PDA

View Full Version : AR partial build legality?


Cato
04-09-2006, 6:12 PM
As I anxiously await the DOJ list, I'm itching to do something with my stripped lower. Would it be legal to partially assemble a lower? That would include a lower kit, pistol grip, collapsable stock, and a gun lock through the magazine well. Basically everything put together except the upper totally separated from the lower and a gun lock through the magazine well. Would that be legal? Off-list lawyers your opinion would be much appreciated!

blkA4alb
04-09-2006, 6:23 PM
As I anxiously await the DOJ list, I'm itching to do something with my stripped lower. Would it be legal to partially assemble a lower? That would include a lower kit, pistol grip, collapsable stock, and a gun lock through the magazine well. Basically everything put together except the upper totally separated from the lower and a gun lock through the magazine well. Would that be legal? Off-list lawyers your opinion would be much appreciated!
No, that is illegal. the open mag well has the ability to accept a detachable magazine, plus the pistol grip itself makes it illegal. You either need to just leave it stripped until something happens or pin the mag in BEFORE you attach the pistol grip and stock. Don't forget that if you have kids in the house you still have to put a gun lock on the stripped lower by law, since the lower is a firearm no matter what. Feel free to install all the parts in the lower though, minus the pistol grip.

Gnote
04-09-2006, 7:43 PM
.. Feel free to install all the parts in the lower though, minus the pistol grip.

And minus the stock if you are not going to fix a 10 round mag. Like blkA4alb said, if you fix the 10 round mag then you will be okay but make sure it is a 10 round mag and not a mag that holds more than that.

tenpercentfirearms
04-09-2006, 8:55 PM
Having a gun lock in anything does not change its legality. In fact, a gun lock has nothing to do with anything at any time. So forget the idea that a gun lock somehow protects you from anything, it doesn't. Either it doesn't violate SB23 or it does. Having a centerfire, detachable magazine rifle with anyone one of the following is an assault weapon.

firejoe
04-09-2006, 11:24 PM
Along this subject, once my lower makes the banned list, can I register it as an AW if I haven't built it up yet? I bought two and have built one with a fixed mag kit, but don't plan to build up the second for a while.

Thanks

blkA4alb
04-09-2006, 11:27 PM
Along this subject, once my lower makes the banned list, can I register it as an AW if I haven't built it up yet? I bought two and have built one with a fixed mag kit, but don't plan to build up the second for a while.

Thanks
you HAVE to register it whether it is built up or not. your options are to register it, sell it out of state, move it out of state, or destroy it. its not a choice.

tenpercentfirearms
04-09-2006, 11:28 PM
As long as the you have a completed, serialized receiver, you should be fine. That is what they did for the .50 BMG ban.

EBWhite
04-10-2006, 12:05 AM
you HAVE to register it whether it is built up or not. your options are to register it, sell it out of state, move it out of state, or destroy it. its not a choice.


Remember- in America, WE ALWAYS HAVE A CHOICE. Might not be the smart one but you always have a choice.

blkA4alb
04-10-2006, 12:11 AM
Remember- in America, WE ALWAYS HAVE A CHOICE. Might not be the smart one but you always have a choice.
Of course, but the other choice would not be staying within the law, and it seems that that is what he plans to do.

gh429
04-10-2006, 12:24 AM
12276.1. (a) Notwithstanding Section 12276, "assault weapon" shall
also mean any of the following:
(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to
accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:

I believe the argument can be made that assembling the lower alone with a pistol grip and the capacity to accept detachable magazines is NOT a violation of the law, because the rifle is NOT yet a semiautomatic rifle. Unless someone can point to any court rulings or DOJ opinions that an AR with the upper modified as to not cycle after each round (such as bolt action, pump action, etc.) is in fact illegal.

Builder
04-10-2006, 9:42 AM
Hmm. The basis as to whether an AR is a single shot or not, is determined by what upper is placed on the semi-automatic AR lower? Just remember that the AR was designed to be semi-auto. Bolt action design from the beginning would be different.
If that single shot upper was permanently pinned, different story. But then again, the lower (the actual firearm) is a "series" semi-automatic design. Another argument against is that the lower has parts that are semi-automatic. Imagine arguing before a judge that the only thing that makes it single shot is two easily removable pins.
On a side note, does anyone know of a pump or bolt action AR upper? (Missing gas tube parts don't count. Target single shot AR's are determined by the magazine, not upper.) So if these parts don't exist, how can they be argued to help?
Finally, yes the DOJ has said that semi or single, the named AR series are AW's.
Thanks,
Builder

bwiese
04-10-2006, 9:58 AM
I believe the argument can be made that assembling the lower alone with a pistol grip and the capacity to accept detachable magazines is NOT a violation of the law, because the rifle is NOT yet a semiautomatic rifle. Unless someone can point to any court rulings or DOJ opinions that an AR with the upper modified as to not cycle after each round (such as bolt action, pump action, etc.) is in fact illegal.

