So I'm building a preban Bushy AR...

Hey abc...

YOu better call Bushy and make sure that those lower receivers LEFT THE FACTORY AS A COMPLETE RIFLE.

Otherwise if you assemble an evil nasty "semi-automatic assault weapon" you will become an instant Felon. Neat huh?

My understanding of AWB law is that the lowers must have left the factory as a complete rifle. If not you cant build em into a complete pre-ban rifle. Better do the research than have the BATF Ninjas break your doow down at 3am.

Cool huh? Just like 1930s Germany
 
Orso, I think that the weapon has to have been assembled prior to the ban to be legal. All I know is Bushmaster said it was manufactured in 1992.

I am not sure how anyone could prove that it was wasn't assembled prior to 1994. Simply putting an upper on it for a few minutes in '93, then taking it back apart would mean it was an assault weapon prior to the ban, would it not.
 
Take it for what it's worth, this is from the legal section on ar15.com

--------------------------
Now you know what a Semiautomatic Assault Weapon (SAW) is, but how do you determine what it is you have or what you can legally buy or make? What is "pre-ban?" What it all boils down to is when the GUN was built. Edward M. Owen, Jr., Chief of the Firearms Technology Branch of the BATF, has this to say:

"Semiautomatic pistols and rifles assembled after September 13, 1994, and possessing two or more of the features listed in [Section 921 (a) (30), Title 18 U.S.C.] are semiautomatic assault weapons as defined. The fact that the receiver may have been manufactured prior to September 13, 1994, is immaterial to classification of a weapon as a semiautomatic assault weapon. Additionally, payment or non-payment of excise tax is also immaterial to classification of a firearm as semiautomatic assault weapon."

What he is stating is, as far as pre-ban and post-ban is concerned, the date of manufacture of the receiver has nothing to do with anything. If your SAW was built into a whole SAW, or in a complete kit form, before Sept. 13, 1994 (The Date), you are the lucky owner of a pre-ban receiver. If the gun was built after this date, or if the receiver was without all of the parts to make a SAW as of The Date, then it is post-ban. Let me give you a few examples...


John Q. Public bought himself an AR-15 receiver in 1988 and put it in his safe. In April 1997, he decided to build it into a rifle. Was it a gun before The Date? No... so he has to build it into a POST-ban firearm.

Mary Mary Quite Contrary buys an AR-15 lower from her dealer who purchased it 7 years ago, built it into a SAW 2 weeks later, and in January '96 tore it apart to sell as components. Did she buy a pre-ban receiver? Yes... it was a SAW before The Date.

Big Bob Bopper finds a respectable dealer at a gun show who is selling "pre-ban AR pistol lowers." The dealer says he bought them before "the Ban" and registered them as pistol lowers, but never built them into anything. Are they pre-ban? No. Are they pistol lowers? Sure...just post-ban pistol lowers. As long as they don't have two or more "Deadly Features" when they are built, they are legal.

Fred Foosball buys a complete semiautomatic assault rifle kit in August 1994, but doesn't assemble it until September 14th, 1994. Is it a legal pre-ban rifle. Yes... it had all (and I mean ALL) of the pieces to make a complete SAW before the ban. BATF accepts this as a complete pre-ban rifle.

Josh the Impaler purchases a Remington 1100 on July 4, 1994 in order to celebrate Independence Day. A year later, he decides that he would like a pistol grip and folding stock added to make it a better home defense gun. Is this legal? No. The shotgun was complete before The Date, but it was not a SAW before the date, and therefore cannot be modified to a SAW after The Date.
All of this makes for some VERY gray areas. But we all must stay within the law as best as we know how. The basic rule of thumb to use is, if you are planning to buy a pre-ban gun or receiver, make sure that the person selling it to you can prove that it was built as a SAW (or in a complete kit form) before The Date. If he or she can't do this, don't buy it!!!!


[This message has been edited by ArmySon (edited August 07, 2000).]
 
So again I ask the question, how can one prove that it wasn't assembled prior to the date in question.

If I put an upper w/ a flashhider on the lower for 5minutes in '93, and then took the upper off, and put the lower in a box, it was assembled into an assault weapon prior to the ban, was it not?
 
Correct, abc.

Q: How can you prove that you did that?
A: You can't.

Q: How can anyone prove that you didn't do it?
A: They can't.

Stripped lower receivers leave factories all the time. Just because a lower left the factory as a lower rather than a complete rifle in 1992 does not make it an illegal "assault weapon" if it has the evil features added.

Say you have every receipt for every part you have on a rifle that you built in 1992. Also say you had someone video-taping you while building the rifle with some proof of date in the video. There would be no question as to the rifle's legality.

However, say you do not have every receipt and a video of you putting the rifle together in 1992. It was legal to build the rifle in 1992, and there was no requirement for you to keep receipts or video-tape the construction of the rifle. Why on earth would this rifle all of a sudden be illegal after 9/13/94? It wouldn't.

