User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/3/2022 9:02:49 AM EDT
[#1]
Pretty sure I called that 2 days ago
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2022 9:15:05 AM EDT
[#2]
You're connecting state and federal laws by the words firearm and other.
That's not valid. NYS law defines a rifle as not a firearm, that's a stupid definition, different than anywhere else A stripped lower is a firearm by federal law because it is the serialized piece of the potential firearm. It's not a firearm by state law because it does not expel a projectile. A lower is an other firearm by fed law because it's not a rifle or pistol yet. It's not an other firearm by state law because it's not a firearm. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2022 9:43:56 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You're connecting state and federal laws by the words firearm and other. That's not valid. NYS law defines a rifle as not a firearm, that's a stupid definition, different than anywhere else A stripped lower is a firearm by federal law because it is the serialized piece of the potential firearm. It's not a firearm by state law because it does not expel a projectile. A lower is an other firearm by fed law because it's not a rifle or pistol yet. It's not an other firearm by state law because it's not a firearm. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2022 9:56:06 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: You're connecting state and federal laws by the words firearm and other. That's not valid. NYS law defines a rifle as not a firearm, that's a stupid definition, different than anywhere else A stripped lower is a firearm by federal law because it is the serialized piece of the potential firearm. It's not a firearm by state law because it does not expel a projectile. A lower is an other firearm by fed law because it's not a rifle or pistol yet. It's not an other firearm by state law because it's not a firearm. https://68.media.tumblr.com/10fecf59842da3305cfe9a770f8a7821/tumblr_mf1m68bjy71rm2cdvo1_400.gif Yeah I'm confused then. I guess I'm reading the part where it says any housing that holds the fire control group is now a firearm in New York hence illegal without an exemption. ANY OTHER WEAPON THAT IS NOT OTHERWISE DEFINED IN THIS SECTION CONTAINING ANY COMPONENT THAT PROVIDES HOUSING OR A STRUCTURE DESIGNED TO HOLD OR INTEGRATE ANY FIRE CONTROL COMPONENT THAT IS DESIGNED TO OR MAY READILY BE CONVERTED TO EXPEL A PROJECTILE BY ACTION OF EXPLOSIVE. Doesn't that sound like they are defining a stripped lower receiver? I know the lower does not expel the projectile but I'm not sure about the fire control group part... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2022 10:55:58 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You're connecting state and federal laws by the words firearm and other. That's not valid. NYS law defines a rifle as not a firearm, that's a stupid definition, different than anywhere else A stripped lower is a firearm by federal law because it is the serialized piece of the potential firearm. It's not a firearm by state law because it does not expel a projectile. A lower is an other firearm by fed law because it's not a rifle or pistol yet. It's not an other firearm by state law because it's not a firearm. It's being lumped into the firearm category of state law which includes handguns, SBS, SBR and assault weapons. The way I'm reading the language, it ends transfers of stripped lowers, barreled actions and frames. Tie this in with the bill they pulled that was going to prohibit any gunsmithing by anyone other than a licensed gunsmith and I believe that their end game is to prohibit the transfer of anything that is not a finished firearm. It was too easy for people to buy parts and assemble them into an otherwise prohibited configuration. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2022 12:14:28 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's being lumped into the firearm category of state law which includes handguns, SBS, SBR and assault weapons. The way I'm reading the language, it ends transfers of stripped lowers, barreled actions and frames. Tie this in with the bill they pulled that was going to prohibit any gunsmithing by anyone other than a licensed gunsmith and I believe that their end game is to prohibit the transfer of anything that is not a finished firearm. It was too easy for people to buy parts and assemble them into an otherwise prohibited configuration. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: You're connecting state and federal laws by the words firearm and other. That's not valid. NYS law defines a rifle as not a firearm, that's a stupid definition, different than anywhere else A stripped lower is a firearm by federal law because it is the serialized piece of the potential firearm. It's not a firearm by state law because it does not expel a projectile. A lower is an other firearm by fed law because it's not a rifle or pistol yet. It's not an other firearm by state law because it's not a firearm. It's being lumped into the firearm category of state law which includes handguns, SBS, SBR and assault weapons. The way I'm reading the language, it ends transfers of stripped lowers, barreled actions and frames. Tie this in with the bill they pulled that was going to prohibit any gunsmithing by anyone other than a licensed gunsmith and I believe that their end game is to prohibit the transfer of anything that is not a finished firearm. It was too easy for people to buy parts and assemble them into an otherwise prohibited configuration. Haha so people will just buy a finished lower with a stock which is a rifle and then configure it however the hell they want it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2022 12:20:30 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah I'm confused then. I guess I'm reading the part where it says any housing that holds the fire control group is now a firearm in New York hence illegal without an exemption. ANY OTHER WEAPON THAT IS NOT OTHERWISE DEFINED IN THIS SECTION CONTAINING ANY COMPONENT THAT PROVIDES HOUSING OR A STRUCTURE DESIGNED TO HOLD OR INTEGRATE ANY FIRE CONTROL COMPONENT THAT IS DESIGNED TO OR MAY READILY BE CONVERTED TO EXPEL A PROJECTILE BY ACTION OF EXPLOSIVE. Doesn't that sound like they are defining a stripped lower receiver? I know the lower does not expel the projectile but I'm not sure about the fire control group part... "weapon ... containing " The first requirement is that we're talking about a weapon. A lower is not a weapon. It's a piece of metal that may become part of a weapon. We're used to thinking of a lower as a firearm/weapon because of the ATF arbitrary definition. That definition does not apply to ny law. You guys could be right but I'd bet a lot it doesn't go your way. At least for now. 20 years from now is a different story. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2022 12:29:53 PM EDT
[#8]
I think what really pissed 'them' off was ARs configured as others and non-safe-compliant.
