Howdy,

I have a question about a receiver marked "RESTRICTED MILITARY / GOVERNMENT
LAW ENFORCEMENT / EXPORT USE ONLY"

What's the law say on this?  As long as I builkd it up to be post ban compliant, I assume I should be able to buy the bare receiver.  

I understand that mags marked LEO only are verboten, but a bare receiver so marked should be ok, right?  

Thanks,

-Skuld

Negative on that.

Any reciever marked '[b]LEO/Military Only[/b]" is for those people in those fields.

It does not matter if you simply got the stripped receiver or the whole rifle.  If the lower receiver has those markings on it, and you do not fit into that category, then you cannot lawfully own it.  The reason for that is because LEO rifles can have all of the pre-ban "evil" features that post-ban rifles are forbidden to have.

Now, come September, all of this will hopefully change...[;)]

Hope this helps!

Edited to add:  If you are looking for an AR with a special, unique engraving on it, may I recommend Pete in NH.  You can find ads for his specially marked RRA lowers on the Equipment Exchange.

Where did you get this info from?

As long as the lower when assembled into a rifle doesn't meet the legal definition of a SAW. Then the owner would be in possession of a legal rifle that just happens to have the LEO/GOV markings on the lower receiver. Nowhere in the law does it say a rifle marked LEO/GOV is illegal for us normal people to own. [;)]

Now that I was unaware of.  I have just heard that anything marked [b]"LEO/Military Only"[/b] was illegal for civilians to use (including magazines, lower receivers, and complete rifles).

Well I guess it is true, you do learn something new everyday.  [:)]

Magazines are a different issue because it is the magazine that is covered in the law. The markings denote that the mag was manufactured after the ban went into affect, which means LEO/GOV use only.

The lower is just a firearm marked LEO/GOV. It still needs the features to be a SAW manufactured after the ban.


Edited to add: It is always a good day when you learn something new IMO. [:)]

Thanks guys!

Although it may be moot, as it seems the guy has pulled his ads.

-Skuld

Is it really worth it with six months left?  Sure, you get people here who tell you how they know it is legal, but are they willing to take a booking photo along side you?  The answer is no.

I wish someone would do one that said for civilian use only!

What are you talking about? It is perfectly legal to own a post-ban rifle that happens to have an LEO marked lower(as long as it isn't marked Colt AR15 too).

It is perfectly legal for anyone to own a LEO receiver.  I know this for a fact being that I own 2 LEO rifles.  The law states that when I retire or leave my agency, I must return my rifle to “post ban” compliant.  I am allowed to keep the entire rifle as long as I change the stock, flash hider, and 86 the bayonet lug.  This comes directly from the ATF, not from hearsay.  No such thing as an “assault receiver”.  The rifle is mine to do what I wish with.  I can sell it, trade it, or whatever.  I can sell it to another LEO as a whole rifle, or I can change it over to post ban and sell it to a civilian.  It’s the features on the rifle that make it LEO, not the receiver.        

Don't you have to submit a letter to the manufacturer/dealer stating that you WILL NOT sell the weapon to a civilian? And doesn't the BATFE consider the reciever to be the weapon?

You have to state that you did not buy it FOR resale.  That doesn't prevent you from being able to sell it at a later date.  A bit contradictory?  Yes, but alot of our laws are.

Mattld, I would hope that one of the things you learn is not to repeat rumor. If you don't know it to be true, why confuse the issue with "I heard".

Here is the text of a BATF reply concerning this topic:

Document Control Numbers: 903050: AVH, 3311/2003-659

Dear Mr. *****:

This is inresponse to your letter of July, 2003, to the Bureau of Achohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) requesting clarification reqarding the legality of assembling firearms from stripped lower receivers marked "Restricted Military/Government Law Enforcement/Export Only."  You refer specifically to a AR-15 type receivers manufactured by Colt.

The Gun Control Act (GCA) enforced by the ATF, per Title 18, United States Code (U.S.C.), Chapter 44, Section 921(a)(30), defines the term "semiautomatic assualt weapon" to include a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least two of teh following features:

1. a folding or telescoping stock;
2. a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
3. a bayonet mount;
4. a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to acccomodate a flash suppressor; and
5. a grenade launcher

It is unlawful for a person to manufacture, transfer, or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon except as provided in 18 U.S.C. Section 992 (v).  However, Section 922 (v)(2) provides that a semiautomatic assault weapon which was lawfully possessed on the date of enactment of this subsection (September 13, 1994) may still be lawfully possessed and transferred.

Although a pre-ban or post-ban AR-15 type receiver is a "firearm" as defined in 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(3), a receiver does not meet the definition of a "semiautomatic assault weapon."  However, and assembly or configuration of an Ar-15 type receiver into a pre-ban AR-15 configuration rifle would be restricted to military or law enforcement only.

The above determination applies exclusively to existing Federal law.  It is suggested that you contact your local authorities to determine if there are any State or local ordinances that may regulate the weapon in question.

We thank you for your inquiry and trust that the foregoing has been responive.

Sincerly yours,

signature
Sterling Nixon
Chief, Firearms Technology Branch.

They never answer the question as to assembling the receiver into a postban configured rifle. Typical of ATF to leave you hanging. They don't want to give you a stright answer so you never knwo what you really can do and can't do.

Well, first of all, I never said [b]"I heard"[/b].  Secondly, what I said was not a rumor, it was simply what [b]I[/b] thought was the honest answer to skuld's question.  I was wrong.  A lot of us usually are.  VA came along and corrected me.  That I am thankful for.  Now I know.  But to say that I am repeating a rumor is just a false statement.

And no, I did not learn any lesson from this.  Mostly because I did nothing wrong.  The whole point of this forum setup is so that those "in the know" will help out those who aren't.  On this issue I thought I was "in the know", but I wasn't.  It was a mistake.  I'll admit that.  

Also, rimfire, don't let me catch you [b]ever[/b] making any kind of false statement.  [;D]

Here's what a letter my friend received from ATF says regarding these (only including the pertinent parts, some abbreviations used):

"A licensed dealer may receiver or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon for transfer to qualified law enforcement officers or government entities as provided in Title 27, CFR part 478, section 478.49(c).  However, a licensed dealer cannot receive or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon for other purposes, such as stripping the weapon for parts.

A firearm frame or receiver possessed without other components does not meet the definition of a semiautomatic assault weapon, even if the receiver bears the "Restricted for Law Enforcement Government Use."  A firearm assembled using such a receiver that does not have the physical characteristics of a semiautomatic assault weapon is not prohibited under section 922(v) of Title 18 USC.  

Any person who is engaged in the business of assemlbing firearms for the purpose of sale and distribution must have a FFL as a manufacturer of firearms.  Assembly of such firearms would incur FET.

blah blah blah . . . We also suggest that you contact your local State Attorney General's office for any applicable state or local ordinances.

Sterling T. Nixon
Chief, Firearms Technology Branch"

So, from my interpretation, if I buy say, a Colt LEO marked stripped lower and build up a post-ban AR for personal use, then that is ok.  However, if a dealer who sold it to me stripped it for parts (M4 upper, collapsing stock, etc) they are the ones in violation.  Hence, it would seem prudent that if you are buying one of these LEO lowers, you have a receipt or letter from the seller stating that they are selling you a stripped receiver so that there is no question as to whether you had a complete rifle and stripped it for parts.