Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Site Notices
6/25/2017 7:35:25 PM
6/21/2017 8:25:40 PM
Posted: 6/12/2001 4:01:11 PM EDT
Can anyone tell me what "average" price is for a pre ban Oly or Bushmaster lower? Thanks! Aviator [img]www.dredgeearthfirst.com/aviator.gif[/img]
Link Posted: 6/12/2001 4:08:21 PM EDT
Olympic: $600-$700 Bushmaster: $800-$900 Some places you look might be higher. My best piece of advice is to shop around and not jump on the first one you see. Look around, you can actually find one for cheaper than you think.
Link Posted: 6/12/2001 4:09:21 PM EDT
Whatever the price it is too much. Just ask, GeoffM24...only the military needs a preban AR15. Us civies only need postbans, pre's are just for show. Really though, Olys can be found for around $650-700 and Bushmasters usually start around $800 or so. Though the occasional "good deals" if you want to call them that can still be found. Michael
Link Posted: 6/12/2001 4:10:36 PM EDT
damn seamusmcoi, deja vu....
Link Posted: 6/12/2001 4:10:54 PM EDT
Ill sell you mine for $25,000. Just kidding I wont sell it to you. Legally, there are no pre ban lowers, only rifles. If it was not a rifle before the ban it is post ban. If it is taken apart and reassembled it must go back into the same config as before or be assembled post ban. But when you can find them, rarely, they are between $500-$800 here in AZ. Most of them were bought up and made into rifles for Y2k. The marked dried up pretty good. Good luck.
Link Posted: 6/12/2001 4:12:33 PM EDT
Thanks guys for the quick responses! Were any Pre Bans made with M4 style barrels? Aviator
Link Posted: 6/12/2001 5:55:32 PM EDT
Originally Posted By threegunar: Legally, there are no pre ban lowers, only rifles. If it was not a rifle before the ban it is post ban. If it is taken apart and reassembled it must go back into the same config as before or be assembled post ban.
View Quote
No way!! If a guy in the factory had 1 preban upper before the ban and put it on every lower that left the factory those lowers would qualify as preban, for now and ever. There is no stipulatin that it has to revert to a postban or the previous confuguration if it is unassembled. This is an unlikely example but nevertheless it makes my point.
Link Posted: 6/12/2001 6:01:54 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Aviator: Thanks guys for the quick responses! Were any Pre Bans made with M4 style barrels? Aviator
View Quote
No. But it is a simple matter to assemble an M4 type rifle yourself.
Link Posted: 6/12/2001 6:11:30 PM EDT
Threegunar, I've heard others say the same thing, but I don't find any support for that position and I have to disagree with you. It has been debated on the legal board quite a bit, and the conclusion is that one can own a preban rifle, put a postban upper on it, shoot it for awhile and then legally put the preban upper back on it. If you want to carry this over to that board you'll find lots of people willing to comment.
Link Posted: 6/12/2001 6:18:25 PM EDT
OK, while this seems off topic now, if you buy a preban lower, you can put any upper on it you want, including an M4 upper. And they're not hard to find.
Link Posted: 6/12/2001 6:55:21 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/12/2001 6:53:40 PM EDT by RipMeyer]
Originally Posted By seamusmcoi: OK, while this seems off topic now, if you buy a preban lower, you can put any upper on it you want, including an M4 upper. And they're not hard to find.
View Quote
Yes "ANY" upper! (16 inch or longer) unless you own a machinegun.
Link Posted: 6/12/2001 8:47:49 PM EDT
Originally Posted By seamusmcoi: OK, while this seems off topic now, if you buy a preban lower, you can put any upper on it you want, including an M4 upper. And they're not hard to find.
View Quote
OK That was my concern, and why I asked the 2nd question. Thanks for the help guys! Aviator [img]www.dredgeearthfirst.com/aviator.gif[/img]
Link Posted: 6/12/2001 8:58:26 PM EDT
$500-800 is about the right price.
