Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 10/22/2003 9:29:24 PM EDT
Is a post-ban upper on a restricted lower legal? I would think that as long as the lower was purchased alone it could legally be built without the evil features.

If not, will AR's (and mags for that matter) marked "restricted" be legal to own after the ban?

Thanks.
Link Posted: 10/22/2003 10:23:04 PM EDT
I think restricted is the operative word here. What would be the point?
Link Posted: 10/23/2003 4:58:08 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Austin_Nichols: Is a post-ban upper on a restricted lower legal? I would think that as long as the lower was purchased alone it could legally be built without the evil features. If not, will AR's (and mags for that matter) marked "restricted" be legal to own after the ban? Thanks.
View Quote
Yes , and yes
Link Posted: 10/23/2003 5:13:27 AM EDT
100% legal to do. The LEO only markings only denote a post ban manufactured rifle that is in preban form. I have a letter from ATF that states a individual may own as long as the lower is legaly acquired and not in pre-ban form. Cruizer
Link Posted: 10/23/2003 6:03:28 AM EDT
Legally? No question, since it is configured as a post ban weapon it would be legal. However, if a non knowlegeable Law Enforcement Officer were to see your rifle, be prepared to be hassled.
Link Posted: 10/23/2003 9:38:26 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Vinnie: Legally? No question, since it is configured as a post ban weapon it would be legal. However, if a non knowlegeable Law Enforcement Officer were to see your rifle, be prepared to be hassled.
View Quote
Thats the only problem with haveing a LEO marked lower. Cruizer
Link Posted: 10/24/2003 6:48:08 PM EDT
Originally Posted By joker581: I think restricted is the operative word here. What would be the point?
View Quote
It's the only way to get a new Colt lower that isn't marked "Match Target". Not that it's a big deal....
Link Posted: 10/24/2003 10:58:11 PM EDT
Why not just wait another 12 months, then it wouldn't be an issue.
Link Posted: 10/25/2003 5:23:03 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Austin_Nichols:
Originally Posted By joker581: I think restricted is the operative word here. What would be the point?
View Quote
It's the only way to get a new Colt lower that isn't marked "Match Target". Not that it's a big deal....
View Quote
You also get a small front push pin and small fire control parts. Some still have a sear block. Cruizer
Link Posted: 10/25/2003 7:55:50 AM EDT
Will anybody even sell you a restricted reciever?
Link Posted: 10/25/2003 1:32:28 PM EDT
Most people will. Your best bet is to do a face to face deal. Most dealers will not want to be involved in a transfer.
Link Posted: 10/25/2003 1:40:12 PM EDT
Technically, any manufacturer can sell an LEO marked lower to a dealer and the dealer can sell it to you, if it's not configured as a pre-ban. But, it's unlikely that any manufacturer would actually do that. They're a bit timid on touchy subjects like this. I know, I've been around and around with some of them on a related topic. A police department could part out its rifles and sell the lower to you, if they were so inclined. CJ
Link Posted: 10/25/2003 4:37:58 PM EDT
How many times do we have to go over this. You cannot own a restricted lower as it is registered a an assualt weapon made after 1994. as a manufacture any weapon made as a assualt weapon has to be marked for leo and export only and is resticted. The only possible ay this might wok is to mark a lower after it was manufactured as then the manufacture isnt liable. hope this helps
Link Posted: 10/25/2003 7:03:15 PM EDT
THAT IS ABSOLUTELY WRONG. I have made a considerable, in-depth study of the matter, and it is IMPOSSIBLE to prove by the letter of ANY part of the United States Code or the Code of Federal Regulations that mere ownership of an LEO-marked lower receiver, stripped or complete, or a rifle built from such a receiver is illegal for civilians, so long as the rifle is post-ban compliant in its configuration. Ownership of an LEO marked lower is NOT prohibited by any law in the U.S.C. or the CFR, PERIOD. The restrictions surrounding an LEO marked lower are as follows: A dealer may not purchase complete LEO rifles for the purpose of disassembly for resale of the individual components. This restriction does NOT apply to a law enforcement or government organization that owns them. Your local department could part out their LEO marked rifles and sell the lower to anyone who passes the background check, as long as it wasn't configured with a collapsible stock at the time of transfer. Nor can it have one later if in civilian hands. (Restriction applicable to the AW ban, to disappear when the ban sunsets next year.) If a rifle built on an LEO lower receiver is transferred to civilian ownership, it can not be in a pre-ban configuration. That's about it. If you persist in thinking otherwise, BACK IT UP WITH THE TEXT OF THE RELEVANT LAW. And you can't do that because it doesn't exist. I've researched it enough to know. CJ
