80% ar lowers

[tcadams85@hotmail.com]

I guess my real question is what do I need to have with my rifle that will keepe out of jail and not have my rifle confiscated it seems as though every officer I talk to has a different opinion and that makes it difficult to figure this whole thing out

[IlDuche]

I'll be honest. I have no idea what an 80% lower is or looks like. And how is it not a zip gun?
Do I want an 80% lower? Its clearly a gun I don't have, so I must want one. I just don't know what the hell it is!

[IlDuche]

If I came across one at work, possessed by "unsavory types," with nothing to explain it to me, well they'd be detained and I'd be trying to call DOJ (useless) or ATF or someone who knew how to proceed.

[lavey29]

If I came across one at work, possessed by "unsavory types," with nothing to explain it to me, well they'd be detained and I'd be trying to call DOJ (useless) or ATF or someone who knew how to proceed.

Not really necessary with modern tech these days. Just google it on your smart phone or the units MDT. I knew nothing about these until maybe a year ago. Seems to be a legal loop hole right now and I would not be surprised if the loop hole is closed at some point and all 80% (now 100%) are required to have some type of serial number, 10 day hold etc... For right now, if you got a regular guy out shooting and he has good ID, no warrants and is not a felon then he is ok with his home made gun in my opinion for now and should not have an issue unless ATF/DOJ continues to take away our 2nd. Nothing wrong with detaining as you indicate also and researching what you have too...

[SteveMartin]

I'll be honest. I have no idea what an 80% lower is or looks like. And how is it not a zip gun?
Do I want an 80% lower? Its clearly a gun I don't have, so I must want one. I just don't know what the hell it is!

It's a lower receiver for an AR (usually) that is only 80% complete, usually a forging, sometimes a billet. Additional machining is required to turn it onto a functional lower receiver. Once machined, it is no different than any other stripped lower receiver (other than no serial number or manufacturer marking unless engraved by the buyer).

[rugershooter]

Not really necessary with modern tech these days. Just google it on your smart phone or the units MDT. I knew nothing about these until maybe a year ago. Seems to be a legal loop hole right now and I would not be surprised if the loop hole is closed at some point and all 80% (now 100%) are required to have some type of serial number, 10 day hold etc... For right now, if you got a regular guy out shooting and he has good ID, no warrants and is not a felon then he is ok with his home made gun in my opinion for now and should not have an issue unless ATF/DOJ continues to take away our 2nd. Nothing wrong with detaining as you indicate also and researching what you have too...

It's not a loophole.
From the ATF website:

[lavey29]

Yes, I have researched this prior to your post and with the DA office for their opinion as well hence the word "LEGAL" in my post. I just think this is one of those areas destined for a high court ruling and change in the law at some point with the various gun control measures that are pending especially here in Cali. The only real case decision that I found in this area dealt with a home made machine gun which or course was found to be a violation based on other existing laws. Till then, 80% to 100% builds seem ok IMO but I would not like to think about how many people out there that are not supposed to have guns in their possession for a variety of reasons might have gone this route.

[rugershooter]

The fact that the laws specifically allow for an unlicensed person to manufacture a firearm for personal use means that it is not a loophole. Saying that 80% builds are "legal loopholes" is equivalent to saying that the ability to buy a C&R gun cash and carry is a "legal loophole". Your understanding of a loophole is flawed.

[lavey29]

The fact that the laws specifically allow for an unlicensed person to manufacture a firearm for personal use means that it is not a loophole. Saying that 80% builds are "legal loopholes" is equivalent to saying that the ability to buy a C&R gun cash and carry is a "legal loophole". Your understanding of a loophole is flawed.

Well, states and feds have laws regarding possession of unregistered firearms and this appears to circumvent those laws albeit in a legal manner so apparently your understanding of loophole is flawed. I think when the libbys grab firm hold of this area then you will see exactly how loopholes are filled in and your 2nd deteriorates even further.

[ke6guj]

Well, states and feds have laws regarding possession of unregistered firearms and this appears to circumvent those laws albeit in a legal manner so apparently your understanding of loophole is flawed. I think when the libbys grab firm hold of this area then you will see exactly how loopholes are filled in and your 2nd deteriorates even further.

neither the feds or CA have laws regarding unregistered firearms that prohibit possession of an unregistered firearm, so I don't know how you can circumvent a law that doesn't exist.

