROS'd as a long gun, for the sole purpose of building a rifle? I have a Mech Tech unit. We've already acknowledged my 1991 handgun frame, once stuck on the Mech Tech unit, can no longer be used as a handgun? So with fixed magazine in place (you didn't think I was going to let anyone catch me on the "you can't because it's an AW, did you?) I dedicate my cheap but workmanlike Essex frame to my Mech Tech.

If an AR receiver can be an "other" why can't a 1911?

[domokun]

The DROS has only two options when it comes to guns. Long guns and handguns. There is no option for "bare frame/receiver". This is why the FFL has to choose one of them, even though both selections are "wrong" in regards to any kind of receiver.

Just because an OLL is DROS'ed as a long gun, doesn't make it a long gun. It's still a bare receiver.

This is not law, it's just an incompatibility with reality. The ATF has even acknowledged this incompatibility and has issued a new 4473 that specifically addresses "other" firearms.

Also, the way a firearm is transferred (4473, DROS, etc) does not in any way make the firearm something that it is not. At the federal level a frame is just a frame. It's not a handgun until it's built into a handgun. It's not a rifle until a shoulder stock is attached. Once a rifle, then it's always a rifle. So just because a bare AR lower is transferred as a "long gun", that doesn't put any requirements on the transferee to only be allowed to build it up as a rifle. If it left the manufacturer as a bare receiver, it will always be a bare receiver in the eyes of the feds until parts are installed. It is only at that point that the receiver becomes a handgun or a long gun (or something else).



Bullet button.

While assembling the frame, you install a mag release that does not have a protruding button. The mag button sits flush with the frame (or just a millimeter below) and you must use a "tool" to then drop the mag. With this setup, you would have a CA AWB-compliant semi-automatic 1911-pattern .45 carbine. You could even put a flash suppressor and threaded barrel on it :)

My question is when the frame leaves the manufacturer what does the 07 FFL mark it in their book as? It is a long gun or handgun frame/receiver? If it left their facility as a handgun frame then it started its life as a handgun? Same thinking goes with AR OLL pistol receivers? It's one of the reasons why I think AR pistol receivers are marked "Pistol" on them if I'm not mistaken so they don't get accidentally mixed up as rifle receivers when sold?

[bdsmchs]

My question is when the frame leaves the manufacturer what does the 07 FFL mark it in their book as? It is a long gun or handgun frame/receiver? If it left their facility as a handgun frame then it started its life as a handgun? Same thinking goes with AR OLL pistol receivers? It's one of the reasons why I think AR pistol receivers are marked "Pistol" on them if I'm not mistaken so they don't get accidentally mixed up as rifle receivers when sold?

For tax purposes, they should be marked as "frame/receiver" or the equivalent. As soon as they are a rifle, shotgun, or handgun, the excise tax must be paid.

So a bare receiver is an excise-tax-exempt title 1 firearm. Can be built up as either a pistol or rifle.

If a manufacturer installs so much as a single part, they must then decide whether it's going to be a rifle, shotgun, or handgun and then mark it that way and pay the 10% or 11% excise tax on it.

Theoretically, they could still mark it in their books as a "handgun" even if it's just a bare frame. They would then have to pay the excise tax and it would have to be transferred as if it's a handgun.

But for tax purposes, I'm sure that most manufacturers DONT mark bare receivers as anything but. Why pay a 10/11% tax on something you don't have to?

[Fjold]

From my discussions with a grand total of one licensed manufacturer. Licensed manufacturers have to designate every frame that they produce as a handgun or long gun in their reporting to the BATF. Once the manufacturer lists it as that, it is whatever they say it is.

Why don't you just borrow or buy a single shot conversion upper for a 1911 and get one of our freindly out of state FFLs (like Freakshow) to install it on a frame and import it as a single shot pistol? Then when you get it after the DROS you can make anything that you want out of it.

You can borrow my upper once I get it back from the Calgunner that is doing that right now.

[bdsmchs]

Why don't you just borrow or buy a single shot conversion upper for a 1911 and get one of our freindly out of state FFLs (like Freakshow) to install it on a frame and import it as a single shot pistol? Then when you get it after the DROS you can make anything that you want out of it.

You can borrow my upper once I get it back from the Calgunner that is doing that right now.

While I really do appreciate the offer, that's just not the point of this whole exercise :)

[Fjold]

While I really do appreciate the offer, that's just not the point of this whole exercise :)


Sorry, I thought that you wanted a solution to a problem, my mistake.

