Rifle receiver only transfer and BB

[seainc]

Does BB still needed if only rifle receiver in the transfer? Thanks

[mej16489]

Not an FFL.

Is a receiver a center-fire semi-automatic rifle? No - so it can't be an 'Assault Rifle'

[seainc]

Receiver is HK SR9 and MR556. Thanks

[Hank Dodge]

As I understand it, the BB should be the first part installed and the last part removed to be in compliance with the laws. A bare receiver ( casting only ) does not require a BB to be transfered. Once any of the lower parts are installed, then the BB and a ten round mag must be in place.

[tenpercentfirearms]

As I understand it, the BB should be the first part installed and the last part removed to be in compliance with the laws. A bare receiver ( casting only ) does not require a BB to be transfered. Once any of the lower parts are installed, then the BB and a ten round mag must be in place.

Nope. Not correct.

You cannot have a semi-automatic centerfire detachable magazine rifle and any one of the evil features.

So if you don't have an upper on a complete lower, it isn't a rifle since it isn't semi-automatic nor centerfire.

You only need a Bullet Button when it is a complete rifle. Lowers stripped or complete are not rifles.

[seainc]

Just curious, why CA DOJ did not give approval to the maker of BB and Raddlock? But we are using it anyway.

[tenpercentfirearms]

Just curious, why CA DOJ did not give approval to the maker of BB and Raddlock? But we are using it anyway.

In the early days approval of such devices would have encouraged their use. So giving no opinion left room for FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) to spread and discourage sales.

Now that Colt is even offering a Bullet Button model, the FUD is hard to spread and everyone is selling EBRs.

[EBR Works]

I'll beg to differ with you on this one. The lower receiver is "the rifle" in the eye of the law, it is what is registered. The upper is simply a component part where the AR platform is concerned. The lower once completed is considered a semi-automatic weapon as it stands; and with the pistol grip installed, it requires a bullet button and a ten round mag. I don't agree with this, but that is how we need to process these in compliance with state law. If there is no pistol grip, then you might have a good arguement....

Sorry, you are incorrect. The assembled receiver could have a rimfire upper potentially attached which requires no BB. It could also be featureless, which requires no BB. You're confusing Federal law with California law. You are correct that the receiver is the firearm as ATF defines it. The BB is only required in California for a centerfire, detachable mag firearm with evil features, which a bare or complete receiver is not.

[tenpercentfirearms]

I'll beg to differ with you on this one. The lower receiver is "the rifle" in the eye of the law, it is what is registered. The upper is simply a component part where the AR platform is concerned. The lower once completed is considered a semi-automatic weapon as it stands; and with the pistol grip installed, it requires a bullet button and a ten round mag. I don't agree with this, but that is how we need to process these in compliance with state law. If there is no pistol grip, then you might have a good arguement....

Sorry, but this is incorrect. And here is why you are incorrect.

http://www.franklinarmory.com/PRODUCTS_308-Upper.html

Now you could argue it is still a semi-automatic because it self ejects the round, but it certainly can't hold anymore than one round and so it definitely doesn't have any magazine at all. A rifle with this upper, would not require a Bullet Button.

And as EBR correctly pointed out, if you put a rimfire upper on your rifle, it also does not require a Bullet Button.

Finally, there is this little memo from the ATF about what constitutes a "rifle" which also directly contradicts your theory.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=271019

If it has never had a rifled bore on it, it is not a rifle for the purposes of creating a pistol. If it currently does not have a rifled bore on it, it isn't a rifle for the purposes of being a semi-automatic centerfire rifle for sure especially since you don't know if it is going to receive a centerfire or rimfire upper or even a shotgun upper.

Further long guns are not registered.

Also further you say if it doesn't have a pistol grip you might be good, but you forgot about a collapsible buttstock which according to your theory would make it illegal.

The good news is now you can start bringing in complete lowers without Bullet Buttons and you are good to go. If you have any issues with this from any of the alphabet agencies, please contact CGF or CALFFL and we would be more than happy to talk to the agents and inform them of the law.

[CSACANNONEER]

I'll beg to differ with you on this one. The lower receiver is "the rifle" in the eye of the law, it is what is registered. The upper is simply a component part where the AR platform is concerned. The lower once completed is considered a semi-automatic weapon as it stands; and with the pistol grip installed, it requires a bullet button and a ten round mag. I don't agree with this, but that is how we need to process these in compliance with state law. If there is no pistol grip, then you might have a good arguement....

A stripped VIRGIN lower is a "firearm" but not a rifle until it has been configured as such. This is the way that ATF&E has interpeted the law in recent opinion letters it has sent out. Also, to point out other problems with your post, "rifles" or even receivers which have been DROSed as long guns are NOT REGISTERED in the first place. An assembled lower is NOT a semi automatic firearm until a semi automatic upper is on it. This is easy to prove to you since there are bolt action uppers. Also, if your interpetation was true, one could not do a SSE on an AR lower because, it would be a SA instead of a single shot gun. Finally, even with a PG and adjustable stock on an assembled lower, it does not need a magazine lock because, it is not a "semi automatic" nor is it a "centerfire rifle". It could have a rimfire semi auto upper on it. Hell, even with a +16" upper and NO shoulder stock on it, it is NOT a "semi automatic handgun" or a "semi automatic RIFLE" under California law.

I really suggest you study the law a little more before trying to give advice.


DAMN YOU WES! You beat me to the punch.

[tenpercentfirearms]

I really suggest you study the law a little more before trying to give advice.

DAMN YOU WES! You beat me to the punch.

I wouldn't be too hard on him. Dealers who are left to read these things for themselves might take a more cautious approach and rightfully so. Hopefully we have shared enough information with him to help him realize that that isn't the case and so if he wants to order a bunch of LMT complete lowers without Bullet Buttons (which I have been doing for at lesast 3 years now), that is perfectly legal as long as a fixed magazine device is on the firearm before a centerfire upper is installed.

It took us a few years to get people to realize that and do what they do now. So it should be expected that a few people still don't know and need to be educated.

[CSACANNONEER]

No interpretation needed. Read and follow the law as it is written without making things up or trying to put common sense in places where it was never ment to be.

Does the dealer you work for really think that all long guns are registered in California? If so, I would not listen to any of his opinions on laws.

[EBR Works]

Hank,

The misunderstanding that receivers need to be equipped with BBs causes many suppliers and dealers to follow this procedure. Let's not allow this misinformation to continue. Tell your boss about this thread please.

[EBR Works]

Simply, there is no constructive possession for parts that would considered an AW if assembled in California.

[EBR Works]

I don't want to drift this thread, but your comment leads me to ask a question for clarification sake. Is a receiver of a "banned by name" rifle (such as Colt Sporter ) not considered an AW by that definition if it is not assembled to an upper? Just asking because I was obviously misinformed about the other issue.

Thanks

This has been discussed at length. It is a defensible scenario, but don't be a test case.