Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 1/23/2002 5:39:08 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/23/2002 5:42:01 PM EST by Schnert]
Last year DPMS introduced the California legal AR lower without the magazine well. When I saw it in Shotgun News I began to wonder I could use that receiver as a platform for some pre-ban barrels that I've horded over the years. When I visited my local dealer I asked him his opinion. He said that I could not use that receiver to assemble a weapon with a tele-stock, bayonet lug and flash suppressor, because it was defined as an AR-15 receiver according to the assault weapon ban. I argued that I could use said receiver to assemble a rifle with tele-stock, bayonet lug and flash suppressor, because it could not accept a high capacity magazine. So, who is right?[argue] P.S. I've held off assembling such a weapon for two reasons: 1.) I didn't know who was right, and 2.) such a weapon is worthless. Nevertheless what do you think?
Link Posted: 1/23/2002 7:18:00 PM EST
your right becouse it doesnt accept a detachble magazine it is not covered by the crime bill. sou can have all the pre ban fetures u want. the whole ar15 type reciver BS is only in the caliban anyway i wish dealers would at least now the damn laws
Link Posted: 1/23/2002 7:30:11 PM EST
In Caliban territory, if you have a folding/telescopic stock on any gun it's an assault weapon. Atleast thats what a DOJ rep told me... - Dustin
Link Posted: 1/23/2002 9:03:00 PM EST
Top Top