[lavey29]

neither the feds or CA have laws regarding unregistered firearms that prohibit possession of an unregistered firearm, so I don't know how you can circumvent a law that doesn't exist.

You are wrong. Existing laws relate primarily to handguns and AW'S here in Cali and basically enhance and turn a misdemeanor charge into a felony if the pistol is not registered but in 2014, will also apply to long guns which will all be required to be registered just like pistols. I should also add that antique stuff will not be required. Seems like it will deal mainly with DROS at time of new purchase but would also apply to private party sales as well. Now if the libbys get their way at some point, universal background checks will also mean universal registration for everything in my opinion as well.

[rugershooter]

Well, states and feds have laws regarding possession of unregistered firearms and this appears to circumvent those laws albeit in a legal manner so apparently your understanding of loophole is flawed. I think when the libbys grab firm hold of this area then you will see exactly how loopholes are filled in and your 2nd deteriorates even further.

Then it shouldn't be too hard for you to provide citations for those supposed laws. Again, doing something that is completely within the law, and even specifically allowed by the law, is not a loophole. If you think that completing an 80% lower for personal use without serial numbers is a "loophole", then your understanding of a loophole is flawed and, more importantly, your understanding of freedom is flawed. Since when is exercising a right as allowed by law considered a loophole? I suppose you also think that private sales in other parts of the country that don't require background checks for PPTs are loopholes, right?

[ke6guj]

You are wrong. Existing laws relate primarily to handguns and RAWS here in Cali and basically enhance and turn a misdemeanor charge into a felony if the pistol is not registered

none of this thread has been talking about RAWs so I did not see the need to comment about them (do we need to cover all the NFA angles as well when we are just talking about standard non-AW Title I firearms?). But what you are talking about is illegal carrying of an unregistered handgun being a felony while the illegal carrying of a registered handgun is a wobbler. mere possession of an unregistered handgun is NOT a crime, but if you are otherwise committing a crime with that handgun, at that point registration status does matter. how you came to possess that handgun in CA might be a crime, but that deals with the acquisition of it (unpapered sale, failure to report handgun importation, etc), not the actual possession.

but in 2014, will also apply to long guns which will all be required to be registered just like pistols.

um, no. I see nothing in the PC that changes the crime of open carrying a long gun from a misdemeanor to a felony if that long gun is not registered to you.

26400. (a) A person is guilty of carrying an unloaded firearm that
is not a handgun in an incorporated city or city and county when that
person carries upon his or her person an unloaded firearm that is
not a handgun outside a vehicle while in the incorporated city or
city and county.
(b) (1) Except as specified in paragraph (2), a violation of this
section is a misdemeanor.
(2) A violation of subdivision (a) is punishable by imprisonment
in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by a fine not to exceed
one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment,
if the firearm and unexpended ammunition capable of being discharged
from that firearm are in the immediate possession of the person and
the person is not in lawful possession of that firearm.
(c) (1) Nothing in this section shall preclude prosecution under
Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 29800) or Chapter 3 (commencing
with Section 29900) of Division 9, Section 8100 or 8103 of the
Welfare and Institutions Code, or any other law with a penalty
greater than is set forth in this section.
(2) The provisions of this section are cumulative and shall not be
construed as restricting the application of any other law. However,
an act or omission punishable in different ways by different
provisions of law shall not be punished under more than one
provision.
(d) Notwithstanding the fact that the term "an unloaded firearm
that is not a handgun" is used in this section, each individual
firearm shall constitute a distinct and separate offense under this
section.

where does it say that in 2014 an unregistered long gun is a felony?

[lavey29]

Then it shouldn't be too hard for you to provide citations for those supposed laws. Again, doing something that is completely within the law, and even specifically allowed by the law, is not a loophole. If you think that completing an 80% lower for personal use without serial numbers is a "loophole", then your understanding of a loophole is flawed and, more importantly, your understanding of freedom is flawed. Since when is exercising a right as allowed by law considered a loophole? I suppose you also think that private sales in other parts of the country that don't require background checks for PPTs are loopholes, right?

