PDA

View Full Version : BB needed on upperless AR?


Cato
08-29-2009, 10:38 PM
Just wondering: do you need a mag lock on your Kali AR if your upper is kept separate?

lomalinda
08-29-2009, 10:45 PM
No. In the same way that a Vector Uzi clone is not in violation by being separated into upper and lower receivers, you're fine as it's not a centerfire rifle--just the components of one. Constructive possession is not an issue.

For ****s and giggles, throw on the collapsing stock while you're at it. Still not a problem.

Dr Rockso
08-29-2009, 10:49 PM
A lower is not a centerfire rifle, so no. Still it's a good idea if you're transporting both the upper and lower together to have a magazine lock and 10-rnd magazine installed to avoid any confusion.

bwiese
08-30-2009, 10:40 AM
Just wondering: do you need a mag lock on your Kali AR if your upper is kept separate?

In theory, no.

But in practice, you should not cruise around with a parts combination that, when slapped together in 0.1 seconds, forms a complete AW.

That's just too much bait even though there's no constructive possession.

One exception to this would be if you *also* had a 22LR conversion kit that ran off a regular 5.56 upper - w/22LR bolt assy and 22LR mags in immediate presence.... this gives a lot more cover.

pinkmist.308
02-07-2010, 11:40 AM
Howdy all,

I posted this question in another forum and somewhat unrelated topic. I got a couple of positive responses. This topic is more to the point. I'm looking for a few more people to tell me I would be within the law if I did the following. I've been reading and searching for days and hours and can't find anything specific to my questions. If this is covered elsewhere, please redirect me.

My .223 oll has multiple "evil" features and I use BB. I'm looking for confirmation that it would be legal to do the following:

Remove my .223 upper from my oll lower and replace the bolt & carrier with the ceiner .22 conversion. Then, with a collapsible stock and pistol grip still attached to my oll, remove my BB and reinstall a standard/normal magazine release button. (At this point I would have a fully functional lower with a standard magazine release button that had the capacity to accept a detachable magazine, a collapsible stock and a pistol grip.) Then reattach the .223 upper with the .22 conversion unit installed and use my lawfully owned high capacity .22 magazines.

Obviously I would convert back to .223 in reverse order.

If I understand the law correctly, .22 are exempted from the AW regs.

Short of the installed .22 conversion unit and with a .223 bolt & carrier reinstalled, this rifle would be a fully functional, multiple "evil" feature equipped centerfire rifle with the capacity to accept detachable mags.

Additionally, my .223 bolt and carrier would likely be on the shooting bench right beside me. Constructive possession would not apply.......correct?

This is o.k. and I'm not required to have a dedicated .22 upper?

Thanks in advance.

IrishPirate
02-07-2010, 11:46 AM
Pinkmist....you'd be ok legally, but thats not to say that an ill-informed cop isn't going to screw with you. If you've got your .223 upper with you, make sure you have a BB with you also. As long as the gun can only fire rimfire rounds in the configuration it's in, the "evil" features aren't evil anymore and you're ok. But once you decide to put that .223 upper back on, you better make sure you have a BB installed first. keeping the BB around will most likely help you avoid any long term hassle

Swatter911
02-07-2010, 1:40 PM
Howdy all,

I posted this question in another forum and somewhat unrelated topic. I got a couple of positive responses. This topic is more to the point. I'm looking for a few more people to tell me I would be within the law if I did the following. I've been reading and searching for days and hours and can't find anything specific to my questions. If this is covered elsewhere, please redirect me.

My .223 oll has multiple "evil" features and I use BB. I'm looking for confirmation that it would be legal to do the following:

Remove my .223 upper from my oll lower and replace the bolt & carrier with the ceiner .22 conversion. Then, with a collapsible stock and pistol grip still attached to my oll, remove my BB and reinstall a standard/normal magazine release button. (At this point I would have a fully functional lower with a standard magazine release button that had the capacity to accept a detachable magazine, a collapsible stock and a pistol grip.) Then reattach the .223 upper with the .22 conversion unit installed and use my lawfully owned high capacity .22 magazines.

Obviously I would convert back to .223 in reverse order.

If I understand the law correctly, .22 are exempted from the AW regs.