Link Posted: 6/13/2001 3:53:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/13/2001 3:55:10 PM EDT by threegunar]
I HAD a copy of the law, its LONG. It specificly says that you CANNOT add any more or different features to the rifle that fall under the ban, you can keep the ones that it already had before the ban but you cant add more. You can put a different upper on it but you cant take an A2 stock off and put on a collapsable. It does say that in the law. That is what I meant, you are allowed to change parts and barrels or whatever, you just cant add any more of the features that were banned: pistol grip, threaded barrel, removable magazine, collapsable/folding stock, bayonet lug, ect. Most people that want a preban now dont want it for the bayo lug, they just want the collapsing stock and flash hider. Some people dont even care about the flash hider. Unfortunatly there werent nearly as many AR's built with Coll stock as there were with A2's. Most people are technically breaking the law by switching them. Its almost impossible to prove it wasnt that way before the ban though.
Link Posted: 6/13/2001 4:05:34 PM EDT
Question regarding pre/post-ban. I haven't gone through the full-text, but have read the parts that define pre/post-ban. I later read an article from Olympic Arms that flew in the face of the legal definition. The BATF [}:D] defines a Stripped Lower Receiver as a full firearm. Therefore, any firearm specifically referenced (Avotmont Kalashnikov, Norinco, Uzi, Glail, AR-15, etc.) would be considered a pre-ban if the lower was produced before the ban. If the text states anything else, then it flies in the face of previous laws that define a Stripped Lower Recevicer as a firearm. I can see if you buy a Hunting Rifle and add a folding stock, threaded barrel, etc., but wouldn't any AR-15 lower be considered an AR-15. And any made before the uncostitutional ban be pre-ban ?
Link Posted: 6/13/2001 6:04:21 PM EDT
Also, I'm not saying you're wrong threegunar, but how could they possibly prove that it wasn't shipped with a telestock? From what I've been told, even the AR companies themselves can only tell you if the lower in question was shipped as a complete rifle or not. Am I wrong, here? If so, somebody please correct me.
Link Posted: 6/14/2001 4:22:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/14/2001 4:30:13 PM EDT by threegunar]
Thats the key, its incredibly hard to really prove how it was made or shipped, a lot of companies wont tell. They wont tell you how it was shipped just for the hassle of looking through all the records, but they do have records as to how it was built. The rifles model is on the sales and shipping invoices along with the serial numbers, at a minimum. If they ATF asked them they would provide, but you'd have to piss off the ATF something fierce to have them bother with that. It is just a technicality, you cant add any features listed in the ban but you can keep the ones you had. If you had a Colt SP1 20" you could change it to 16" and keep the flash hider and bayo lug. The one thing you cant do is put a collapsable stock on it if it didnt have one already when the ban went into effect. Someone would have an incredibly hard time proving you did it after the ban, but that doesnt make it legal to do. Who is going to prove that you didnt put on an aftermarket one after you bought the rifle but before the ban? As for the stripped receivers being firearms that is true to a degree. The only thing with that is what KIND of firearm. You can buy a rifle action without a stock or barrel and it is a FIREARM, not a rifle or pistol specificly. How it gets built the first time declares if it is a rifle or pistol. If you put on a pistol stock and short barrel it is legally a pistol, rifle stock and long barrel its a rifle. Once it has been built it cant be changed from rifle to pistol or from pistol to rifle without converting it to SBR or AOW. If you cant tell I have dealt with this stuff more than anyone should ever have to. ITS MIND NUMBING, the only nice thing is if you call and ask, NICELY, the ATF will walk you through any questions or tell you where to find the answer.