[bdsmchs]

Sorry, I thought that you wanted a solution to a problem, my mistake.

I want a specific solution to a problem.

Read this whole thread to get the point ;)

[grammaton76]

I think the easiest solution would be to get an 07 FFL who makes frames, to mark one as 'rifle' instead of 'handgun' in the bound book. Shouldn't be too hard to do with some of the smaller shops.

Then it should be fairly easy to divorce the issue of "1911 rifle frame" (perfectly legit) from "transmuting a 1911 frame from a handgun to a rifle" (murkier)

[bdsmchs]

I think the easiest solution would be to get an 07 FFL who makes frames, to mark one as 'rifle' instead of 'handgun' in the bound book. Shouldn't be too hard to do with some of the smaller shops.

Then it should be fairly easy to divorce the issue of "1911 rifle frame" (perfectly legit) from "transmuting a 1911 frame from a handgun to a rifle" (murkier)

At the root of the issue though is the fact that a frame/receiver *IS NOT* a handgun, rifle, or shotgun. They're just a Title 1 firearm. They become a handgun or rifle or shotgun when the purchaser starts putting parts on them.

Therefore, 1911 and 3rd party Glock frames (just two examples) should be just as legal and just as transferrable in CA as AR receivers are right now.

You can't "transmute a 1911 frame from a handgun to a rifle" because it was never a handgun to begin with.

This is the point that I am repeatedly stressing in this thread that no one really seems to get, except for a small few.

According to all law and precedent that I can find and have read, there is NOTHING wrong with FFL's importing into the state 1911 frames and transferring them to individuals 21 years of age or older. This is exactly the same, legally, as transferring AR receivers.

Once the transferee takes home the receiver, they are allowed to start adding parts to that Title 1 firearm to make it into a rifle, pistol, shotgun, or AOW (with the stamp, of course).

The only time that the roster should, in theory, come up with regarding one of these frames is that if you wanted to build one into a pistol (AR, 1911, whatever), you would have to first build it as a single-shot roster-exempt configuration and then register it with the DoJ on the voluntary registration paperwork. After that is done, then you could legally convert it into a semi-auto.

The thing that we need to do is get some CA FFL's on board with this and to start transferring 1911 frames to people.

[freakshow10mm]

From my discussions with a grand total of one licensed manufacturer. Licensed manufacturers have to designate every frame that they produce as a handgun or long gun in their reporting to the BATF. Once the manufacturer lists it as that, it is whatever they say it is.

Not really. The manufacturer log book needs an entry for the type of firearm. Receiver or frame is acceptable. If a manufacturer designates a rifle frame or handgun frame, that's their choice and it means nothing. A frame is a frame is a frame and nothing but a frame.

The Form 5300.11 Annual Firearms Manufacturing and Exportation Report 07 and 10 FFLs file this form annually. There are different types of firearms that are listed:

pistol
revolver
rifle
shotgun and combination gun
machine gun
AOW
miscellaneous Firearms (defined as suppressors, starter guns, etc)

A frame is not any one of those above so it is a miscellaneous firearm. The number of frames is recorded here. By line g you put the number of total production and description of the type of firearm (frame/receiver).

[grammaton76]

At the root of the issue though is the fact that a frame/receiver *IS NOT* a handgun, rifle, or shotgun. They're just a Title 1 firearm. They become a handgun or rifle or shotgun when the purchaser starts putting parts on them.

Then I'm assuming you're claiming that when the FFL07 sends out the frame and has written "handgun" in the logbook, it has no relevancy?

I would actually like to hear from Freakshow about this, as he IS a 07 FFL and can resolve this very simple issue.

My point is that if the frame NEVER said "handgun" on it, from 07 to 01 to owner, then you have absolutely no problem.

However, if the frame said "handgun" when manufactured, there's more FFL neck-sticking-out being involved, which can be resolved VERY easily by getting an FFL to write "rifle" in his 07 logbook instead.

[Mikeb]

OK this is almost on topic... Can I import a 1911 frame to repair a pistol? The pistol I have was purchased before the list and is cracked at the dustcover.
thanks
Mike

[grammaton76]

Not really. The manufacturer log book needs an entry for the type of firearm. Receiver or frame is acceptable. If a manufacturer designates a rifle frame or handgun frame, that's their choice and it means nothing. A frame is a frame is a frame and nothing but a frame.

Heh, you actually posted the information I wanted before I got done posting that I'd like to see it posted. How's that for prescience?

