I'd like to get clarification/opinion on this scenario. I think I know the answer but would appreciate confirmation from others here.
A person purchases a new Colt Competition HBAR (complete factory rifle) in July 94. So what we have is a rifle purchased preban "BUT" the factory competition HBAR was not sold with a telescoping stock, bayonet mount or a flash suppressor.
Now the question is... "Is this considered a Preban SAW and can the LOWER now be used to build a carbine with telescoping stock, flash suppressor, etc.?"
I guess the real question is... "Are ALL AR15 type rifles sold before sept 94 considered preban SAWs whether OR NOT they had telescoping stock, bayonet mount or a flash suppressor at that time?"

In theroy , no you cannot.

In practice, I doubt anyone will care unless you rob a bank or something with it and they are feeling REALLY creative.

What made me believe otherwise was this part of the law

[b](Section 921 (a) (30), Title 18 U.S.C.) defines it as so:

Any of the firearms, or copies or duplicates of the firearms in any caliber, known as;
Norinco, Mitchell, Poly Technologies, Avtomat Kalashinikovs.
Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI, Galil.
Beretta Ar70 (SC-70).
[red]Colt AR-15[/red]
Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, FNC.
SWD M-10, M-11, M-11-9, M-12.
Steyr AUG.
Intratec TEC-9, TEC-DC9, TEC-22.
Revolving cylinder shotguns, such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12.[/b]

Is a COLT only an "AR15" if it's stamped AR15 on the receiver or are all configurations including the HBAR considered "AR15s"?

Also worth noting is the fact that serial numbers beginning with "CH" are shown on the Colt Preban cutoff list. "CH" is specific to the HBAR model. This seems to indicate the early HBARs are considered "preban" SAWs.

Yes, if it doesn't say "AR-15" its not an AR-15

Since the gun was not configured as an "assault weapon" PRIOR to the ban, changing it to include the evil features after the ban would be manufacturing an illegal "assault weapon."

Is it really worth the potential prison time and loss of ALL your firearms FOR LIFE to do this? The risk of getting caught is low, but the consequences are extremely high.

It really is a convoluted law.

Ahhhhh correction! I was just informed this HBAR was purchased new in July 94 equipped with a "flash suppressor". This revelation does change the whole scenario and my interpretation is now that it is a "preban SAW" and can now be configured with other evil features such as bayo lug and telescoping stock...
--RR

You're fucked.

YOU purchased it in a post ban condition. Correct?

Since the rifle has exchanged hands in a non-grandfatherable state, it has lost any grandfathered status it may have had.

Latest ruling is it must stay in pre-ban configuration if it is to keep it's grandfathered status.

No, not fucked. I have not purchased it yet. I have only seen pics and up to now had only seen pics of the receiver closeup so mistakingly thought it didn't have a flash suppressor. I'm purchasing the gun from the original owner who is giving me the original dated and serial numbered sales receipt. I now have have been informed it is NIB (blue lable) never altered and it does and always did have flash suppressor. So, I still believe it is perfectly legal for me to purchase the rifle and outfit it with a M4 upper, suppressor, lug and Vltor telescoping stock.
Of course I'll keep the HBAR upper as well and have the option to change uppers at will.
--RR

What about when you dis-assemble the [pre-ban] upper from lower for cleaning? It is still a legal gun but has lost the evil features, and is thus in post-ban configuration. Are you saying you cannot now put the [pre-ban] upper back on?


Can you post or provide link to that ruling?

From the Legal Issues section on this site:

"What it all boils down to is when the GUN was built. Edward M. Owen, Jr., Chief of the Firearms Technology Branch of the BATF, has this to say:

"Semiautomatic pistols and rifles assembled after September 13, 1994, [b]and possessing two or more of the features listed[/b] in [Section 921 (a) (30), Title 18 U.S.C.] are semiautomatic assault weapons as defined. The fact that the receiver may have been manufactured prior to September 13, 1994, is immaterial to classification of a weapon as a semiautomatic assault weapon. Additionally, payment or non-payment of excise tax is also immaterial to classification of a firearm as semiautomatic assault weapon."
What he is stating is, as far as pre-ban and post-ban is concerned, the date of manufacture of the receiver has nothing to do with anything. If your SAW was built into a whole SAW, or in a complete kit form, before Sept. 13, 1994 (The Date), you are the lucky owner of a pre-ban receiver. If the gun was built after this date, or if the receiver was without all of the parts to make a SAW as of The Date, then it is post-ban." emphasis added.

It had to be a SAW (at least two evil features), not just a gun prior to Sept. 13, 1994. Of course, since this particular gun had a second evil feature prior to 1994, it is a Pre-ban.

Yes, so there is the confirmation. The HBAR was built and sold in July 94 complete with a flash suppressor. Thus, according to the above, I will be [b]the lucky owner of a pre-ban receiver.[/b]

Guys, all the nit picking & legal hair splitting will fall by the wayside if we do our part to prevent the AW ban from being re-authorized (or made MUCH worse) next September!!!

