I know it's illegal to ship a fully functional and assembled firearm sans FFL. Isn't it legal to ship individual pieces, i.e. bolt group, barrels, etc. without an FFL? It sure would be nice to have one shipped to you in pieces from say, Mexico, assemble it and TADA! the gun that never existed? Is this possible and is it legal?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Guns that don't exist
- Thread starter antenna
- Start date
Jason Demond
New member
Anything other than the receiver is not considered a gun.
------------------
ACCEPT NOTHING LESS THAN FULL VICTORY!"
General Dwight D. Eisenhower-- June 6,1944
------------------------
http://www.homestead.com/gunrights/Guns_and_Gunrights.html
------------------
ACCEPT NOTHING LESS THAN FULL VICTORY!"
General Dwight D. Eisenhower-- June 6,1944
------------------------
http://www.homestead.com/gunrights/Guns_and_Gunrights.html
Yes, the receiver is the key. However, that poses an important question, to take this a step further: What exactly is a "receiver"? What if a "receiver" is designed modularly, with say, 5 parts, each of them indispensable to the receiver, and each of approximately the same size? If each is sold separately, what then?.....
Futo Inu,
I believe it is the piece that has the serial number that is considered the reciever/firearm. I also believe that according to BATF, that the firearm only has to be that piece, and not a complete assembly. IIRC, it had something to do with one of those wallet holsters, and just some of the parts of a gun that would fit it if assembled. The guy didn't have anything except the reciever, and BATF said posession of that part, plus the wallet holster was enough to get him busted.
------------------
CCW for Ohio action site.
http://www.ofcc.net
Do what you C.A.N.
http://thematrix.acmecity.com/digital/237/cansite/can.html
I believe it is the piece that has the serial number that is considered the reciever/firearm. I also believe that according to BATF, that the firearm only has to be that piece, and not a complete assembly. IIRC, it had something to do with one of those wallet holsters, and just some of the parts of a gun that would fit it if assembled. The guy didn't have anything except the reciever, and BATF said posession of that part, plus the wallet holster was enough to get him busted.
------------------
CCW for Ohio action site.
http://www.ofcc.net
Do what you C.A.N.
http://thematrix.acmecity.com/digital/237/cansite/can.html
here is what i don't get:
try to fire a bullet with just an AR-15 reciever
no where for a bullet to go out of...
now mail order an AR-15 upper & bolt assembly
chamber a round & close the bolt.
wap the end of the firing pin with a small hammer
boom
round down range
seems to me you just shot a gun
dZ
try to fire a bullet with just an AR-15 reciever
no where for a bullet to go out of...
now mail order an AR-15 upper & bolt assembly
chamber a round & close the bolt.
wap the end of the firing pin with a small hammer
boom
round down range
seems to me you just shot a gun
dZ
Another thing to remember is that different countries register different parts of some weapons. For instance in Canada the upper receiver of the FAL is registered IIRC whereas in the USA the lower receiver of the FAL is the registered part.
Also I would venture to say that most class three weapons in the USA have parts that are not receivers that are registered. Most class three weapons in the USA (privately owned) are conversions (registered sears, trigger packs etc) thus the part that obstinately creates the full auto fire is usually (but not always) the registered part. So if you own an AR15 and have an M16 bolt group or trigger assembly, technically you are in violation of owning an unregistered and untaxed machinegun, even though adding those parts won't give you FA capability!
Sometimes weapons that are not even capable of full auto fire were placed on class three listings (FN-FAL, M14) just because they were designed from the outset to be built into a FA capable battle rifle.
As a last point, acquiring a weapon in many countries is much riskier than acquiring one in the USA and the penalties are much stiffer. Most liberals would balk if they saw the treatment of prisoners in many countries with "reasonable" gun laws. So you would have to ask yourself is it an acceptable risk to break the laws of the country of origin and/or possibly US laws to get this weapon?
Also I would venture to say that most class three weapons in the USA have parts that are not receivers that are registered. Most class three weapons in the USA (privately owned) are conversions (registered sears, trigger packs etc) thus the part that obstinately creates the full auto fire is usually (but not always) the registered part. So if you own an AR15 and have an M16 bolt group or trigger assembly, technically you are in violation of owning an unregistered and untaxed machinegun, even though adding those parts won't give you FA capability!
Sometimes weapons that are not even capable of full auto fire were placed on class three listings (FN-FAL, M14) just because they were designed from the outset to be built into a FA capable battle rifle.
As a last point, acquiring a weapon in many countries is much riskier than acquiring one in the USA and the penalties are much stiffer. Most liberals would balk if they saw the treatment of prisoners in many countries with "reasonable" gun laws. So you would have to ask yourself is it an acceptable risk to break the laws of the country of origin and/or possibly US laws to get this weapon?