PDA

View Full Version : Random question regarding legality of pistol uppers


CnCFunFactory
03-30-2009, 5:49 PM
Is the mere possession of a pistol upper without a pistol lower somehow against the law? i.e. having it locked in my safe with my other AR rifles as it could be put on one of those lowers to form an illegal weapon.

I am asking for this reason and this reason only..... I am thinking about buying a pistol upper because it is being offered to me at a great price and I will get a pistol designated lower at a later date (is that possible even, from what I've read it is). I would obviously never attach it to a lower that is designated as a rifle as the entire point of me asking this question is to be up to the letter of the law and not expose myself to any unwanted messiness resulting in legal issues.

Thanks. Looking forward to your always knowledgeable responses.

pro defensive greg
03-30-2009, 5:52 PM
a bunch of funny stuff comes into play, which im sure later worry-wort posters will fill you in on...but possessing both, even un-attatched, can cause you problems. . . the same goes with m16 parts and silencers...not worth the trouble. . .what can you do with a 10" barrel that you can't with a 16" anyway. the last time i had to clear a room and actually fire was many moons, and miles ago. my wrists just don't belong in handcuffs i guess.

Wizard99
03-30-2009, 6:05 PM
Both state and federal SBR laws have a constructive possesion aspect. If you have the parts to make an SBR in your possesion even if it is not assembled means that you have an SBR.

So having an AR pistol upper in your possesion without a lower to go with it and having one or more AR rifles means you have an SBR.

If you can't pass up the deal, buy it and have them hold on to it until you get the pistol lower or immediately get it into the hands of someone who could hold it for you.

CnCFunFactory
03-30-2009, 6:08 PM
a bunch of funny stuff comes into play, which im sure later worry-wort posters will fill you in on...but possessing both, even un-attatched, can cause you problems. . . my wrists just don't belong in handcuffs i guess.

Neither do mine hence the reason I'm asking :eek:. I figured it wouldn't be worth the trouble but figured if there were no issue at all to possessing/owning it would be cool to build.

CnCFunFactory
03-30-2009, 6:11 PM
Both state and federal SBR laws have a constructive possesion aspect. If you have the parts to make an SBR in your possesion even if it is not assembled means that you have an SBR. .

That was what I was not hoping to hear but got it loud and clear. 16" and over for me. Like I said I don't need the hassle if it were to come up.:thumbsup:

professorhard
03-30-2009, 6:12 PM
make sure you dont have a hacksaw and any guns either....constructive possession of a SBR....:6:

Quiet
03-30-2009, 6:29 PM
Penal Code 12020
(c)(2) As used in this section, a "short-barreled rifle" means any of the following:
(A) A rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length.
(B) A rifle with an overall length of less than 26 inches.
(C) Any weapon made from a rifle (whether by alteration, modification, or otherwise) if that weapon, as modified, has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length.
(D) Any device which may be readily restored to fire a fixed cartridge which, when so restored, is a device defined in subparagraphs (A) to (C), inclusive.
(E) Any part, or combination of parts, designed and intended to convert a device into a device defined in subparagraphs (A) to (C), inclusive, or any combination of parts from which a device defined in subparagraphs (A) to (C), inclusive, may be readily assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person.

CnCFunFactory
03-30-2009, 6:35 PM
Penal Code 12020
(c)(2) As used in this section, a "short-barreled rifle" means any of the following:
(A) A rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length.
(B) A rifle with an overall length of less than 26 inches.
(C) Any weapon made from a rifle (whether by alteration, modification, or otherwise) if that weapon, as modified, has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length.
(D) Any device which may be readily restored to fire a fixed cartridge which, when so restored, is a device defined in subparagraphs (A) to (C), inclusive.
(E) Any part, or combination of parts, designed and intended to convert a device into a device defined in subparagraphs (A) to (C), inclusive, or any combination of parts from which a device defined in subparagraphs (A) to (C), inclusive, may be readily assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person.

...and on that note I won't be purchasing it, period. Thanks for the exact code I appreciate it. Like I said in the original and subsequent posts I have no interest in getting into trouble. Thanks for being so concise.

bwiese
03-30-2009, 6:57 PM
Is the mere possession of a pistol upper without a pistol lower somehow against the law?

You are free to own pistol uppers alone.
You are free to own pistol uppers if you have at least a legit pistol lower if you also own matching rifle/rifle lower.

In CA, you should NOT own a pistol upper if you have ONLY a rifle or rifle lower.


i.e. having it locked in my safe with my other AR rifles as it could be put on one of those lowers to form an illegal weapon.Correct, CA has constructive possession for SBRs.

Post-Thompson/Center decision, Feds apparently don't have constructive possession of SBRs (from reliable source, Freakshow10mm).

But it's moot point in CA.


I am asking for this reason and this reason only..... I am thinking about buying a pistol upper because it is being offered to me at a great price and I will get a pistol designated lower at a later date (is that possible even, from what I've read it is).Don't do this.

BTW you'd also have issues getting a bare pistol lower. Most OLL AR pistols in CA are coming in via the 12133PC single-shot exemption as whole guns.

yellowfin
03-30-2009, 7:30 PM
Would it be hard to get the SBR constructive possession law scrapped?

hoffmang
03-30-2009, 9:55 PM
Would it be hard to get the SBR constructive possession law scrapped?

It's pretty far down the list of litigation. It is on the list however.

-Gene

Wizard99
03-30-2009, 11:12 PM
So Gene, are you saying that it would be ok to have multiple pistol uppers and one pistol lower even if you have multiple rifle uppers and lowers? Or do you have to have enough pistol lowers to match up with your pistol uppers?

hoffmang
03-31-2009, 9:25 PM
So Gene, are you saying that it would be ok to have multiple pistol uppers and one pistol lower even if you have multiple rifle uppers and lowers? Or do you have to have enough pistol lowers to match up with your pistol uppers?

Let me try to make it simple.

1. Rifle lower. Rifle upper(s). Good.

2. Rifle lower. Rifle upper(s). Pistol upper. Bad.

3. Rifle lower. Pistol lower. Rifle upper(s). Pistol upper(s). Good.

The key to possessing one or more pistol uppers is owning a pistol marked and transferred lower.

-Gene