I think private sales with no background checks will be eliminated in the near future as it is in Cali right now and other states. The 10 day wait for any firearms transaction will be universal in my opinion. I think that 80% lowers will still be allowed however, they will probably amend existing laws that will require it to be registered once it is no longer a paper weight. Most likely with some type of engraving of a personal marking/number. Then you take your now 100% stripped lower to FFL and register it and wait the 10 days. I am a strong supporter of the 2nd and believe that good people should be allowed to own what they want but I also believe that certain people should not own or have access to firearms and I am sure you know what I mean here.

[lavey29]

none of this thread has been talking about RAWs so I did not see the need to comment about them (do we need to cover all the NFA angles as well when we are just talking about standard non-AW Title I firearms?). But what you are talking about is illegal carrying of an unregistered handgun being a felony while the illegal carrying of a registered handgun is a wobbler. mere possession of an unregistered handgun is NOT a crime, but if you are otherwise committing a crime with that handgun, at that point registration status does matter. how you came to possess that handgun in CA might be a crime, but that deals with the acquisition of it (unpapered sale, failure to report handgun importation, etc), not the actual possession.



um, no. I see nothing in the PC that changes the crime of open carrying a long gun from a misdemeanor to a felony if that long gun is not registered to you.

26400. (a) A person is guilty of carrying an unloaded firearm that
is not a handgun in an incorporated city or city and county when that
person carries upon his or her person an unloaded firearm that is
not a handgun outside a vehicle while in the incorporated city or
city and county.
(b) (1) Except as specified in paragraph (2), a violation of this
section is a misdemeanor.
(2) A violation of subdivision (a) is punishable by imprisonment
in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by a fine not to exceed
one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment,
if the firearm and unexpended ammunition capable of being discharged
from that firearm are in the immediate possession of the person and
the person is not in lawful possession of that firearm.
(c) (1) Nothing in this section shall preclude prosecution under
Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 29800) or Chapter 3 (commencing
with Section 29900) of Division 9, Section 8100 or 8103 of the
Welfare and Institutions Code, or any other law with a penalty
greater than is set forth in this section.
(2) The provisions of this section are cumulative and shall not be
construed as restricting the application of any other law. However,
an act or omission punishable in different ways by different
provisions of law shall not be punished under more than one
provision.
(d) Notwithstanding the fact that the term "an unloaded firearm
that is not a handgun" is used in this section, each individual
firearm shall constitute a distinct and separate offense under this
section.

where does it say that in 2014 an unregistered long gun is a felony?

I made a typo in my post and put RAWS instead of just AW's. Is an unregistered AW (long gun) a felony? I am sure you know the answer to that. What I was referencing is that now long guns will have the same type of registration as handguns in 2014 in Cali. When you buy new DROS will register that Remington 700 in your name now with DOJ and it will turn up under your name if it is checked in a firearms database query. That did not happen before 2014 for that Rem 700. So, now that California is requiring new purchases and private party long gun transactions to include registration do you think they will try and apply it to rifles that you already have in your possession now that are not registered? They did it 13 years ago with AW's. I would bet they try and do it also with existing owed rifles. They want everything tracked and databased so if they get their various bans even stronger then they know who has what. Now here is the allure of the 80% because there is no DROS or record of anything really. So if they ultimately require all long guns (except antiques) to be registered at some point just like handguns are required to be now what happens with your 80% build that is nice and complete now? I am speculating that it now will require some type of identifying markings and subsequent registration to be legal. Otherwise it just sits in your safe right? Also, not really understanding some of your post. None of this was about open carry laws or lawful transportation of unloaded weapons but more about whether or not registration was required or not. If I loan you my .45 registered in my name and you are enroute to the range to test it out (transporting legally of course) and get contacted well that is not a crime because it is not registered to you. There are sections that specifically address legal reasons such as this. Now if you get caught with my loaded 45 illegally possessed in your car and/or on your person you will be charged with appropriate sections which will also include an enhancement section for possession an unregistered firearm.