I'd not wanna go/be there. If you're at that point, you're already in a fight for your life to avoid multiple felony charges. When the upper is away from the lower, the prime function/original design is for a semiauto.

What you are describing is a "last ditch defense" that would require judge's interpretation and is subject to appeal chain.

Bottom line: don't have a pistol grip or other evil features unless a fixed 10rd mag is in place FIRST.

sac7000
04-10-2006, 12:28 PM
For god's sake, just build it! Pin the mag first before you do anything. Jack-booted DOJ Agents of DOOM are NOT going to kick in your door and haul you off to prison to rot. You are NOT a criminal, YOU are a tax paying citizen who has constitutional RIGHTS that your forefathers gave their lives for. The crack dealer down the street with the stolen AK-47 and the drum magazine is the problem, NOT YOU!

Now, take on the day and build that rifle son! You deserve it!

Cato
04-10-2006, 1:18 PM
For god's sake, just build it! Pin the mag first before you do anything. Jack-booted DOJ Agents of DOOM are NOT going to kick in your door and haul you off to prison to rot. You are NOT a criminal, YOU are a tax paying citizen who has constitutional RIGHTS that your forefathers gave their lives for. The crack dealer down the street with the stolen AK-47 and the drum magazine is the problem, NOT YOU!

Now, take on the day and build that rifle son! You deserve it!

_______________________________________________
Thank you for the encouragement and support. I am a tax paying citizen and a veteran. My 2nd amendment rights are being infringed; however, I dont want to risk the hassel of defending myself in the legal system. So I think I'll wait until the DOJ list comes out to bring my rifle "life."

Has anyone considered the legality of simply owning AW parts? Pistol grips, detachable magazines, collapsable stocks, et al? If they are not attached but still in your possession is that illegal?

blacklisted
04-10-2006, 1:22 PM
Has anyone considered the legality of simply owning AW parts? Pistol grips, detachable magazines, collapsable stocks, et al? If they are not attached but still in your possession is that illegal?

There are no laws against owning parts.

bwiese
04-10-2006, 1:45 PM
Thank you for the encouragement and support. I am a tax paying citizen and a veteran. My 2nd amendment rights are being infringed; however, I dont want to risk the hassel of defending myself in the legal system. So I think I'll wait until the DOJ list comes out to bring my rifle "life."


That's your privilege, but having a fixed-mag rifle as of now is fun and legal.

Has anyone considered the legality of simply owning AW parts? Pistol grips, detachable magazines, collapsable stocks, et al? If they are not attached but still in your possession is that illegal?

As long as we stay away from machinegun/short-barrel rifle/NFA territory, "constructive possession" concepts do not apply to 'by features' AWs. (In direct contrast, possession of an unregistered 'named' bare stripped receiver - alone - say, one marked "Colt AR15" or "Bushmaster XM15" - without any parts or buildup, is illegal.) There is a letter from DOJ Firearms Div Asst Dir Tim Rieger saying this (I believe it's on Robinson Arms' website, and may be echoed on calgunlaws.com website.

Now that doesn't mean to push the limit of the law, either - don't go driving around with a gripless off-list AR in A2 configuration w/detachable mag and a grip right next to it, or with a gripless FAL clone w/detachable mag and a pistol grip right next to it. That's just baiting a local DA.

artherd
04-10-2006, 10:09 PM
Full letter: http://cdglobal.net/DOJ/DOJAnswers8Jan04-construcitve.pdf
Page2, question #6.
http://cdglobal.net/DOJ/DOJAnswers8Jan04-construcitve2.jpg

gh429
04-11-2006, 1:48 AM
Hmm. The basis as to whether an AR is a single shot or not, is determined by what upper is placed on the semi-automatic AR lower? Just remember that the AR was designed to be semi-auto. Bolt action design from the beginning would be different.
If that single shot upper was permanently pinned, different story. But then again, the lower (the actual firearm) is a "series" semi-automatic design. Another argument against is that the lower has parts that are semi-automatic. Imagine arguing before a judge that the only thing that makes it single shot is two easily removable pins.
On a side note, does anyone know of a pump or bolt action AR upper? (Missing gas tube parts don't count. Target single shot AR's are determined by the magazine, not upper.) So if these parts don't exist, how can they be argued to help?
Finally, yes the DOJ has said that semi or single, the named AR series are AW's.
Thanks,
Builder

Well first I would argue that these rifles are off-list and not a "series" weapon (can of worms there eh hehe?) Furthermore I don't see how a DA can possibly construe the intent to build a semi-auto firearm when the upper is missing and not attached to the rifle, especially given the adaptability of the AR lower. I just don't think that's a reasonable assumption and Ben's letter from the DOJ below (thanks Ben!) I think further supports this notion...

akspetsnaz
04-11-2006, 2:03 AM
What is Category 1 "assault weapon" vs. Category 2 vs. Category 3?

gh429
04-11-2006, 2:24 AM
woops double