Short of the installed .22 conversion unit and with a .223 bolt & carrier reinstalled, this rifle would be a fully functional, multiple "evil" feature equipped centerfire rifle with the capacity to accept detachable mags.

Additionally, my .223 bolt and carrier would likely be on the shooting bench right beside me. Constructive possession would not apply.......correct?

This is o.k. and I'm not required to have a dedicated .22 upper?

Thanks in advance.

Take a look at the Radlock. This is what I use on my LMT MRP when I put the 22 bolt and barrel on it.

rromeo
02-07-2010, 1:50 PM
If I don't own anything other than a parts kitted lower, then everything is okay?

pinkmist.308
02-07-2010, 2:58 PM
Yeah, 10-4 IrishPirate. You and bwiese make good points about giving yourself enough cover with respect to an ignorant law enforcement officer. Having everything in your possession to make a lawful .223 centerfire or .22 rimfire rifle would be prudent.

I remember having this conversation back in 1999 in an attempt to find a legal way around registration. That pig wouldn't fly back then because either the lower was banned by make and model or as a "series" lower, hence putting a .22 conversion unit in made no legal difference.

I'm glad to see that this pig has wings now.


Swatter911 : I'm a little confused. Are you saying when you have your .22 upper attached to your lower you use a radlock? The radlock is not necessary on a .22 rimfire. It would only be necessary if you have a centerfire upper attached and "evil" features. Is that what you were saying?

rromeo: Per previous comments and my understanding of the law, you are o.k. if you only have an oll with a standard lower parts kit installed which includes a pistol grip. You could even have a collapsable stock installed. You need to be careful though, the moment you attach a centerfire upper you will have created an illegal assault weapon. You would need to have a BB installed in leiu of the standard mag release if you were to attach that lower to a centerfire upper. And don't use a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds.

fairfaxjim
02-07-2010, 4:16 PM
Howdy all,

I posted this question in another forum and somewhat unrelated topic. I got a couple of positive responses. This topic is more to the point. I'm looking for a few more people to tell me I would be within the law if I did the following. I've been reading and searching for days and hours and can't find anything specific to my questions. If this is covered elsewhere, please redirect me.

My .223 oll has multiple "evil" features and I use BB. I'm looking for confirmation that it would be legal to do the following:

Remove my .223 upper from my oll lower and replace the bolt & carrier with the ceiner .22 conversion. Then, with a collapsible stock and pistol grip still attached to my oll, remove my BB and reinstall a standard/normal magazine release button. (At this point I would have a fully functional lower with a standard magazine release button that had the capacity to accept a detachable magazine, a collapsible stock and a pistol grip.) Then reattach the .223 upper with the .22 conversion unit installed and use my lawfully owned high capacity .22 magazines.

Obviously I would convert back to .223 in reverse order.

If I understand the law correctly, .22 are exempted from the AW regs.

Short of the installed .22 conversion unit and with a .223 bolt & carrier reinstalled, this rifle would be a fully functional, multiple "evil" feature equipped centerfire rifle with the capacity to accept detachable mags.

Additionally, my .223 bolt and carrier would likely be on the shooting bench right beside me. Constructive possession would not apply.......correct?

This is o.k. and I'm not required to have a dedicated .22 upper?

Thanks in advance.

If you are simply inserting a .22lr conversion kit into a .223 or 5.56 centerfire upper, then what body of law or regulation are you using to decide that it is no longer a semi-automatic centerfire rifle? Are you able to produce that in the field to an inquiring officer? Or, more importantly, in court to a jury? Without that, you may be hard pressed to convince anyone that an upper stamped .223 Rem is really a .22lr because you stuck something in the chamber.

b.faust
02-07-2010, 7:43 PM
In theory, no.

But in practice, you should not cruise around with a parts combination that, when slapped together in 0.1 seconds, forms a complete AW.

That's just too much bait even though there's no constructive possession.

One exception to this would be if you *also* had a 22LR conversion kit that ran off a regular 5.56 upper - w/22LR bolt assy and 22LR mags in immediate presence.... this gives a lot more cover.

This actually brings up a question I have been mulling over. While this generally doesn't happen, lets say I have my BB'd AR-15 being transported in the same trunk as my un-BB'd dedicated AR .22

In theory, I know that both are absolutely configured to the letter of the law, but as you suggested, it'd take a second to swap the uppers out.
Do you think this would ever become an issue (to the point I'd be calling you for help?)