Link Posted: 10/26/2003 7:48:37 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/26/2003 9:45:56 AM EDT by imcoltsguy]
Not worth the hassle. If Colt won't make lowers with standard size takedown and fire control pins, buy something else. Maybe someday the incredibly long run of stupid Colt executives and owners [buttkick] will come to an end and Colt will again be competitive with all their imitators, which--by the way--came into existence mostly because Colt wouldn't supply the market as well as they could have. I like Colt products (the name, get it) but can't support the decisions that have been made in Hartford for many years, decisions that have almost put a legendary company out of business. [chair]
Link Posted: 10/26/2003 8:04:34 AM EDT
I dare say that you could find better leadership for Colt at the local homeless shelter. CJ
Link Posted: 10/26/2003 6:49:59 PM EDT
CJ your gonna fuck around and get some of these guys in trouble with jonny law. IM gonna crack open my green atf book and sight were i read that. now dont get me wrong if you had it marked it may be okay as ive marked some sear guns auto and never put a sear in them as i hate dias, but anything that came as leo only was registered with the batfe a assualt weapon, write atf or call the at 1-202-927-8330 and if you can prove me wrong ill buy you lunch
Link Posted: 10/26/2003 7:22:48 PM EDT
Here's an ATF opinion on the subject, in the first post in this thread, which I started and then I ended and requested that it be locked when its usefulness had apparently come to an end: [url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=2&f=28&t=140949&w=searchPop[/url] Read it and know I speak the truth. CJ
Link Posted: 10/29/2003 5:25:15 AM EDT
That replies to a retired leo officer, not a civilian. not anywere in that refered to a civilian.
Link Posted: 10/29/2003 8:40:28 AM EDT
Legally speaking, a former LEO is a civilian, same as you and me. That ruling applies to civilians as well. No matter how hard you try, you will not find anything in the written letter of the law that prohibits a civilian from possessing a post-ban configured rifle with the LEO markings on it. I absolutely guarantee it. I will accept nothing but the written letter of the law as proof to the contrary...IF you can find it, which you won't, because it doesn't exist. There simply is no language in the law that prohibits us from owning an LEO marked receiver so long as the rifle it's part of is post-ban compliant. And remember, BATF's opinion is just that...an opinion. It is not their task to create laws, but it is their task to provide a functional interpretation of firearms laws. However, their interpretations have to be relevant to the text of the law. They can't say you are not allowed to have a given item if it's not mentioned in the law. CJ
Link Posted: 10/29/2003 9:06:59 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/29/2003 11:29:51 AM EDT
If you are a DEALER, (That is, an FFL holder) then this is correct, you cannot purchase a complete LEO marked rifle for resale to non-LEO's. No argument there. However, you CAN purchase a lower alone from a manufacturer, and sell it to anyone who can pass the background check, but there is a bit of a grey area concerning whether or not you have to inform the manufacturer that this one is intended for a non-LEO. Presumably you CAN. Beyond question, any police department or governmental agency has the right to separate the lower from the upper and sell the marked lowers to anyone who is eligible to purchase a post-ban rifle...so long as the lower isn't configured as pre-ban. No folding or collapsible stock. In fact, if the rifle was obtained by that agency and its original factory configuration made it strictly post-ban compliant, there exists no obstacle within the written letter of the law that would prohibit a civilian from purchasing that rifle from the agency if it came up for sale. The law prohibits only DEALERS from selling pre-ban configured LEO marked products to the public. It does not prohibit non-dealers from doing so. Read it yourself. I hate going round and round on this issue because I've fought this battle before and won decisively. I'll do so again, but there's not really any point to it. I'm not in the market for another rifle at this point unless it's absurdly cheap, has a clean history, and is of exceptional quality. CJ
Top Top