Shockwaves might not have been worth action on their own but got caught up. An attack on lowers may well come but I don't think this is it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2022 12:31:17 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Haha so people will just buy a finished lower with a stock which is a rifle and then configure it however the hell they want it. That most likely would be the way to go |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2022 1:16:30 PM EDT
[#10]
I'm more concerned with lowers being decreed to be semi auto rifles and requiring a license.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2022 9:43:46 PM EDT
[#11]
Expel a projectile with an EXPLOSIVE, huh?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2022 10:00:32 PM EDT
[#12]
Glad to see someone else caught on.
49 CFR § 173.171 Smokeless powder for small arms. which has been classed in Division 1.3 may be re-classed in Division 4.1 https://royalarms.com/smokeless-powder-regulations-gun-powder/#:~:text=49%20CFR%20%C2%A7%20173.171%20Smokeless%20powder%20for%20small,for%20domestic%20transportation%20by%20motor%20vehicle%2C%20rail%20car%2C https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/173.59 |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2022 10:04:29 PM EDT
[#13]
I am reading that sometimes smokeless powder is referred to as a "low explosive" but that may be a misnomer? I'm not s chemical expert...
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/smokeless%20powder |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/4/2022 2:01:10 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think what really pissed 'them' off was ARs configured as others and non-safe-compliant. Shockwaves might not have been worth action on their own but got caught up. An attack on lowers may well come but I don't think this is it. Which is one of the reasons I was not a fan of the “others” everyone was building. I get why they did it, but this is the unintended but predictable consequence. We pushed an inch and they took a mile. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/4/2022 10:13:55 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Which is one of the reasons I was not a fan of the "others" everyone was building. I get why they did it, but this is the unintended but predictable consequence. We pushed an inch and they took a mile. One just needs to look at Kalifornia. As soon as people figured out a workaround for their a$$inine laws (ex. bullet button), the legislature stepped up and outlawed the workaround as well. New York is now on that path of playing whack-a-mole. Problem is it gets expensive for us to play and we win stupid prizes when the legislature passes more restrictions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/4/2022 10:42:07 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: +1 One just needs to look at Kalifornia. As soon as people figured out a workaround for their a$$inine laws (ex. bullet button), the legislature stepped up and outlawed the workaround as well. New York is now on that path of playing whack-a-mole. Problem is it gets expensive for us to play and we win stupid prizes when the legislature passes more restrictions. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Which is one of the reasons I was not a fan of the "others" everyone was building. I get why they did it, but this is the unintended but predictable consequence. We pushed an inch and they took a mile. One just needs to look at Kalifornia. As soon as people figured out a workaround for their a$$inine laws (ex. bullet button), the legislature stepped up and outlawed the workaround as well. New York is now on that path of playing whack-a-mole. Problem is it gets expensive for us to play and we win stupid prizes when the legislature passes more restrictions. So let's just not own things even if they are legal? Out of fear our masters will whip us even harder? Come on guys. Victim blaming. And we are the victims. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/4/2022 7:15:35 PM EDT
[#17]
this seems to target the 80% lowers eg glocks etc.
something that is not yet acknowledged as a firearm. id imagine whatever you have may be grandfathered anything new would be licensed. or, is it more encompassing? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/4/2022 8:42:49 PM EDT
[#18]
80% are being attacked in a different law.