Link Posted: 6/14/2001 4:54:59 PM EDT
I have seen them as cheap as $300 up here in Washington but they weren't in good shape, and they weren't bushmaster either only oly, I have never seen a preban bushmaster lower up here, bunch of colts thought, but you may as well have bought the whole gun for what they were asking for them. Ash
Link Posted: 6/14/2001 5:03:23 PM EDT
It depends on the condition. However, for a lightly used (95%+) lower: Olympic Arms are between $650.00 and $750.00. Bushmasters are between $750.00 and $900.00. Give or take $50 or so... Mike
Link Posted: 6/14/2001 5:54:12 PM EDT
I think threegunar is wrong. You can mix and match pre-ban features on a pre-ban receiver to your heart's desire. You're going to have to provide some sort of conclusive proof to convince me otherwise.
Link Posted: 6/14/2001 8:02:43 PM EDT
Boomer, Research it for yourself. Im only telling you what I read for myself in the law and what the ATF has told me on several occaions. I have had to deal with this on a professional level for quite a while now. I dont have the need or want to have to prove it to you. I believe I have stated it as plainly as possible for you. I have also stated, and others have agreed, that it is almost impossible for anyone to get in trouble for it anyway. I was only trying to be informative and educational. Isnt that the real purpose of this message board? If you dont believe me, so be it. But unless you take the time and effort that I have to check, I think your kind of a dumb ass just to assume I'm wrong. The laws are all public record and the ATF will help if you really want to know. Otherwise keep on sitting there being ignorant. Its irrelavant to me.
Link Posted: 6/14/2001 8:57:52 PM EDT
threegunar, listen up, if you can't back up your BS then at least quit beating around the bush and be honest enough to come out and say so. Time to dispense with the childish name calling and either put up or shut up. The fact that you listed a detachable magazine as one of the banned features tells me that you are not as familiar with this law as you are pretending to be.
Link Posted: 6/14/2001 9:10:33 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Ash: I have seen them as cheap as $300 up here in Washington but they weren't in good shape, and they weren't bushmaster either only oly, I have never seen a preban bushmaster lower up here, bunch of colts thought, but you may as well have bought the whole gun for what they were asking for them. Ash
View Quote
Interesting, if you do know where I could find a cheap pre ban Oly lower, even in rotton condition let me know if you would. Thanks. Aviator [img]www.dredgeearthfirst.com/aviator.gif[/img]
Link Posted: 6/15/2001 6:44:05 AM EDT
threegunar- I know you are just trying to help out a fellow shooter, but right now you are spreading the most rediculous lie I have ever heard in my entire life. A rifle is either preban or it isnt, there is no inbetween. If its preban you can put one, two three or fifty banned features on it or any combination there of. If it is postban it can legally have none of the banned features which would put it over the legal limit for a post ban. Oh, and don't think that I am a dumbass and just assuming you are wrong like you have stated about others. I would quote the section of the law that proves you wrong here for everyone to see and back up my point, but.....there isnt one! This idea is so idiotic even the govt couldn't think of it. There is no place in the Crime Bill where it even begins to talk about mixing and matching features on preban firearms. Next time before you start stating "facts" and insulting people who disagree with you, I believe you need to research those "facts" a little better. That way you don't sound so much like a raving lunatic to those of us who know what the law really does say. Michael
Link Posted: 6/15/2001 4:52:41 PM EDT
Like I said, I dont care what you do or if you believe me. I just dont want you to think you proved me wrong. READ THE LAW! The page you referred to is actually over 20 pages just on centerfire firearms, not magazines, not rimfire but centerfire alone. I can safely say that I am one of the few people that come here that actually worked for a firearms manufacturer when the law went into effect. The ATF sent out a nice plain english explanation of what everything meant. Did you ever read it? Did you ever read the law? I doubt it if you think there is just a page that explains anything in there. It is typical legal writting refering from one page to anohter constantly. If you READ my post I said you were a dumbass -IF- you didnt check for yourself and you are arguing with someone who has. So if you took insult to that I guess you didnt read it or investigate it and you are basing