For the record though, I don't think I've ever had both with me at the same time. One is outdoor range fungun, and the other is indoor range fungun.

Thanks
B.

pinkmist.308
02-08-2010, 1:35 AM
If you are simply inserting a .22lr conversion kit into a .223 or 5.56 centerfire upper, then what body of law or regulation are you using to decide that it is no longer a semi-automatic centerfire rifle? Are you able to produce that in the field to an inquiring officer? Or, more importantly, in court to a jury? Without that, you may be hard pressed to convince anyone that an upper stamped .223 Rem is really a .22lr because you stuck something in the chamber.

You make a valid and sobering point.

Some legal precedent, DOJ/ATF interpretation or body of law regarding the use of a converter and whether or not it stands the legal muster would be nice.

Short of that I don't think I'll go down this road.

This surly has to be dicussed in detail elsewhere. I can't find anything though.

Thanks for your prior response.

All others are welcomed.

pinkmist.308
02-10-2010, 4:59 PM
I found an answer to my question in the FAQ-Calguns Wiki page. I must have passed over it initially because I did a lot of searching and reading before I posted my questions.

http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/FAQ

What I found is located the the "Bullet Button" questions. It is a question and answer format.

Question: Do I need to use a bullet button with a centerfire rifle with a rimfire conversion kit?

Answer: No, not so long as the conversion kit is installed. Before the conversion kit is removed, the magazine locking device/bullet button must be reinstalled.

I would think that those who created and edited this Frequently Asked Questions section must really know about the legal precedents and DOJ/ATF interpretations before posting on the topic. Everything I read in the FAQ section seems to be right on the money. It would be incredibly irresponsible for inaccurate info to be posted.

Though there is a disclaimer, Iím generally satisfied. I've printed a copy and keep it with my flowchart, receipts, etc.

Thanks all.

ke6guj
02-10-2010, 5:21 PM
I would think that those who created and edited this Frequently Asked Questions section must really know about the legal precedents and DOJ/ATF interpretations before posting on the topic. Everything I read in the FAQ section seems to be right on the money. It would be incredibly irresponsible for inaccurate info to be posted.

Though there is a disclaimer, Iím generally satisfied. I've printed a copy and keep it with my flowchart, receipts, etc.

Thanks all.do realize that that is a wiki, that can be edited by anyone, so you do have to decide for yourself if the info contained is accurate or not. The same goes for your post saying that you are looking for people to tell you that it is legal. You shouldn't rely on the word of anybody to keep you out of trouble. What you can do is use the info that you get and crosscheck it against the PC, CCR, and any linked Case Law.


ask yourself this, if you had a AR-pattern rifle that was not capable of firing centerfire ammo, since it did not have the proper BCG, but was capable of firing rimfire ammo with the BCG that was installed, would you call it a centerfire or rimfire rifle. If you called it a rimfire rifle, then would hte AW regs that apply to centerfire rifles apply to the rifle in question? If so, why, and if not, why not? You need to understand the legalities yourself and be able to explain them to a questioning officer, not "but I read it on the internet that it was legal."

pinkmist.308
02-10-2010, 9:16 PM
Yes, ke6guj, I do realize that anyone can edit wiki. Thanks. I also understand the point you make about “reading it on the internet”, getting legal advice from someone that is not qualified to give it and crosschecking against case law, etc.

Though I am generally satisfied, I agree, I lack solid documentation to demonstrate the legality of said situation. Everything I read seems to indicate this configuration would be legal. I think I’ll make it easy on myself and start a thread on this topic in an effort to obtain leads on such documentation. Once I have such documentation, I’ll add it to my detailed folder of assault weapons laws history, case law, penal codes, receipts, etc.

As far as convincing a LEO in the field that my rifle was configured legally, I think I would do it with as few words as possible. I would probably say something like “Per my attorney’s advice, I respectfully decline to answer any questions. This documentation demonstrates the legal status of my firearms. Please take a look at it.”. Then I would hand him/her my folder. The risk versus reward just is not there. This is an entirely different topic though.

Thanks for your response.