This is for tac14s, shockwaves, ARs configured as other, etc I strongly disagree with some others that this will affect stripped lowers. Anything is possible with tyrants, though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/6/2022 12:10:57 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I strongly disagree with some others that this will affect stripped lowers. Anything is possible with tyrants, though. How does the language below not apply to striped lowers, frames, barreled actions, etc? (F) ANY OTHER WEAPON THAT IS NOT OTHERWISE DEFINED IN THIS SECTION CONTAINING ANY COMPONENT THAT PROVIDES HOUSING OR A STRUCTURE DESIGNED TO HOLD OR INTEGRATE ANY FIRE CONTROL COMPONENT THAT IS DESIGNED TO OR MAY READILY BE CONVERTED TO EXPEL A PROJECTILE BY ACTION OF EXPLOSIVE. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/6/2022 12:37:23 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How does the language below not apply to striped lowers, frames, barreled actions, etc? (F) ANY OTHER WEAPON THAT IS NOT OTHERWISE DEFINED IN THIS SECTION CONTAINING ANY COMPONENT THAT PROVIDES HOUSING OR A STRUCTURE DESIGNED TO HOLD OR INTEGRATE ANY FIRE CONTROL COMPONENT THAT IS DESIGNED TO OR MAY READILY BE CONVERTED TO EXPEL A PROJECTILE BY ACTION OF EXPLOSIVE. The overriding criteria is "a weapon". A stripped lower is not a weapon by common usage or existing NYS law. It's a firearm by ATF technicality but that doesn't apply to NYS law. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/6/2022 12:42:26 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The overriding criteria is "a weapon". A stripped lower is not a weapon by common usage or existing NYS law. It's a firearm by ATF technicality but that doesn't apply to NYS law. Good luck with that interpretation 265.00 (3) provides the definition of "firearm" under state law. Paragraph (f) adds the language I cut and pasted to the state definition of "firearm". Considering that everything else under the "firearm" paragraph is stuff they're restricting...handguns, SBS, SBR, "assault weapons"....I dont see (f) as helping out the argument that lowers, barreled actions etc are not covered. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/6/2022 12:49:41 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The overriding criteria is "a weapon". A stripped lower is not a weapon by common usage or existing NYS law. It's a firearm by ATF technicality but that doesn't apply to NYS law. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: How does the language below not apply to striped lowers, frames, barreled actions, etc? (F) ANY OTHER WEAPON THAT IS NOT OTHERWISE DEFINED IN THIS SECTION CONTAINING ANY COMPONENT THAT PROVIDES HOUSING OR A STRUCTURE DESIGNED TO HOLD OR INTEGRATE ANY FIRE CONTROL COMPONENT THAT IS DESIGNED TO OR MAY READILY BE CONVERTED TO EXPEL A PROJECTILE BY ACTION OF EXPLOSIVE. The overriding criteria is "a weapon". A stripped lower is not a weapon by common usage or existing NYS law. It's a firearm by ATF technicality but that doesn't apply to NYS law. Interesting but wrong in my opinion. They've banned 80% frames which aren't even able to add fire control units and the like without work and are unregulated by the fed. Finished lowers are regulated by the fed and must be sold through an FFL. No way the state is going to say they aren't a firearm, and since they don't fall into the category of a handgun, rifle with at least a 16 inch barrel or a shotgun with an 18 inch barrel, the state is going to treat them as an "other." |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/6/2022 12:56:25 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Good luck with that interpretation Your interpretation leads to absurd consequences like I'm a criminal for changing stocks on a 22 rifle. I'm not paranoid enough to believe that they deviously wrote vague language on purpose in order to enforce absurdities. They intended to ban shockwaves and AR 'others' and that's what they'll enforce. When they want to ban lowers they'll do it, not slide it through on crazy interpretations of something semi-related. The currently proposed federal AWB has a line item to ban all AR receivers, period. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/6/2022 1:00:53 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Your interpretation leads to absurd consequences like I'm a criminal for changing stocks on a 22 rifle. I'm not paranoid enough to believe that they deviously wrote vague language on purpose in order to enforce absurdities. They intended to ban shockwaves and AR 'others' and that's what they'll enforce. When they want to ban lowers they'll do it, not slide it through on crazy interpretations of something semi-related. The currently proposed federal AWB has a line item to ban all AR receivers, period. Did you read my edit? Its pretty clear that a lower receiver fits that language: "CONTAINING ANY COMPONENT THAT PROVIDES HOUSING OR A STRUCTURE DESIGNED TO HOLD OR INTEGRATE ANY FIRE CONTROL COMPONENT" We already know that the state wants to ban home builds. They tried to ban any weapon builds by anyone other than a licensed gunsmith last year; it failed only because the language was too vague. Hoping that those in Albany somehow are OK with people doing home builds that dont meet their SAFE Act limits is pure fantasy |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/6/2022 1:32:59 