Given this, then yes, I don't see a reason this would fail to be legitimate.

However, I would suggest that if the 07 were to write "rifle frame" or whatnot (even if it holds no particular weight), it would probably reduce the level of FFL01 discomfort involved in the process.

Of course, this raises issues that Xeno was screaming about quite a while back (i.e. refused to provide much backup, just repeated "once a rifle always a rifle" and never defined at which point this became a rifle)... I've got NDS-6 AK pistol receivers which I haven't done any building on, however they were DROS'ed as rifles I believe. If folks start accepting bare frame to mean bare frame, would that mean my NDS-6's can actually be built as pistols?

[bdsmchs]

OK this is almost on topic... Can I import a 1911 frame to repair a pistol? The pistol I have was purchased before the list and is cracked at the dustcover.
thanks
Mike

Not currently.

Though by the end of this thread, hopefully you'll be able to :)

[bdsmchs]

I've got NDS-6 AK pistol receivers which I haven't done any building on, however they were DROS'ed as rifles I believe. If folks start accepting bare frame to mean bare frame, would that mean my NDS-6's can actually be built as pistols?

In theory, yes. We can't find any law preventing this. This is the whole point of this thread. It *SHOULD* be perfectly legal to do this. The 4473 and the DROS do not make the firearm something that it's not. Just because it was 4473'ed and DROS'ed as a long gun doesn't make it a long gun. It's still a Title 1 receiver and nothing more.

However, to remain as CA-compliant as possible, you will need to fill out the voluntary handgun registration form for them and build them up initially as single-shot pistols.

Once they are registered, you can go to semi-auto :)

[freakshow10mm]

I'm game. I will be place an order for 1911 frames. They will be available for DROS and transfer at PRK Arms in Fresno early January. Price is $250.

[bdsmchs]

I'm game. I will be place an order for 1911 frames. They will be engraved "for rifle use only". They will be available for DROS and transfer at PRK Arms in Fresno early January. Price is $250.

You're an amazing man :)

I'll have to come up with an excuse to visit my buddy up in Fresno sometime around early January...

Now our next project will be to get these into the state with no rifle markings. And get someone to build and self-register a 1911 on one. I'm game. Just need an FFL to cooperate.

[hoffmang]

Gents, I think we're on to something. I'm going to talk to some of "the right people" but I want to issue a challenge.

PC 12125:
12125. (a) Commencing January 1, 2001, any person in this state who manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state for sale, keeps for sale, offers or exposes for sale, gives, or lends any unsafe handgun shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year.


Note that it doesn't include frame or receiver there.

The other place to look is 12001:

12001. (a) (1) As used in this title, the terms "pistol,"
"revolver," and "firearm capable of being concealed upon the person"
shall apply to and include any device designed to be used as a
weapon, from which is expelled a projectile by the force of any
explosion, or other form of combustion, and that has a barrel less
than 16 inches in length. These terms also include any device that
has a barrel 16 inches or more in length which is designed to be
interchanged with a barrel less than 16 inches in length.
(2) As used in this title, the term "handgun" means any "pistol,"
"revolver," or "firearm capable of being concealed upon the person."
(b) As used in this title, "firearm" means any device, designed to
be used as a weapon, from which is expelled through a barrel, a
projectile by the force of any explosion or other form of combustion.

(c) As used in Sections 12021, 12021.1, 12070, 12071, 12072,
12073, 12078, 12101, and 12801 of this code, and Sections 8100, 8101,
and 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, the term "firearm"
includes the frame or receiver of the weapon.
...
(k) For purposes of Sections 12021, 12021.1, 12025, 12070, 12072,
12073, 12078, 12101, and 12801 of this code, and Sections 8100, 8101,
and 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, notwithstanding the
fact that the term "any firearm" may be used in those sections, each
firearm or the frame or receiver of the same shall constitute a
distinct and separate offense under those sections.


The frame of a handgun or pistol is not defined as a handgun or pistol in 12001 (c) means that it is just a frame.

Where am I incorrect? Let's try to find the hole in that logic.

-Gene

[FEDUPWBS]

ITS ON!

[bdsmchs]

Gents, I think we're on to something. I'm going to talk to some of "the right people" but I want to issue a challenge.


Gene, you just made my night :)

When you say "I think we're on to something", I get giddy with excitement!

[timmyb21]

I'll take a 1911 frame. And available in my own town too...thanks PRK!!!

