Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Durkin Tactical Franklin Armory
User Panel

Posted: 1/2/2003 7:04:13 PM EDT
With homebuilt firearms does pre or post ban mean anything? (who can prove it?)
Link Posted: 1/2/2003 7:07:40 PM EDT
IANAA (I am not an attorney) - but my understanding is that you're guilty until you can prove yourself innocent. :)

Link Posted: 1/2/2003 7:10:23 PM EDT
By homebuilt are you referring to an 80% lower receiver project?  If so, The [b]B[/b]ureau [b]A[/b]gainst [b]T[/b]hings[b] F[/b]un would sufficiently be able to research/investigate/prove pre-vs-post status.  Any other manufactured lower receiver would simply be a matter of its respective serial #.

Edited to add kestrou is absolutely correct; why chance it?  Not implying you would (or were even contemplating or condoning such a legal infraction) but would it really be worth the possible revocation of your personal firearms ownership rights?
Link Posted: 1/2/2003 9:47:42 PM EDT
I have long since given up  entirely on the whole thing (I tryed once to build 2 but by the time they were done they were SO UGLY that I destroyed them and threw them away.

I was just trying to figure out why anyone would do this when for $60 you can BUY AN OLY ARMS CAST reciever (these 80%'s aren't forged anyway.)

Even as a group buy this will cost at least $100 a piece (probably more) and you will end up with an INFERIOR product. (those TS recievers are not even close to any spec comercially sold.)
Link Posted: 1/2/2003 9:49:57 PM EDT
Besides what would they do CARBON DATE THE ALUMINUM ??? (carbon dating is flawed)

Is this paranoia or Fact.
Link Posted: 1/2/2003 11:33:44 PM EDT
Not related to the parent post, but...

Carbon dating is NOT flawed, despite what any number of scientifically unqualified cults and associated mystics would preach.

You're right about not carbon dating aluminum. You could conceivably use some other radioisotope, but not carbon, since it is not ingested by the aluminum, and the technique is not usable for dating short periods of time.

To contribute something to the parent post, I'm not sure the ATF would put in the effort, but it'd be a [relatively] simple matter to match tool marks on your equipment to the lower. Past that, they could vacuum up shavings, and compare metallic composition to your lower. Just.. don't do it.
Link Posted: 1/3/2003 5:19:39 AM EDT
... it'd be a [relatively] simple matter to match tool marks on your equipment to the lower. Past that, they could vacuum up shavings, and compare metallic composition to your lower.
View Quote

Don't forget that ATF can also take scrapings from under your finger nails to see when you did indeed work on that lower.  They match the metal atoms to the boogers atoms from the scrapings and compile a time line.  And if you took a dump and not wash your hands, they will know that too.

What would the tools marks or shavings prove?  Just that this piece of metal was cut by this tool.  Was it cut in 1955, 1965, 1975 or 2015?

If you guys want to talk isotopes, just think about half-life.  Nothing we have today can tell if this piece of metal was cut last year or last decade.  The best that could be done would probably be an age determination of the base metal to +/- 25 years.  I can analyze some metal or alloy and chart/graph it and then tell you that it was made in 2010 and it would look correct.  Have spent 2 years working on NMR (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance) and the trace detection of heavy metals, mainly cadminum and mercury so I'm aware of the limitations.  The CSI shows on TV are really driving up imaginations.
Link Posted: 1/3/2003 7:45:49 AM EDT
The carbon dating is flawed (scientists do not believe that Humans (homoerectus) and dinosaurs coexhisted- Yet there is a place in Texas where you can see dinosaur tracks in a riverbed (unearthed in the 1930's by  abnormally fast-flowing conditions WITH HUMAN TRACKS INSIDE THESE FOOTPRINTS. (I think this is Odessa TX north of Waco.)

Also a Australian ship was found in the Pacific Ocean and dated back thousands of years (then the geniuses found a bottle of whiskey in the wreck dated 1750 and the ships log confirming this date.
Link Posted: 1/3/2003 8:58:45 AM EDT
I simply wouldn't want to chance configuring any non-verifiable rifle as pre-ban.  As far as the BATF is concerned, you are guilty until proven innocent.  Just ask Randy Weaver.
Link Posted: 1/3/2003 9:09:05 AM EDT
Unlike modern science, juries need not be impartial, or even certain of the results to come to a conclusion. Metallurgical analysis on chips would prove that the lower was forged on that particular tool. Past there, they can convince the jury that given the amount of use for the machine, chips should have long since disappeared (fallacy), or that tool marks from bits and mills would have long since been obliterated from the tooling (fallacy). If you mothballed your 8 year old machine with old cosmoline, ground down/polished your tools, and made sure nobody knew, things would be OK...

I'm not sure I'd want to take that much effort to commit a felony, though. The ATF will do whatever it takes, including lying and falsifying evidence, to secure a conviction. It's only that much easier if you give them something to start with.

WRT carbon dating.. I wasn't *saying* that you could use other isotopes, it was mere speculation, hence the word "conceivably." I was elaborating on the point that carbon dating isn't the technique to be used.

Green0: I can't find any reference to the ship in the pacific, but errors do occur in any scientific process. That's why evidence from the ship's log and the whiskey bottle would be useful. This is all part of the scientific process. Given that radiocarbon dating, and conventional techniques agree with the sane perspective on the coexistence of man and dinosaur, this is the best idea, until contrary evidence comes about. The Paluxy River anomaly/hoaxes have been debunked for some time now.
Link Posted: 1/3/2003 9:48:22 AM EDT
I was just trying to get some ideas on WHY PEOPLE WOULD Pay more for a Home Built than for a Mil-Spec FORGED Lower (IE$100 CMT or $110 RRA or OLYARMS, or EAGLE ARMS.

I built the 2 as above stated and I thought it was the dumbest thing I ever did. (paying $60 a reciever more for less quality.)
Link Posted: 1/3/2003 10:28:31 AM EDT
Yo Ho there GreenO...It appears you have more to say than you do to ask, eh...sniff, sniff,sniff...I smell [:K] Maybe you can set me straight on that...are ya [:K]'ing or are you asking something about BIY? The choice between building a rifle & assembling one from parts has been addressed many times on this board. A quick look back through the posts wooda cured your "query". If you're [:K]'ing I'll be happy to run & get the firewood for a BIG [:K] BBQ!!!

Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! 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.

By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top