your belief off of what some other person, who probably heard it 3rd, 4th or 5th hand, told you. Things dont ever get distorted through the grape vine. I could be wrong, but I think calling someone ignorant is the correct word for someone who doesnt know something, its not an insult. I am ignorant in the Chinese language, but I dont think Im insulting myself by saying that. Boomer, it does list detachable magazine as a feature of the ban. AR-15's have detachable magazines and pistol grips, thats why they cant have any of the other features. Where did you hear that it doesnt, the same person who you believe about the rest of the law? If you think it is just a quick few pages in the crime bill you are very wrong. It is very long and in depth. There are individual sections defining individual features banned for rifles, pistols and shotguns. There are defintions of assault rilfes. There are over 6 pages of firearms that are directly banned from manufacture (like the AR-15), there are sections for centerfire and rimfire rifle, sections for centerfire and rimfire pistols, there is a section on shotguns, several sections for magazines, there is a section on import bans, section on parts import, and more. It took me a couple days to read through it, do you really think you can just grab a page and know what your talking about? Why do you think it took so long before anyone started making post ban rifles? It was confusing and in depth thats why. Ponyboy, why do you think this is an "idiotic idea"? The government wasnt trying to up the resale value of your rifle. They were trying to BAN them. Do you really think they would intentionally leave a loop hole that would allow you to make a rifle they didnt want any more of even worse (their point of veiw not mine) by allowing you to add more of the features they want gone to it?. I wont post on this thread anymore to argue this point. I just want to reiterate that I have dealt with this on a PROFESSIONAL level. I have read the law many times. I have called and asked the ATF many specific questions. What I am posting is what I have learned over a fairly long period of time. I did not mean to directly insult anyone, but I belive that if you dont actually learn it for yourself but you will argue it to another, you are a dumbass (this subject or any other). If you read the law and your opinion is what you got out of reading it, thats fine I wont try to argue, just find out for yourself.
Link Posted: 6/15/2001 4:54:13 PM EDT
Before anyone bashes me for saying the AR-15 was banned. It was, along with the Sporter, SP1, AK47, AK74, HK91, HK93, and many pages more. Thats why noone makes AR-15's, they are all m-15's or xm-15's or ASA15's. Thats also why the MAC90 isnt called an AK. Another technicality in the law. They thought they were banning firearms but they technically banned names of firearms.
Link Posted: 6/15/2001 9:13:33 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/15/2001 9:17:10 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/15/2001 10:41:22 PM EDT
Threegunar - Sit down, shut up, pay attention, and you might learn something. You may have read the law, but I don't think you fully understand it. Chapter 44 of Title 18 is a relatively easy piece of legislation to understand. You want a difficult piece of legislation to read, try the Patent Act (Title 35 USC). 18 USC 921(a)(30) defines an SAW by features. It does NOT state the original features that defined the firearm as an assault weapon are the only "assault features that firearm can ever have. So long as the firearm has a detachable mag and two or more features listed in 921(a)(30)(B)(i-v) it is a SAW. Possession of a SAW is illegal under 18 USC 922(v)(1)unless 922(v)(1) in inapplicable because of 922(v)(2-4). The common defense to possesion of a SAW is that it is a "pre-ban". That is, under 922(v)(2), it was lawfully possessed prior to 9-13-94. 18 USC 922(v)(2) does not require continuity of prohibited features to be effective - only that the weapon was a SAW and lawfully possessed prior to 9-13-94. A SAW does not become a different SAW just because of a change in features. With regards to the detachable mag. It is not a banned feature; it is the defining feature. If it doesn't have a detachable mag (and I've seen AR's with 120rd non-detachable mags), you can have all the assault features you desire and add them AFTER the ban. Next point; stop calling BATF. Most of the time you get some flunkie who cares more about beating Mary from the mail room to the last jelly donut than giving you the right advice. If you want an opinion from BATF, get it in writing. Of course, they get these wrong too, and letters don't have any legal weight, but it lets you know what's going on inside their little heads.
Top Top