[freakshow10mm]

So we got one for sure. Anyone else want to do this or was this discussion only educational?

[ke6guj]

was this discussion only educational?
I'm not ready to purchase a "rifle" marked 1911 frame. I was discussing the reasoning why I can buy an AR-pattern receiver but not a 1911-pattern receiver. I want to be able to just buy a plain 1911 receiver for the exact reasons that Gene mentioned.

[bdsmchs]

So we got one for sure. Anyone else want to do this or was this discussion only educational?

I will DEFINITELY take a 1911 frame.

Only issue is that I'm in OC, about 3-4 hours away from Fresno. But I'll make it work.

I want to see "handgun" frames become the next legal OLL.

[bdsmchs]

I'm not ready to purchase a "rifle" marked 1911 frame. I was discussing the reasoning why I can buy an AR-pattern receiver but not a 1911-pattern receiver. I want to be able to just buy a plain 1911 receiver for the exact reasons that Gene mentioned.

I have to agree. I don't think they should need to be marked "rifle" in any way.

Now, if it's a really light marking that can easily be obliterated by some steel wool or something.... :)

Why don't we wait to see what Gene comes back to us with. Then maybe we can go with Bill's idea of doing a big FFL "all at once" import/group buy all over the state.

This is definitely not just "educational", I want to do this for real. The idea behind starting out with a 1911 carbine was just some tactical thinking on my part. Guys like Gene and Bill are a lot better at that than I am though, so it might not be needed as a first step.

[hoffmang]

Let's skip the carbines.

Off List Handgun Frames or Receivers are legal. I'm quite confident and I'll be able to say more over the next 48-72 hours depending on some little details.

I like the sound of OLH. Excellent thought process bdsmchs.

-Gene

[freakshow10mm]

I'm not ready to purchase a "rifle" marked 1911 frame. I was discussing the reasoning why I can buy an AR-pattern receiver but not a 1911-pattern receiver. I want to be able to just buy a plain 1911 receiver for the exact reasons that Gene mentioned.
The rifle only was for the people who want to build a rifle out of it. That's what I thought this was about. The rifle is a subject I we need to address. That is a liability on our part. You know you can't use the frame for a pistol once it's been a rifle, but if you sell the gun to someone else, they might use the frame to build a pistol (creating a SBR). It could come back on us (the FFL) that we didn't inform them of the situation.

I will DEFINITELY take a 1911 frame.

Only issue is that I'm in OC, about 3-4 hours away from Fresno. But I'll make it work.
Probably make it work somehow. I know people.


I want to see "handgun" frames become the next legal OLL.
Freakshow Mfg and PRK Arms can make that happen. If I can get them pumping into California earlier than January I will do it. I just picked that time due to the holiday season.

[Mikeb]

The whole build it as a single shot and take a picture then make a proper pistol out of it is a real PIA. Or my repair comment from before.



take care
Mike

[Darklyte27]

did anyone see this?


http://www.diyguns.com/product_info.php?products_id=54&ecSid=e0e60755737c29f3b9fc2c40150c9a96

[ke6guj]

The rifle only was for the people who want to build a rifle out of it. That's what I thought this was about.

This was more about, why can we buy stripped AR-pattern receivers, but not 1911-pattern receivers? Because the 1911 receiver is usually used as a pistol? Well, the PC doesn't seem to prohibit that. The OP brought up the "carbine" option to show that there was a legal use for that 1911 receiver, even if CADOJ prohibited sales of "pistol" receivers". If we wanted to build a 1911 carbine, why would we be prevented from buying the receiver for it?


The rifle is a subject I we need to address. That is a liability on our part. You know you can't use the frame for a pistol once it's been a rifle, but if you sell the gun to someone else, they might use the frame to build a pistol (creating a SBR). It could come back on us (the FFL) that we didn't inform them of the situation.
I understand you with this. If I was planning on building a 1911 carbine because that was the only way to get a 1911 receiver in CA, then I wouldn't have a problem with it being marked as rifle. But I want to be able to buy any receiver I want and initially build it up as a pistol or a rifle, my choice. Because, as we both know, a receiver is just a receiver, it isn't a pistol or rifle until I make it so.

[freakshow10mm]

Well then we will just have to send in unmarked frames. I also figured it would be about $200 and up for a frame, depending on maker. I have a post in my subforum about it. Details will be in there for sure.

[hoffmang]

Let me expound on the "single shot" issue.