To this end, I direct you to...

[url=www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=203989]The Essential "End the AW Ban" Contact List & Sample Letter Thread[/url]

There is no fate but the fate we make...

IF it had the flash hider, it is a legal pre-ban. Plain and simple.

As for my previos statement, i must clarify it a bit. The rifle must stay in a pre-ban configuration IF IT EXCHANGES OWNERSHIP to keep it's grandfathered status.

Allow me to elaborate. A stripped receiver cannot be bought as a pre-ban, unless it is stamped "Colt AR-15".

A lower is a firearm, but is not and cannot be a grandfathered assault weapon unless it is banned by name, i.e. "Colt AR-15".

Amen brother!

I believe you are wrong on all counts. Since the receiver is legally the firearm, if it was a legal AW on 13 September 1994, it is ALWAYS a legal pre-ban. Do you have a written BATFE finding that says otherwise?

As for a weapon needing to be stamped "Colt AR-15" in order to be a preban, you need to note that the law specifically states: (emphasis added). This covers ALL AR clones, by any manufacturer. Plus, the rest of the law spells out what constitutes an "assault weapon," just in case they missed any by name.

I agree we all need to keep fighting to end this absurd law, but until it sunsets you should understand what it covers. A conviction under the AWB means PERMANENT loss of your right to own any firearm.

I will answer that question.

First, i ask you a question. What is an assault weapon?

According to Title 18, part 1, chapter 44, sec. 921 of USC, an assault weapon is defined as "any of the firearms, or copies or duplicates of the firearms in any caliber, known as -

(i)

Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models);

(ii)

Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil;

(iii)

Beretta Ar70 (SC-70);

(iv)

Colt AR-15;

(v)

Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, and FNC;

(vi)

SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9, and M-12;

(vii)

Steyr AUG;

(viii)

INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and

(ix)

revolving cylinder shotguns, such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12;

(B)

a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of -

(i)

a folding or telescoping stock;

(ii)

a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;

(iii)

a bayonet mount;

(iv)

a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and

(v)

a grenade launcher;

(C)

a semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of -

(i)

an ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip;

(ii)

a threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer;

(iii)

a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned;

(iv)

a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; and

(v)

a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm; and

(D)

a semiautomatic shotgun that has at least 2 of -

(i)

a folding or telescoping stock;

(ii)

a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;

(iii)

a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 5 rounds; and

(iv)

an ability to accept a detachable magazine. "

So, we have a problem with your argument.

While i concur that a lower receiver is a firearm as defined by law, it is not an assault weapon unless marked "Colt AR-15".

Does a lower have 2 or more of the banned features? you say "Yes", if a collapseable stock is mounted. Incorrect. While a lower is a firearm, it isn't a SEMIAUTOMATIC firearm. there are pump uppers. single shot uppers. Point is, it isn't necesarily semi auto.

Therefore, a lower cannot be an assault weapon, unless marked "Colt AR-15".

If that's true there's a whole lotta people out there buying, selling and using stand alone receivers presumed to be "preban" and using them to build weapons with telescoping stocks, bayonet mounts and flash suppressors..... illegally?
--RR

The BATFE says otherwise.

The controlling factor is whether the receiver was in a gun (or full kit), with at least two evil features, prior to 13 September 1994. Write the Technology Branch of BATFE if you want the legal opinion of the people who make those calls. If you have a WRITTEN opinion from them that supports your unique interpretation, I will believe it.

detachable mag, flash hider

there's two

[edited] pistol grip

Please re-read my post.

It clearly states the definition of an AW.

A lower does not meet the legal definition of an assault rifle unless it is marked "Colt AR-15".

[red]"a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine [b]and [/b] has at least 2 of..." [/red]

a lower is a firearm, but not necessarily a rifle. Nor is it necesarily semi automatic.

Is it not possible to use a pump upper?
a pump is not a SAW.

IS it not possible to make said lower into a single shot?
a single shot is not a SAW.

The law is very clear for those who are literate.

As for the letter reguarding the loss of [re-ban status, i will see if i can find it. It hasn't shown up here in a while, but i'll dig.

I don't have a copy of the actual letter, but here is the text of it:

********************************************
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO AND FIREARMS
WASHINGTON, DC 20226

NOV 16 2001

Dear Mr. XXXXXXXXXX:

This refers to your letter of March 19, 2001, in which you ask about the
status of certain semiautomatic assault weapons which have been altered
to another configuration.

As defined in section 921(a)(30), of Title 18, United States Code
(U.S.C, the term "semiautomatic assault weapon" includes certain named
weapons and certain semiautomatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns that
have a combination of enumerated features. Title 18 U.S.C. section
922(v)(1) prohibits manufacture, transfer, and possession of
semiautomatic assault weapons; however, section 922(v)(2) provides that
any semiautomatic assault weapon that was lawfully possessed under
Federal law on September 13, 1994, is excluded from the prohibition.

