Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

94 AWB Question

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • NSR500
    Banned
    • Aug 2006
    • 19530

    94 AWB Question

    In 94 I was just graduating from HS and did not own firearms. My question is for those that stocked up on Receivers and lived through the ban.

    If the unbuilt receiver(s) were acquired before the 94 ban took effect; when they were built up over the course of the ban, did they have to have post ban configurations?

    The reason I ask is because some people had told me that it was just not enough to have the bare receiver. They say that "Technically" it had to already have all the evil features on it by the time the 94AWB took effect.

    Is that true???
  • #2
    Stormfeather
    Calguns Addict
    • Jan 2006
    • 7739

    It has to have been registered with DOJ with its own seperate AWB paperwork having been sent back to you. Doesnt matter that if its a bare reciever or a fully operational firearm. I have a buddy with 15 or so .50 cal recievers waiting to be built, all by ferret. 15 blocks of steel with serial numbers on them, all waiting to be turned into working recievers. I hate the guy. . .
    Originally posted by Soldier415
    I am naked except for seatless white chaps, a boonie hat and a tactical vest playing HALO.
    Originally posted by oaklander
    I don't like getting my butt kicked, but I would like to have it spanked by some big hairy guys!
    Originally posted by ohsmily
    I wouldn't put "mounting a weasel" past too many people on this forum.
    Originally posted by hoffmang
    Going after the NFA soon is like asking the girl you just met in the bar if she's into anal sex...
    -Gene

    Comment

    • #3
      !@#$
      Senior Member
      • Nov 2006
      • 2461

      if talking about the fed ban of 94 then yes they had to be complete weapons before the ban. building a reciever into a weapon with fed ban features was illegal for those 10 years.

      Comment

      • #4
        NSR500
        Banned
        • Aug 2006
        • 19530

        Originally posted by !@#$
        if talking about the fed ban of 94 then yes they had to be complete weapons before the ban. building a reciever into a weapon with fed ban features was illegal for those 10 years.
        Okay... That's what I needed clarification on. Makes you wonder how much compliance there was with that?

        Comment

        • #5
          Fjold
          I need a LIFE!!
          • Oct 2005
          • 23008

          Originally posted by NSR500
          Okay... That's what I needed clarification on. Makes you wonder how much compliance there was with that?
          100%. I don't think that I know anyone who would break that law.
          Frank

          One rifle, one planet, Holland's 375




          Life Member NRA, CRPA and SAF

          Comment

          • #6
            saber
            Senior Member
            • Feb 2003
            • 696

            I remember that the law wasn't that hard to comply with at the time. I was living in Florida and I was able to buy an AR-15 no problem. The only issue was that it had to have post-ban features.

            So, I had to have a fixed stock instead of a collapsible one and no flashider. That was really it. If I had wanted to, I could've gotten a fixed collapsible stock and a muzzle break that looked like a flashider.

            Overall, it was so much easier than the current Cali-ban.

            Comment

            Working...
            UA-8071174-1