Let's use Freakshow, RPK, and Bill Wiese as examples.

Freakshow can send 1911 frames to RPK. Bill has two options.

1. Have RPK construct his pistol on a frame they DROSed to him since the frame is not a firearm and therefor not an unrostered handgun. If RPK manufactures or builds the firearm, they are still not exempt from the prohibition on the manufacture of an unrostered handgun. As such, they'd have to build the 1911 as a single shot and hand it back to Bill as gunsmiths.

2. Have RPK hand a parts kit to Bill and a DROSed bare receiver since the frame is not a firearm and therefor not an unrostered handgun. Bill can then put the darn thing together directly into an unrostered handgun because he's not manufacturing as the frame or receiver is already manufactured under Federal and California law.

s/1911/AK psitol or AR pistol...

-Gene

[scobun]

So, potentially, my bare AR lowers can be built up as pistols? However, the minute I attach a buttstock to it, then the pistol option is forever more a no-go, correct? I've got a few untouched AR lowers that I'd love to do something with.

I'll be following this closely. Very interesting!

[freakshow10mm]

Correct.

[hoffmang]

So, potentially, my bare AR lowers can be built up as pistols? However, the minute I attach a buttstock to it, then the pistol option is forever more a no-go, correct? I've got a few untouched AR lowers that I'd love to do something with.

I'll be following this closely. Very interesting!

I would suggest for now that if you want to build an AR pistol that you now acquire a soon to be very easy to acquire bare pistol marked AR lower to keep the potential drama down.

-Gene

[bdsmchs]

I would suggest for now that if you want to build an AR pistol that you now acquire a soon to be very easy to acquire bare pistol marked AR lower to keep the potential drama down.

-Gene

You know Gene, every single time you post in this thread, it just makes my heart sing :)

"soon to be very easy to acquire bare pistol marked AR lower"

^^^ That right there is just beautiful.







Now... Is it too early to start thinking big? I'm imagining Sig P250 locks....

[bwiese]

We've just killed the Roster.
We've just killed microstamping.
We've just killed mag disconnects.

The DOJ stance that a frame = handgun cannot stand. If we attack en masse, nobody will have problems.

We also have paperwork on this to support our positions, so this is not just a wild hair up our arses.

For clarity, let's get our terms straight and use them consistenly: I'd like to not mix up AW terminology and handgun Roster terminology.

Let's keep "Off List" terminology restricted just for items not listed on, but perhaps similar to, items listed on Roberti-Roos or Kasler AW lists.

New terms:

Off-Roster Handguns: handguns not on Roster nor exempt from it;



Roster-Exempt Handguns: per 12133PC: dimensionally-compliant single-action
revolvers, dimensionally-compliant single-shot pistols, C&R handguns;



Non-Rosterable Frames: (a.k.a NRFs), stripped handgun frames which aren't
Rosterable since they're not pistols - although eligible to be built into pistols.


"NERFs" - I like it. In the very near future we will not have to do single-shot treatment for AR pistols.

STI Frames, anyone?

I'm getting a S&W M&P45 Compact.

[thedrickel]

Rate this thread: ***** Excellent

[bdsmchs]

We've just killed the Roster.


I.
Can't.
Breathe.
Right.
Now.
!!!!!!!

[oaklander]

You know, my internet was down earlier today, then my GF came over, and then I finally get back on the internet and I find out that you lovable knuckleheads just defeated the ROSTER!

Gotta love Calguns!!!

:D

[ke6guj]

Hi Kevin, you're late for the party :D

[oaklander]

Hi Kevin, you're late for the party :D

LOL - or too early. . .

For those of you too young to remember, I was the first person in California to successfully do a voluntary registration on an AK pistol. . . That was way back in early 2008. . .

Here's a pic of the evil thing:

http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2irt2dx&s=3

:D

[hoffmang]

This thread has migrated to:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=1755433

-Gene

[Kestryll]

Gents, I think we're on to something. I'm going to talk to some of "the right people" but I want to issue a challenge.

PC 12125:
12125. (a) Commencing January 1, 2001, any person in this state who manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state for sale, keeps for sale, offers or exposes for sale, gives, or lends any unsafe handgun shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year.


Note that it doesn't include frame or receiver there.

