PDA

View Full Version : Question Regarding "CONSTRUCTIVE POSSESSION"


DanHuuN
07-09-2009, 12:03 PM
I know that owning a upper with a barrel length of less than 16'' overall is a NO NO in the state of California unless I am in possession of an AR-Pistol lower of SBR permit. Here is my question....

I currently have 2 LMT MRP uppers, both with 16'' barrels on them and I am debating on turning 1 into a 10.5'' and put it on an AR-Pistol lower.

Finding a pistol lower for a reasonable price is damn near impossible right now but I can obtain a 10.5'' LMT barrel for the MRP. Is that legal for me to posses BEFORE i obtain my pistol lower? Does the "constructive possession" law only apply to a COMPLETE UPPER with a barrel length shorter than 16''?

I know that I should probably obtain my AR-Pistol lower FIRST, but I can get the LMT barrel at a good price and it is available.

Thanks in advance for the info guys.....

*EDIT*

I am referring to being in possession of 2 COMPLETE LMT MRP 16'' uppers and just a 10.5" barrel that is not attached to anything. (I would have to take the 16'' barrel off with a torx wrench then insert the 10.5'' and torx it back down)

5hundo
07-09-2009, 12:07 PM
If you don't have a pistol lower and you have an upper with a barrel that is shorter than 16", you are in violation (as it has been explained to me).

ke6guj
07-09-2009, 12:27 PM
I wouldn't. The problem is that you could construct an SBR by installing that 10.5" barrel into an upper, and installing hte upper on a rifle lower.


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.Do you want to argue in front of a jury that because you have to swap out the barrel from the upper, it can't be "readily assembled"?

Jicko
07-09-2009, 12:29 PM
I think SBR is a NFA violation on the Federal level.

ke6guj
07-09-2009, 12:32 PM
SBRs are regulated on both the State and Federal levels.

Josh3239
07-09-2009, 12:36 PM
If you need that barrel, I would suggest having it shipped to a friends house. You'll want it as far out of your possession as you can until you get a pistol lower. The ATF has called a shoelace a machine gun, in my mind you'll lose no matter how many 16'' uppers you have and no matter how few lowers you have.

I want to build an AR 9mm pistol, my game plan is to get any 9mm pistol barrel and have it cut down after it is built just to be 100% safe. That is my personal recommendation, get yourself a barrel that you like that is 16" or greater, and cut it down later. It isn't that expensive to have a pro like Randall at AR15barrels do it.

DanHuuN
07-09-2009, 1:01 PM
Cool....thanks for the info guys....

Ducman
07-09-2009, 1:03 PM
or have it shipped to Randall, problem fixed ;)

Untamed1972
07-09-2009, 1:47 PM
I wouldn't. The problem is that you could construct an SBR by installing that 10.5" barrel into an upper, and installing hte upper on a rifle lower.


Do you want to argue in front of a jury that because you have to swap out the barrel from the upper, it can't be "readily assembled"?


The funny part about this always seems to be that if you have an AR rifle and an AR pistol, from a "constructive posession", aren't you now in a constrcutive posession of the parts to construct an SBR? Pop 4 take down pins and swap pistol upper to rifle lower, pop 2 pins back in, tap, tug, rack, BANG! You got an SBR.

I'm not saying you guys are wrong in your advice and I believe in erring on the side of caution.....just saying the laws are stupid.

Seems to me that when it comes to "constructive posession" that should only apply if the ONLY thing that can be built with it is something illegal can be. Like for example FA parts for an AR. But when it comes to a barrel if there is also something legal that can be constructed with it, whether or not one is posession of ALL the parts required to make the legal thing, then constructive posession should not apply. Kinda like the threaded pistol barrel thing in CA. It's only illegal to have if it's actually installed in the pistol. Or the magazine parts thing. Parts should be parts unless the ONLY thing to be made from the parts is illegal.

That's like saying: "Well .223 ammo COULD be used in an illegal assault weapon, so unless you also have a legal .223 firearm in your posession, then you could get charged with constructive posession of an illegal AW."

JeffM
07-09-2009, 2:04 PM
when it comes to "constructive posession" that should only apply if the ONLY thing that can be built with it is something illegal

This is, in fact, how it is. ^

This is why you cannot possess a 10.5" barrel w/o a pistol or sbr lower if you already possess a rifle lower.

Kinda like the threaded pistol barrel thing in CA. It's only illegal to have if it's actually installed in the pistol. Or the magazine parts thing. Parts should be parts unless the ONLY thing to be made from the parts is illegal.

Because CA AW and mag limit laws do not include a constructive possession provision.

CA and Federal SBR laws do.

ke6guj
07-09-2009, 2:49 PM
The funny part about this always seems to be that if you have an AR rifle and an AR pistol, from a "constructive posession", aren't you now in a constrcutive posession of the parts to construct an SBR? Pop 4 take down pins and swap pistol upper to rifle lower, pop 2 pins back in, tap, tug, rack, BANG! You got an SBR.AFAIK, the "rule of lenity" is what allows for a person to have an AR pistol and AR rifle. Since there is a legal usage for that pistol upper, they can't assume that you are gonna use it on the rifle lower.

I'm not saying you guys are wrong in your advice and I believe in erring on the side of caution.....just saying the laws are stupid.I would agree that the laws are stupid.


Seems to me that when it comes to "constructive posession" that should only apply if the ONLY thing that can be built with it is something illegal can be. Like for example FA parts for an AR. But when it comes to a barrel if there is also something legal that can be constructed with it, whether or not one is posession of ALL the parts required to make the legal thing, then constructive posession should not apply. correct, if you can legally use that pistol barrel with the combination of parts you have availble without making an SBR, even though you could make an SBR, the Rule of Lenity applies. But, if you can't make a complete pistol out of the parts available, and have a pistol barrel, then you fall afoul of the SBR construcive possession regs.


Kinda like the threaded pistol barrel thing in CA. It's only illegal to have if it's actually installed in the pistol. Or the magazine parts thing. Parts should be parts unless the ONLY thing to be made from the parts is illegal.

That's like saying: "Well .223 ammo COULD be used in an illegal assault weapon, so unless you also have a legal .223 firearm in your posession, then you could get charged with constructive posession of an illegal AW."The difference is that the PC does not include constructive possession of an AW like it does for stuff like SBR, SBR, and MGs.