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Did you read my edit? Its pretty clear that a lower receiver fits that language: "CONTAINING ANY COMPONENT THAT PROVIDES HOUSING OR A STRUCTURE DESIGNED TO HOLD OR INTEGRATE ANY FIRE CONTROL COMPONENT" We already know that the state wants to ban home builds. They tried to ban any weapon builds by anyone other than a licensed gunsmith last year; it failed only because the language was too vague. Hoping that those in Albany somehow are OK with people doing home builds that dont meet their SAFE Act limits is pure fantasy It's not at all clear because you dropped out the most important word. "A WEAPON containing" That clearly indicates that the component in itself does not satisfy the definition. If they started the definition at "Any component" you'd be right. Previously they tried to ban finishing 80%ers, some people CHOSE TO INTERPRET their vagaries as banning all home gun work. NY choosing to define a stripped lower as a semiautomatic rifle that can only be purchased with a license is fairly likely. Regarding all gun receivers as criminal to possess in themselves but legal AFTER being completed into a rifle or shotgun is absurd , not what was intended and not what's going to happen. They were not ok with people building ARs the fell through the holes in their law. They plugged the hole. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/6/2022 1:41:25 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's not at all clear because you dropped out the most important word. "A WEAPON containing" That clearly indicates that the component in itself does not satisfy the definition. If they started the definition at "Any component" you'd be right. Previously they tried to ban finishing 80%ers, some people CHOSE TO INTERPRET their vagaries as banning all home gun work. NY choosing to define a stripped lower as a semiautomatic rifle that can only be purchased with a license is fairly likely. Regarding all gun receivers as criminal to possess in themselves but legal AFTER being completed into a rifle or shotgun is absurd , not what was intended and not what's going to happen. They were not ok with people building ARs the fell through the holes in their law. They plugged the hole. Your interpretation is not likely, because a stripped lower by itself is not semiautomatic. It has to be built up into that configuration. Whereas the stripped lower meets the language I cut and pasted. You hanging your hat on the use of the word "weapon" isn't going to fly in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/6/2022 2:15:30 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Interesting but wrong in my opinion. They've banned 80% frames which aren't even able to add fire control units and the like without work and are unregulated by the fed. Finished lowers are regulated by the fed and must be sold through an FFL. No way the state is going to say they aren't a firearm, and since they don't fall into the category of a handgun, rifle with at least a 16 inch barrel or a shotgun with an 18 inch barrel, the state is going to treat them as an "other." 80% frames was a separate law. Not changing criminal possession of a firearm like this other definition does. 265 is about possessing dangerous weapons. It's not about regulating acquisition of guns. Apparently they left that to the feds. The state has always said that a compliant AR rifle or licensed AR pistol is not a firearm. That's not changing. If I start with a legal rifle and pull it apart until I have an inert piece of metal with no moving parts, NOW I'm possessing a dangerous firearm? If possession of a stripped lower is illegal then I'm still possessing it when it's attached to other stuff. That would make all guns illegal because they have receivers that are defined as illegal items. Unlike the feds NY never had an official category for 'other'. A 14" shotgun was never accepted as intended to be legal. An AR that escaped regulation by safe was clearly never intended to be legal. Only an]unintentional, implicit hole in the specifics of the categories made prosecution of 'others' problematic. So why has a stripped lower been very commonly accepted as legal to possess in the past? Because it fell into other? No, because they never even acknowledged other existed. Because it was a rifle? No, because that is in-determinant. Because it;s not a weapon yet. Take the same lower. put on a rifle upper and it's fine. Put on a pistol upper and it's an illegal firearm. Yes, ATF says the lower is a firearm/weapon but that's separate law. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/6/2022 2:31:32 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Your interpretation is not likely, because a stripped lower by itself is not semiautomatic. It has to be built up into that configuration. Whereas the stripped lower meets the language I cut and pasted. You hanging your hat on the use of the word "weapon" isn't going to fly in my opinion. The technical argument is only 49%. We probably agree we're dealing with rotten incompetents who will interpret what they want how they want anyway. However, their MO lately has been to pass whatever they want and brag about it. This bill eliminated others that fell through the illegal possession and safe laws. They did that and they're bragging about it. The idea that they ALSO deviously included a vague ban on all lowers and are pretending they didn't seems very weak. If they were ready to ban lowers they'd do it and brag about it. I definitely don't argue it's not on the agenda. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/6/2022 6:19:36 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 80% frames was a separate law. Not changing criminal possession of a firearm like this other definition does. 265 is about possessing dangerous weapons. It's not about regulating acquisition of guns. Apparently they left that to the feds. The state has always said that a compliant AR rifle or licensed AR pistol is not a firearm.An AR Pistol IS a "Firearm" by NY Law, unless it's an "Other" which sets up a quandary. That's not changing. If I start with a legal rifle and pull it apart until I have an inert piece of metal with no moving parts, NOW I'm possessing a dangerous firearm? If possession of a stripped lower is illegal then I'm still possessing it when it's attached to other stuff. That would make all guns illegal because they have receivers that are defined as illegal items. Unlike the feds NY never had an official category for 'other'. A 14" shotgun was never accepted as intended to be legal.which is why they are sold, and the SP have orders to confiscate them and letting a Judge figure it out. An AR that escaped regulation by safe was clearly never intended to be legal. nor clearly illegal; absent a case ruling on things like "Bullet Buttons" it's a grey area supported by historical precedence. Only an]unintentional, implicit hole in the specifics of the categories made prosecution of 'others' problematic. nothing happens in Government by accident. So why has a stripped lower been very commonly accepted as legal to possess in the past? I don't know, most can only speculate. Have to remember, these typically aren't gun people, or only think they are. Because it fell into other? No, because they never even acknowledged other existed. Because it was a rifle? No, because that is in-determinant. Because it;s not a weapon yet. Take the same lower. put on a rifle upper and it's fine. Put on a pistol upper and it's an illegal firearm. Yes, ATF says the lower is a firearm/weapon but that's separate law. NY depends on Federal Regulations, then fucks around with them and we end up with the stupid shit we have; and IF you're jammed up you might as well kiss it good by as it's likely going to be cheaper to surrender it with a plea deal to a lesser, bullshit charge than to fight it...how else do you think DA's get convictions? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/6/2022 6:43:44 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: NY depends on Federal Regulations, then fucks around with them and we end up with the stupid shit we have; and IF you're jammed up you might as well kiss it good by as it's likely going to be cheaper to surrender it with a plea deal to a lesser, bullshit charge than to fight it...how else do you think DA's get convictions? Yes but no. An AR pistol is a firearm. With an exception if it's licensed. I said licensed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/6/2022 9:50:00 PM EDT
[#31]
How does this work if you already have them? Is this new sales only ?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/6/2022 10:06:12 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How does this work if you already have them? Is this new sales only ? The semi auto rifle ban? That's just new sales. This "others" ban - Nope...no grandfathering. If you have an other, it's a felony soon. Nice right? Don't worry...unless Thomas writes an absolute scathing decision in the NYSRPA case, NY will ban all semi auto guns without grandfathering soon too. I'd give it 5 years. Unless SCOTUS gives NY an absolute smacking. Which is very unlikely as they don't like to make waves. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/7/2022 10:07:13 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Don't worry...unless Thomas writes an absolute scathing decision in the NYSRPA case, NY will ban all semi auto guns without grandfathering soon too. I'd give it 5 years. Unless SCOTUS gives NY an absolute smacking. Which is very unlikely as they don't like to make waves. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/7/2022 11:17:00 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: NY depends on Federal Regulations, then fucks around with them and we end up with the stupid shit we have; and IF you're jammed up you might as well kiss it good by as it's likely going to be cheaper to surrender it with a plea deal to a lesser, bullshit charge than to fight it...how else do you think DA's get convictions? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/7/2022 11:19:20 AM EDT
[#35]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/7/2022 11:34:12 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The semi auto rifle ban? That's just new sales. This "others" ban - Nope...no grandfathering. If you have an other, it's a felony soon. Nice right? Don't worry...unless Thomas writes an absolute scathing decision in the NYSRPA case, NY will ban all semi auto guns without grandfathering soon too. I'd give it 5 years. Unless SCOTUS gives NY an absolute smacking. Which is very unlikely as they don't like to make waves. Simple possession is a misdemeanor. I don't know if the difference would influence anybody's decision on what to do with them. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File