Buy a complete AR15 or just a lower?

[fuelcell]

I was at a local gun shop and was looking into a possible ar build. While talking to the sales person he said i should just buy a complete gun as opposed to buying a lower before the ban. I asked why he said I need to have the build complete before the first of the year or I'll be breaking the law. I said wouldn't I only need to register the lower as an assault weapon? He said no you have to have the gun complete by the first of the year. Is this true? Or am i right with just needing to register the lower?

[Bullitt01]

I believe you are correct, just need a registered lower by the first of next year.

[Drew Eckhardt]

I believe you are correct, just need a registered lower by the first of next year.

As of January 1st, the term "assault weapon" includes

(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that does not have a fixed magazine but has any one of the following:
(A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon.
(B) A thumbhole stock.
(C) A folding or telescoping stock.
(D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(E) A flash suppressor.
(F) A forward pistol grip.
(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches.

To be pedantic, a stripped lower

• Is not semiautomatic (you could put a pump-action or straight-pull bolt action upper on it)
• Is not centerfire (you could build it with a rimfire upper)
• Is not a rifle (you could use a smooth bore soda can launching upper, or assemble it as an other weapon)
• Does not have a qualifying feature like a pistol grip

The law on registration says

(b) (1) Any person who, from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2016, inclusive, lawfully possessed an assault weapon that does not have a fixed magazine, as defined in Section 30515, including those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be readily removed from the firearm with the use of a tool, shall register the firearm before January 1, 2018, but not before the effective date of the regulations adopted pursuant to paragraph (5), with the department pursuant to those procedures that the department may establish by regulation pursuant to paragraph (5).

Astute readers will note what it says about timing.

Those who are also paranoid and own a rifle which has or had both a bullet button and listed feature installed will also notice the registration clause does not exempt firearms which are no longer "assault weapons."

[Hairball]

Depends on what you are trying to build and if/when you may register it next year. Still waiting for the final wording to figure out exactly what my plans for next year will be...if I am not mistaken, currently if you intend to register the rifle as an AW, the build "must" be done before the new year.

[WWDHD?]

So I guess if you bought a complete "CA compliant" SA, center-fire rifle shipped with a bullet button in the last year or so there's no way to avoid registering it next year even if you change out all the nasty bits (grip, stock, flash hider,....). No more "going featureless" to avoid the new RAW list next year (short of selling by 12/31/16)? Risk of "Constructive Intent"?

[boobytrap]

Buy the lower. You have over a year to assemble it before you would have to register it.

Buying a complete Ar15 only leads to a lighter wallet as you will end up changing out a lot of the factory parts for upgrades and spending more.

Building an Ar15 you will spend about the same $ wise as any known name brand complete Ar15, but you will have exactly what you like and want, and no pile of extra parts that you stripped off a factory built rifle.

[Capt1776]

So to be clear, the only reason to keep a stripped lower after Jan 1 is if you plan to build a rim fire, pump or bolt action rifle with it in CA or plan to move to a free state and build whatever you want?

[Hairball]

That's some of the reasons. While there are others... I plead the 5th

[dadler]

This has been discussed at length:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=1228426

See my posts:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=18624276#post18624276

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=18626984#post18626984

Best to assemble the weapon prior to 1/1/2017 if you intend to register (it's an open question on whether you need to register regardless: See http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...1#post18659501 and http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...9#post18656159 )

I don't condone anyone breaking the law, but it would be exceedingly difficult for the prosecution to prove that you assembled a stripped lower in 2017--that was legally possessed prior to 1/1/2017. Burden of proof and all...

[CWDraco]

If you want to register a Rifle under the AWB and own a LEGAL RAW, meaning a fully featured AR15, you best purchase and entire fully built AR15 with magazine lock INSTALLED.

There is a possibility the DoJ / BoF will collect the data on what you bought and declare only magazine locked rifles SOLD PRIOR TO 1/1/2017 can be registered. All others...as in stripped lowers and other featureless rifles are NOT eligible for registration.


and I will quote myself from another thread... as to why I believe this MIGHT be the case...

No, sorry I too remember the last Registration and I was never asked when and where and from who I bought my AW.

We were just required to furnish the maker model and caliber along with finger prints as I remember.

This time around the law is VERY different.

1- Maglocked rifles will be..let me repeat...will be AWs..and that is the ONLY reason given as to why you are allowed to register them because THOSE and ONLY those will be RECLASSIFIED under the new law.

2- The Law is FORCING DoJ / BoF into gathering information...ABOUT WHAT YOU HAVE AND WHEN YOU GOT IT AND WHO SOLD IT TO YOU. There is only one reason to gather this... see # 1 as to why they need this information.