From http://www.atf.treas.gov/firearms/legal/semiautomatic.htm
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of the enactment of this subsection.[/quote]

Again, burdon of proof is none of our concern. The Government (be it State or Federal) has the burdon of proving that you did wrong. This is nothing new. The enactment of the Semiautomatic Assault Weapon ban did not suddenly mandate that the burdon of proof be placed on the accused. You are not, under Federal law, required to maintain proof of a semiautomatic firearm's legality unless that firearm falls under NFA '34.

Furthermore, the Government would need reason to believe that you illegally manufactured the SAW in the first place to even consider indicting and prosecuting you. How's that going to happen when you are possessing a perfectly legal firearm?

------------------
¡Viva la RKBA!
Bulldawg: NRA, GOA, TSRA, Shiner Bock Connoisseur.
Bulldawg's Firearms Page
 
I think I am more confused now than I was before on this law.

But thats what these laws are designed to do. Make it harder and more confusing for Joe law abider to own firearms. Thsi has nothing to do w/ crime.

If you want to prevent violent crime, pass out .45 AAutomatics at the Post office for any law abiding citizen to carry open or concealed. That will stop violent crime.

Orso
 
Bulldog,

I agree with your analysis, although I'm skeptical with regard to certain agencies understanding of where the burden of proof lies.

But to the immediate case in point, it seems that we have concluded that abc cannot buy a stripped lower receiver in 2000, regardless of when it was manufactured, and assemble it into a pre-ban SAW . . . unless there is a record somewhere indicating that the lower was assembled into a SAW some time before the magic date in 1994. Won't the dealer from whom abc purchases the lower have a record that what was sold was a stripped lower? In this instance, we're clearly talking about a stripped lower in 2000. What started this discussion was abc's title, "So I'm building a preban Bushy AR..." What constitutes "preban?"

Seems to me that a case could be made against this law using an "equal protection" argument. It doesn't seem to be equal protection for one firearm to be legal and another illegal, when the only difference between them is date of assembly.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Legionnaire:
Bulldog,

I agree with your analysis, although I'm skeptical with regard to certain agencies understanding of where the burden of proof lies.

But to the immediate case in point, it seems that we have concluded that abc cannot buy a stripped lower receiver in 2000, regardless of when it was manufactured, and assemble it into a pre-ban SAW . . . unless there is a record somewhere indicating that the lower was assembled into a SAW some time before the magic date in 1994. Won't the dealer from whom abc purchases the lower have a record that what was sold as a stripped lower? In this instance, we're clearly talking about a stripped lower in 2000. What started this discussion was abc's title, "So I'm building a preban Bushy AR..." What constitutes "preban?"

Seems to me that a case could be made against this law using an "equal protection" argument. It doesn't seem to be equal protection for one firearm to be legal and another illegal, when the only difference between them is date of assembly.
[/quote]
 
Legion, the lower in question is not a stripped lower. It is a complete lower, and the seller maintains that it was in fact mated to an upper prior to 94. It was just never fired, and hence will be transferred as a new weapon.

All bushmaster told me was that "the weapon in question was manufactured prior to '92".

At this point, I plan to proceed w/ ordering an upper from bushmaster. As they know that this upper will be mated to the lower in question, I would think they would tell me if I was about to become a felon. I gave them the serial # prior to contacting them about the upper. I will include the serial # of the lower w/ my order for the new upper.

I am not sure what else I can do...
 
O. SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPONS AND
LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICES
(O1) What restrictions does Federal law impose on semiautomatic assault
weapons?
It is generally unlawful for a person to manufacture, transfer, or
possess semiautomatic assault weapons after September 13, 1994, the effective
date of the law. See the exceptions listed in Question O5.
[18 U.S.C. 922(v)(1)]
(02) How does the law define the term "semiautomatic assault weapon?"
The term "semiautomatic assault weapon" is defined to include 19 named
models of firearms and semiautomatic rifles, semiautomatic pistols, and
semiautomatic shotguns that have at least 2 of the features specified in the
law. Frames or receivers for firearms are not regulated as semiautomatic
assault weapons, since they could be assembled as a firearm other than the 19
named models of firearms. Likewise, frames or receivers are not semiautomatic
assault weapons under the "features" test of the law because they do not yet
have the features necessary to bring them within the definition.
Semiautomatic assault weapons in knockdown (disassembled) condition
consisting of a receiver and all parts needed to assemble a complete
semiautomatic assault weapon are subject to regulation if the parts are
segregated or packaged together and held by a person as the parts for the
assembly of a particular firearm.
[18 U.S.C. 921(a)(30)]

(05) What exceptions from the prohibitions on semiautomatic assault weapons
and large capacity ammunition feeding devices are provided in the law?
Exceptions are provided for semiautomatic assault weapons and large
capacity ammunition feeding devices -(
1) lawfully possessed on or before the date of enactment;
(2) manufactured for, transferred to, or possessed by governmental
entities or law enforcement officers employed by governmental entities for
official use;
(3) transferred to licensees maintaining on-site security at a nuclear
power plant required by Federal law, or possession by an employee or
contractor of such licensee on-site for such purposes or off-site for purposes
of licensee-authorized training or transportation of nuclear materials;
(4) transferred to law enforcement officers by the officer's agency upon
the officer's retirement; and
(5) manufactured, transferred, or possessed by licensed manufacturers or
licensed importers for the purposes of testing or experimentation as
authorized by ATF.
Ammunition feeding devices having a capacity of more than 10 rounds of
ammunition that were manufactured on or before September 13, 1994, are
excluded from the definition of “large capacity ammunition feeding device”
and, therefore, are not subject to the prohibitions.
[18 U.S.C. 922(v)(2), (v)(4), (w)(2) and (w)(3)]

