Pre-ban AR builds

[SSBotanyBay]

Will all of the legislation talk, this may have been covered elsewhere but I haven't seen it.

I was having a conversation tonight with a relative when he brought up something that really perked my interest. Let's say that you own an AR direct from <insert manufacturer here>. The factory build rifle has documentation and if legislation like the Brady bill were to go through again, that complete rifle would be considered pre-ban. What about all of those ARs out there that have been built from stripped lowers and pieced together from various manufacturers (or even the same manufacturer for that matter)? How might one safeguard themselves against their inability to prove that the rifle they built was complete in its configuration before the sure-to-come legislation was/is enacted?

[45Badger]

Good question. Gonna be a hell of a mess to figure it out because of the huge volume of lowers and finished guns that have come on the civilian market since ban ended, not to mention all the neutered guns sold during ban period. That scares me because it may effectively force and "all or nothing" mindset on the antis. If it were to pass, the "all" could be very bad.

[FJ540]

Take a pic, print it off, have it notarized.

[walstien]

I believe it was based off of when the receiver was made. The gun company that made it has those records.

I don't believe you had to have an assembled rifle for it to be counted as preban. The receiver itself had to be preban


Am I wrong?

[FJ540]

It's not a rifle until it has a buttstock, so personally I'd complete it to be "in before the ban."

Who's going to check anyway? That's why these bans are stupid.

I can make 50 rifles in my shop and unless you watched them being cut, you'd have no way to prove when I made them.

[rukwikenuf]

It's not a rifle until it has a buttstock, so personally I'd complete it to be "in before the ban."

Who's going to check anyway? That's why these bans are stupid.

I can make 50 rifles in my shop and unless you watched them being cut, you'd have no way to prove when I made them.

amen, brother.

plus, there's no ban being passed. if you stay positive, blah blah blah.





we're effed

[SSBotanyBay]

Well, I am going to run out and grab a stock to finish up the build but, I also have a follow-up question.

Let's say I finish a build. Take pictures, detail what is in the photos with text, and have it all notarized thereby having proof of a (reluctant sigh)pre-ban built rifle. Does that then mean that said rifle could not be altered from its configuration as depicted/described in the notarized photo?

[xd ED]

Well, I am going to run out and grab a stock to finish up the build but, I also have a follow-up question.

Let's say I finish a build. Take pictures, detail what is in the photos with text, and have it all notarized thereby having proof of a (reluctant sigh)pre-ban built rifle. Does that then mean that said rifle could not be altered from its configuration as depicted/described in the notarized photo?

You're asking for an interpretation of a law that hasn't been(and possibly won't be) written.

[Heffay]

Watching used M1A Scout Squads go for over $2k on gunbroker.com has me seriously thinking about taking advantage of the stupidity...

[SSBotanyBay]

Well, I am going to run out and grab a stock to finish up the build but, I also have a follow-up question.

Let's say I finish a build. Take pictures, detail what is in the photos with text, and have it all notarized thereby having proof of a (reluctant sigh)pre-ban built rifle. Does that then mean that said rifle could not be altered from its configuration as depicted/described in the notarized photo?

You're asking for an interpretation of a law that hasn't been(and possibly won't be) written.

I was thinking along the lines of how the Brady bill worked. I realize that there is not and might not be any legislation concerning this issue. That notwithstanding, I want to cover my proverbial bases now rather than being too little tool late IF something gets passed.

[45Badger]

If it comes to pass, it will be a mess. And then you have state laws.

In NY a guy could take a pre-ban receiver and turn it into anything he wanted. This let a guy take a boring 20" gun and turn it into an exciting 16" gun. In CT, the whole rifle had to be factory assembled prior to ban.

Nobody knows what each state will do after possible federal legislation. Better to focus on writing your state and federal reps and senators. My emerging paranoid fear is that the republicans will give away gun rights in a bundle of tax/spending negotiations.

[cigartim]

like Ed said, there is no law yet, but according to Feinstein's summary of the bill she intends to introduce, all grandfathered "assault weapons" will need to be registered a la NFA like that which is currently required for machine guns and sbrs. That would be a logistical cluster you-know-what that would cost a fortune. That would mean 10 million applications to process just for ARs.

Not to indorse complacency, but it is very unlikely an AWB will pass. It is unlikely that there are enough votes in the Senate, and very unlikely that there are enough votes in the House.
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2012/12/can-gun-control-make-it-through-congress.html

Still, you should write your representatives. I did.