Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Shipping parts to New York

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • chayden
    Senior Member
    • Jan 2012
    • 508

    Shipping parts to New York

    I'm in the process of selling a Sig556 lower with folding stock to a person in New York State. Trying to figure out if I can.
    Sig556 lowers by themselves aren't considered firearms and aren't subject to being shipped through FFL's.
    Are there any laws I'm missing or unaware of as it applies to these lowers that may require more than being treated as just parts?
    It is a complete lower with grip, trigger group, folding stock, and takedown/pivot pins installed. It is currently configured for CA with bullet button and pinned stock.
    Any info would be appreciated to ensure I comply with the law and don't accidentally get myself in trouble by thinking I fully understand these laws.
    Thanks.
  • #2
    kemasa
    I need a LIFE!!
    • Jun 2005
    • 10706

    The lower is the firearm typically and I don't think that Sig has gone against that.

    That means it would have to be shipped to a NY FFL. The NY FFL may or may not accept a firearm from a non-FFL, but that is policy, not law.
    Kemasa.
    False signature edited by Paul: Banned from the FFL forum due to being rude and insulting. Doing this continues his abuse.

    Don't tell someone to read the rules he wrote or tell him that he is wrong.

    Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein

    Comment

    • #3
      itisagoodname
      CGN/CGSSA Contributor
      • Jan 2010
      • 1359

      Is it really worth the potential legal issues? Friend or stranger?



      You gotta remember, this is a place where they'll arrest you over a shell casing.
      Last edited by itisagoodname; 09-27-2013, 12:59 PM.
      tere hanges

      Comment

      • #4
        chayden
        Senior Member
        • Jan 2012
        • 508

        Yeah, I pretty much told the guy that the sale is off due to this issue:

        (d) any of the weapons, or functioning frames or receivers of such weapons, or copies or duplicates of such weapons, in any caliber, known as:
        (i) Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models);
        (ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil;
        (iii) Beretta Ar70 (SC-70);
        (iv) Colt AR-15;
        (v) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, and FNC;
        (vi) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9, and M-12;
        (vii) Steyr AUG; (viii) INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and - See more at: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/P....hrHIo6O2.dpuf


        Seems any part of a rifle they consider to be an AW is subject. I'm sure they could say the SIG556 is a duplicate of one of these platforms in some size, shape, or form.
        One area I choose not to even consider testing. I thought it was a simple no-brainer, but I chose to err on the side of caution and ask around at the LGS and post this on here to make sure I wasn't being unnecessarily paranoid.
        Makes CA look tame by comparison.

        Comment

        Working...
        UA-8071174-1