Nothing in the law allows the willy-nilly registration of grandpas Mini-14 so you can manufacture an AW.


I could be wrong and if I am... I'm going to buy a threaded barrel for my Glock 17 and install a Solvent Trap threaded device...but I can bet I'm not going to be able to do that.

[Aeneas]

I'd say build your own. That way you can get exactly what you want.

Most importantly though, let's get those petitions signed, and get as many people as we know to go vote this November. That can make all the difference.

[sloppy joe]

Buy both.

[CWDraco]

snip....

I don't condone anyone breaking the law, but it would be exceedingly difficult for the prosecution to prove that you assembled a stripped lower in 2017--that was legally possessed prior to 1/1/2017. Burden of proof and all...

You are confusing two different things and I think that is where everyone is missing the point...

No one is charging you with a crime.

YOU are REQUESTING to register a firearm under a law.

YOU are REQUIRED to furnish information REQUIRED under that law.


The reason you are ALLOWED to REQUEST Registration is because the new law makes your magazine locked firearm an AW...

makes your magazine locked firearm an AW....
makes your magazine locked firearm an AW...
makes your magazine locked firearm an AW

Nothing in this new law allows the open registration of all firearms.


The BURDEN of proof is ON YOU

[dadler]

You are confusing two different things and I think that is where everyone is missing the point...

No one is charging you with a crime.

YOU are REQUESTING to register a firearm under a law.

YOU are REQUIRED to furnish information REQUIRED under that law.


The reason you are ALLOWED to REQUEST Registration is because the new law makes your magazine locked firearm an AW...

makes your magazine locked firearm an AW....
makes your magazine locked firearm an AW...
makes your magazine locked firearm an AW

Nothing in this new law allows the open registration of all firearms.


The BURDEN of proof is ON YOU

I promise I am not missing the point. Feel free to re-read the linked threads.

I was trying to offer a simple summary of the linked threads.

I believe you are overstepping the bounds of what is known, what is required, etc.

I really, really do not want to rehash this, but:

Successful prosecution requires the prosecutor to overcome burden of proof. The defendant has to prove exactly nothing. If you are obligated by statute to register your firearms and do so, whether they approve your registration or not (can't fathom how they would deny a mandated registration that complies with the text of the statute), it becomes that much harder for the prosecution to prove you have committed a crime.

In the context of prosecution, you may wish to review the true meaning of "burden of proof". I have been on juries, and all of my fellow jurors seemed to misunderstand what burden of proof truly is/means and who has the burden. Despite extenuating circumstances and explicit exceptions, the defendant does not have the burden of proof.

Just a side note: In am not a big fan of your tone in general. Can we keep it civil, and clear on what is known, what is unknown, and what is up in the air? I think you are doing a better job of confusing people than pretty much anyone else on here.

As always, just my opinion.

[elSquid]

The law on registration says
Quote:
(b) (1) Any person who, from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2016, inclusive, lawfully possessed an assault weapon that does not have a fixed magazine, as defined in Section 30515, including those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be readily removed from the firearm with the use of a tool, shall register the firearm before January 1, 2018, but not before the effective date of the regulations adopted pursuant to paragraph (5), with the department pursuant to those procedures that the department may establish by regulation pursuant to paragraph (5).

Astute readers will note what it says about timing.

Those who are also paranoid and own a rifle which has or had both a bullet button and listed feature installed will also notice the registration clause does not exempt firearms which are no longer "assault weapons."

Those who are paranoid will notice that the law says:

Any person who, from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2016, inclusive, lawfully possessed an assault weapon that does not have a fixed magazine,

Meaning that the rifle in question had to be possessed on Jan1/2001 through to December 31, 2016 _inclusive_ - from the start date through to the end date. ~16 years. If you register next year, and give an acquistion date later than January 1, 2001 then you've just admitted ownership of an assault weapon and you don't fall under the exemption. That should be enough grounds for LE to get a warrant.

No? The date of acquisition is immaterial? It just has to fall within the date range given? Ok, what if you sold it? Notice that the law doesn't make mention of current possession.

So if you owned what would now be considered an AW during that time period, and sold it, you'd still need to register the rifle. A guy that bought a rifle in Aug 2014 but sold it to someone else in Sept 2015 would still satisfy the legal criteria as set forth in the law. He'd have to register as well as the person that he sold it to. This way DOJ has a complete record of the history of the rifle since it came into the state... ( cough, cough )

It really is a horribly written law.

-- Michael