(O10) If a person is in possession of a frame or receiver for a semiautomatic
assault weapon on the date of enactment, may the person acquire the rest of
the parts and assemble a complete semiautomatic assault weapon?
No. It is unlawful to make such weapon after the law's effective date.
[18 U.S.C. 922(v)(1)]

(O11) What documentation must a manufacturer, importer, or dealer obtain from
law enforcement officers who purchase semiautomatic assault weapons and large
capacity ammunition feeding devices for official use?
Licensees may transfer semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity
ammunition feeding devices to law enforcement officers with the following
documentation:
(1) a written statement from the purchasing officer, under penalty of
perjury, stating that the weapon or device is being purchased for use in
performing official duties and that the weapon or device is not being acquired
for personal use or for purposes of transfer or resale; and
(2) a written statement from a supervisor of the purchasing officer,
under penalty of perjury, stating that the purchasing officer is acquiring the
weapon or feeding device for use in official duties, that the weapon or device
is suitable for use in performing official duties, and that the weapon or
device is not being acquired for personal use or for purposes of transfer or
resale. In the case of a transfer of a semiautomatic assault weapon, the
supervisor’s written statement must also state that a records check reveals
that the purchasing officer has no convictions for misdemeanor crimes of
domestic violence.
In the case of semiautomatic assault weapons, licensees are required to
retain the above statements in their permanent records for a period of 5
years.
[27 C.F.R. 178.129, 178.132, 178.134]
 
(O17) What evidence is sufficient for Federal firearms licensees to be sure
that particular semiautomatic assault weapons are "grandfathered" weapons
which are not subject to the restrictions on possession and transfer?
The requirement that semiautomatic assault weapons be marked "RESTRICTED
LAW ENFORCEMENT/GOVERNMENT USE ONLY" was not effective until July 5, 1995.
Thus, semiautomatic assault weapons manufactured from September 13, 1994-July
4, 1995, may not be marked with the restrictive markings. Additionally,
sporting weapons may have been modified after September 13, 1994, so that they
are semiautomatic assault weapons, e.g., a pistol grip and magazine extension
are installed on a sporting shotgun. Licensees obtaining semiautomatic
assault weapons which do not have the restrictive marking should obtain from
the seller an invoice, bill of sale, or other documentation indicating that
the weapon in its present configuration was lawfully possessed on or before
September 13, 1994.
[27 CFR 178.92(a)(2)]
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Licensees obtaining semiautomatic assault weapons which do not have the restrictive marking should obtain from the seller an invoice, bill of sale, or other documentation indicating that the weapon in its present configuration was lawfully possessed on or before September 13, 1994.[/quote]

With all due respect, DrZox:

A: We are not licensees. If the above statement were law, I could understand licensees wanting proof. However, imagine all of the handguns, rifles, and shotguns that pass from one person to the next through private transactions - Private transactions by private citizens, not licensees. Further, if this statement were law, it would be regulating Federal Firearms Licensees, not private citizens. If there is an offense anywhere, it's in the FFL's court, not ours, because that FFL failed to maintain proper records and sold that SAW to us with the understanding that it was a legit pre-ban.

B: This is from the BATF FAQ, not law. For all we know the phrase, "...should obtain from the seller..." is merely a suggestion. Now if it was worded "...Shall obtain..." or "...Will obtain...", that would indicate that that's how it is to be done, no ifs, ands, or buts about it.

Show me the actual law, and I'll back down. Otherwise, I'll remain nit-picky. After all, it's the little things that can win court cases in big ways.

In my opinion, it's a FUBAR law. It's only enforcible up to a certain point. If the prosecution can call up the manufacturer of a particular lower and determine that it was built after the ban, you're done for. After all, they have just proved that the lower that you illegally built up as a SAW was post-ban.

However, there's not a dadgum thing they can do if the manufacturer tells them that the lower was manufactured and sent out on the market in 1990. There were/are no requirements to keep records pertaining to the actual "building-up" of the rifle.

There are those out there that say "Yeah, but who wants to be the test case???" Hell, I'll do it. I think it's absolutely absurd that they can open a book, look at photos of these "Evil Assault Weapons," and write these asinine, poorly-worded laws that confuse the living hell out of everyone the way this law has done, thus rendoring them too paranoid to enjoy their hobby. So I'll be the friggin' test case if need be.

Now if everyone is insistant on covering their butts from this half-way unenforcible law, the way to do it is to obtain a signed, sworn, notarized statement from the seller stating that the rifle was in SAW configuration before 9/13/94.

Me? I'm happy with my email from Bushmaster stating that mine left the factory as a lower in 1990.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top