Taurus Firearm Forum banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,732 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
17,717 Posts
Yeah, this has been a bit of a problem for a while. The real problem will come when they change the definition, which will have to happen sooner or later.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,813 Posts
Well, until congress gets all of this worked out, we have a working loophole that's been proven effective. Now we have to start really pushing legislators to get rid of ATF "interpretations" that go against 2A and slowly start regaining our rights.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,104 Posts
From the comments section of this article comes this, "Bought some 100% complete AR-15 lower receivers this year, and they were treated like handguns, and not rifles, apparently at the insistence of the ATF. This is significant, because you cannot buy handguns out of state, but you can usually buy rifles, etc, in another state. So you cannot any more buy AR-15 lower receivers outside the state you reside in. Moreover, they now require you to be 21, instead of the previous 18."

When I bought an AK receiver for an AK build, years ago, I had to declare, at the time of transfer, whether it would be used as a pistol or a rifle. Was that an BATFE policy or a law? It sounds quite a bit like a policy to me and so far this is not something that I have ever encountered when buying an AR receiver. As the receiver can be used as either pistol or rifle, does this then bar anyone under 21 from owning such a receiver?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MoKen

·
Registered
Joined
·
164 Posts
It looks to me from that definition, that the usual definition of most pistol frames as the "gun" is wrong too. The slide is the only piece that could be described as containing a breechlock, and in most cases the slide "receives the barrel."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
839 Posts
I have bought bare virgin lowers probably a year ago and don't remember them being listed as rifle or handgun of the form, but as "other".
i then assembled them as handguns so in the future i could use them in a rifle or pistol configuration. (took pictures of the lowers assembled as a pistol togive me some legal footing)
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
36,058 Posts
We just had a thread about the guy in CA who had charges dropped after being charged for running a shop that facilitated DIY 80% lower manufacturer. This is along the same line.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CaptainMorgan

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,331 Posts
We just had a thread about the guy in CA who had charges dropped after being charged for running a shop that facilitated DIY 80% lower manufacturer. This is along the same line.
It is the same case and it may help with other firearm laws. Every little win for us is important as we haven't gotten enough of them!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,813 Posts
We just had a thread about the guy in CA who had charges dropped after being charged for running a shop that facilitated DIY 80% lower manufacturer. This is along the same line.
It was that story that spurred this thread as a spinoff of the other thread.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,076 Posts
It is the same case and it may help with other firearm laws. Every little win for us is important as we haven't gotten enough of them!
I hope you're right, but a lot of the ATF regs regarding the AR platform could be fixed just by requiring matching S/N on uppers and lowers. I've got a pistol kit with three uppers and a single lower. That's a regulatory correction I'd rather not have to contend with.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
36,058 Posts
I hope you're right, but a lot of the ATF regs regarding the AR platform could be fixed just by requiring matching S/N on uppers and lowers. I've got a pistol kit with three uppers and a single lower. That's a regulatory correction I'd rather not have to contend with.
Wow...that would sell a lot more components, eh?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,642 Posts
They'll just change one word in the definition of receiver to read:

'That part of a firearm which provides housing for the hammer, bolt or breechblock, or firing mechanism, and which is usually threaded at its forward portion to receive the barrel'
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
19,747 Posts
They'll just change one word in the definition of receiver to read:

'That part of a firearm which provides housing for the hammer, bolt or breechblock, or firing mechanism, and which is usually threaded at its forward portion to receive the barrel'
The part about the “threaded to receive a barrel” part would then become the weak part of the policy? Law? If they drop the “threaded” part and add matching SNs on upper and lower parts then the entire receiver/AR cottage industry would hit a brick wall. According to the article referenced Loretta Lynch notified congress but congress shrugged it off. And they are really distracted by “you know who” now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,842 Posts
The part about the “threaded to receive a barrel” part would then become the weak part of the policy? Law? If they drop the “threaded” part and add matching SNs on upper and lower parts then the entire receiver/AR cottage industry would hit a brick wall. According to the article referenced Loretta Lynch notified congress but congress shrugged it off. And they are really distracted by “you know who” now.
So for people who build their own AR, they would have to go through 2 background checks to build one rifle or pistol? (If they don't buy all the components at the same time that is) I know a few people that due to money are doing exactly that, buying parts a little at a time.
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top