[red]A frame or receiver of a semiautomatic assault weapon, meets the
definition of a "firearm" in 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(3); however, a
firearm frame or receiver alone, without the additional qualifying
features, does not meet the definition of a "semiautomatic assault
weapon" in section 921(a)(30). Therefore, a firearm frame or receiver
does not meet the exemption in section 922(v)(2). [/red]

We have also determined that a semiautomatic assault weapon in knockdown
(unassembled) condition consisting of a receiver and all parts needed to
assemble a complete semiautomatic assault weapon are subject to
regulation if the parts are segregated or packaged together and held by
a person as the parts for the assembly of a particular firearm.

You describe an AR15 type rifle that met the definition of a
semiautomatic assault weapon and was lawfully possessed on September 13,
1994. At some subsequent time the rifle was temporarily reassembled in a
configuration such that it no longer had the qualifying features of a
semiautomatic assault weapon. You asked if the original components could
then be lawfully reinstalled on the rifle.

Provided that the original components were held by the owner and
reinstalled on the rifle, it is our opinion that the rifle would still
qualify as an exempted semiautomatic assault weapon even though it had
been temporarily assembled in a different configuration. We note, that
mere disassembly of a semiautomatic weapon by an owner would not remove
the firearm from the definition of a semiautomatic assault weapon nor
would the reassembly constitute manufacture of a prohibited
semiautomatic assault weapon.
[red]
Your second question concerns a semiautomatic assault weapon that also
meets the exemption in section 922(v)(2). However, this firearm was
disassembled and the receiver, without other components, was sold. Since
the receiver is no longer possessed with all parts necessary to assemble
a complete semiautomatic assault weapon, it no longer meets the
definition of a semiautomatic assault weapon. The receiver does not meet
the exemption in section 922(v)(2) and assembly of this firearm in the
configuration of a semiautomatic assault weapon would be prohibited
under section 922(v)(1).[/red]

If you are interested in determining the status of a particular receiver
or semiautomatic assault weapon, you should contact the manufacturer or
importer and ask about the date that it was manufactured and the
configuration at the time of sale. It may also be necessary to contact
subsequent dealers and owners who possessed the firearm.

We regret the delay in responding to your inquiry. If you have further
questions concerning this matter, please contact us.


Sincerely yours,

Curtis H.A. Bartlett
Chief, Firearms Technology Branch"

Very interesting letter you have there. I have seen many "stand alone" lower receivers for sale (not marked Colt AR15) advertised as "preban" and I believe many potential buyers assume they can legally build Semiautomatic Assualt Weapons on them....
--RR

That's exactly the problem.

Many people, who think they are in compliance with the law, are not.

I try to warn people, but often time my help falls upon deaf ears.

Coudl you get away with buyign a stripped lower? sure. But remember, the burden of proof of grandfathered status lies in your hands. ATF need only prove that you are in possession of an assault weapon.


Let's jsut all hope, and fight, to get rid of this rediculous infringement called the assault weapon ban.

I'm not sure how this is to be interpreted regarding "CHANGING" specific assault weapon  components. Not "original components held by the owner and reinstalled on the rifle", but swapping components like changing to a Vltor stock or swapping to a different flash suppressor?
--RR

You can change out flash suppressors and buttstocks all you like legally. An example of what the letter is saying is that you have to have ownership of a pre-ban upper if you temporarily install a post-ban upper on it. You have effectively removed the pre-ban features from the rifle. Owning [red]only[/red] a post-ban upper with the pre-ban lower changes it permanently to a [b]POST-BAN[/b] lower according to the BATF.

Interesting read...

[url]http://www.falfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=69021[/url]

Ekie knows his stuff, and posted this thread on ARFCOM a few months back.

But again, this all becomes academic if we work our butts off!!!

CARPE DIEM

ekie has his moments.


obviously no one here listens to his pharisee bullshit, so he relocated his pulpit.

Yeah that is an interesating read. getting back to my original question... I have an oppurtunity to purchase a NIB Colt Competition HBAR from the original owner. He bought the complete weapon new at a local gun store in July 94 and has the receipt. He will be giving me the receipt which is dated and has gun serial number as well (CH 016***). The weapon has never been altered in anyway since purchased new. The only evil feature the gun has is a Flash Supressor. It does not have a telescoping stock or bayo lug.
OK, the question is.... If I buy the weapon can I legally put a Preban M4 upper receiver on it, flash supressor, bayonet lug and telescoping stock? In other words convert it to an M4gery. And YES, I will also keep the original upper in my possesion.
--RR

Yes.

The receipt is worth it's weight in gold.

When the rifle was purchased, on the date of the receipt, It was a semiautomatic assault rifle. THerefore, it is grandfathered as such.

Remember, an assault weapon has two or more banned features. A protruding pistol grip and a flash hider makes that two. Assault weapon. Nothing else is needed.

[banana]