The other place to look is 12001:

12001. (a) (1) As used in this title, the terms "pistol,"
"revolver," and "firearm capable of being concealed upon the person"
shall apply to and include any device designed to be used as a
weapon, from which is expelled a projectile by the force of any
explosion, or other form of combustion, and that has a barrel less
than 16 inches in length. These terms also include any device that
has a barrel 16 inches or more in length which is designed to be
interchanged with a barrel less than 16 inches in length.
(2) As used in this title, the term "handgun" means any "pistol,"
"revolver," or "firearm capable of being concealed upon the person."
(b) As used in this title, "firearm" means any device, designed to
be used as a weapon, from which is expelled through a barrel, a
projectile by the force of any explosion or other form of combustion.

(c) As used in Sections 12021, 12021.1, 12070, 12071, 12072,
12073, 12078, 12101, and 12801 of this code, and Sections 8100, 8101,
and 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, the term "firearm"
includes the frame or receiver of the weapon.
...
(k) For purposes of Sections 12021, 12021.1, 12025, 12070, 12072,
12073, 12078, 12101, and 12801 of this code, and Sections 8100, 8101,
and 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, notwithstanding the
fact that the term "any firearm" may be used in those sections, each
firearm or the frame or receiver of the same shall constitute a
distinct and separate offense under those sections.


The frame of a handgun or pistol is not defined as a handgun or pistol in 12001 (c) means that it is just a frame.

Where am I incorrect? Let's try to find the hole in that logic.

-Gene

Okay, I've been up for nearly 20 hours straight so I could be a bit foggy but how do the parts in bold all interact with this?

Does it only define the frame as a firearm and not specifically as a handgun or are they banking on it's status as a 'firearm capable of being concealed' to default it in to a 'handgun' somehow?

[Mike's Custom]

I think some of the problem is, the FEDs do not consider a frame to be a "firearm" and CA does. But I can't DROS a handgun without a caliber and barrel length. It just won't go through.

[bdsmchs]

I think some of the problem is, the FEDs do not consider a frame to be a "firearm" and CA does. But I can't DROS a handgun without a caliber and barrel length. It just won't go through.

Mike, this thread is pretty dead as we've moved on to the other thread.

Regarding DROS'ing a frame as a handgun, yes you can :)

Here are the instructions for a dealer to properly DROS a handgun frame as a handgun:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=136207

When Bill/Gene make their official NeRF announcements, they will most likely solidify any questions involved in the DROS process for a handgun frame.

[Mssr. Eleganté]

I think some of the problem is, the FEDs do not consider a frame to be a "firearm" and CA does.

The Feds do consider a frame to be a "firearm".

§ 921. Definitions

(a) As used in this chapter --

(3) The term "firearm" means (A) any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; (B) the frame or receiver of any such weapon; (C) any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; or (D) any destructive device. Such term does not include an antique firearm.

[Mike's Custom]

The Feds do consider a frame to be a "firearm".

Not exactly what I meant. The FEDs do consider it a firearm and it must be A&D'd but it is looked at differently then in CA as a complete firearm. CA treats a frame as a complete firearm for the sake of the Roster.

[ke6guj]

But what PC says a bare frame is a complete firearm that needes to be on the Roster? And what says that a 1911 frame must be rostered, but a AR-pattern frame doesn't have be rostered?

All these questions have been asked and asked again. Right now we are just in a holding pattern while they fully document the legality of NeRFs and how they need to be DROSed.

.

[bdsmchs]

Not exactly what I meant. The FEDs do consider it a firearm and it must be A&D'd but it is looked at differently then in CA as a complete firearm. CA treats a frame as a complete firearm for the sake of the Roster.

Actually, it doesn't. And that's why we're going to be able to NeRF things soon :) It's a wonderful little bit of CA law.

For the purposes of the roster, a handgun must be an entire handgun capable of fire.

[Mike's Custom]

Well, hey, I am all for more guns to sell. At least while we can.

[thedrickel]

PRK Arms will DROS any unlisted and non-AW frame/receiver as a long gun.

[hoffmang]

Not exactly what I meant. The FEDs do consider it a firearm and it must be A&D'd but it is looked at differently then in CA as a complete firearm. CA treats a frame as a complete firearm for the sake of the Roster.

See, that's where you're exactly incorrect. As a pattern or practice, CA may have treated frames as the handgun, but that's not what California law says. That's the key realization. The frame or receiver is not the firearm for PC 12125 et seq.

-Gene

[hoffmang]

PRK Arms will DROS any unlisted and non-AW frame/receiver as a long gun.

Which means you can not build a pistol/handgun on that frame; an important caveat to keep in mind. That is distinct from NRFs.

-Gene