I have been trying to sell a preban lower in the equipment exchange for some time.  I have received an offer for the lower, but the buyer would like a notorized letter from me stating this is from a real preban assembled rifle.  I know the rifle was purchased in 1992, and was a complete weapon at that time.  It had the collapsable stock, a flash hider bayonnet lug.  So I think it is a real preban SAW.  Am I correct in this?  What sort of letter should I type up and get notorized?  Are there certain things that should be included or excluded?  I am not trying to hide anything, I am just unsure of how to write this.  Any help is greatly appriciated.

Jeff

If it were me, I'd just state my name and address, and that I have personal knowledge that the rifle in question (give serial number, make, etc) was a complete, assembled rifle with such and such features as of (whatever date is your earliest personal experience).

The letter is not strictly necessary under the law, for a private buyer and seller, but I'd certainly require one or some other proof before I'd purchase a pre-ban.

The notarizing is gilding the lily, in my opinion. A signed statement is good enough, according to the ATF FAQ, for a dealer, so it should be good enough for a private buyer.  If you feel like getting it notarized, go for it.  Hopefully your bank will do it free of charge, otherwise I'd charge the buyer for the notary fee, though.

Scoobydo

I sent you the email offer for the lower if you would send me a notarized letter stating its preban status. I already purchased another lower after waiting 5 days for a response from you.  I think you will have little trouble selling it if you repost again stating that you will provide such documentation.  Good luck

Tom

Who made the lower? Why don't you just contact the maker and ask for a letter from them stating the status of the lower in question.

I called Bushmaster and asked them to send me a letter stating that my rifle was produced as a complete rifle before the ban. They did so, at no cost to me, and I had the letter in a week.

At worst, you might get charged $5.00 from another company. Big deal, add the cost to the lowers price when you sell it.

Simple problem, simple solution.....unless it's an Oly Arms lower, then you might be in trouble.

That would be a simple solution, but this is an Olympic lower.  We all know the story with this manufacturer.

Tom, no worries.  Actually several people asked for this kind of letter.

Hey Chuck, with your reasoning I can argue that a brand new Colt's Match Target is a restricted item.

does it specifically say it can't have a flash suppressor or just a threaded barrel.?

Chuck couldn't be more wrong.  

Title 18 USC 921(a)(30) provides that the term ''semiautomatic assault weapon” describes certain named weapons, and rifle, handguns and shotguns that meet certain criteria as to the number of “evil features.”  If the weapon meets that criteria, it is a semiautomatic assault weapon, regardless of date of manufacture or assembly.

Title 18 USC 922(v)(1) provides that:

(1)  It shall be unlawful for a person to manufacture, transfer, or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon.  

(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of the enactment of this subsection.

So, a “post-ban” AR15-type rifle with only one defined feature, the pistol grip, would not legally be an assault weapon.  

The somewhat misleading terms "preban" and "postban" were coined to differentiate the legally grandfathered semiautomatic assault weapons (preban) and the legally configured semiautomatic weapons (postban).  For the purposes of the law, a rifle that was not identified by name and had only one evil feature prior to 9/13/1994 is not a grandfathered semiautomatic assault weapon and must remain in "postban" configuration to be legal.

I don't think it's out of line for the buyer to request a letter of confirmation. Just put down your name and address and information you know to be true that it is a Pre-Ban. I wouldn't charge extra for that, if the guy wants the letter notarized I might charge what it cost.

My HO, that is just bad business.  There is nothing taxing about affirming the truth, as you know it, based on personal knowledge.  If the notary charges five bucks, tack that on, but don't charge a nuisance fee for a prospective buyer's peace of mind.

Chuck,
I thought you would be sharp enough to pick up on the fact that I was summarizing 18 U.S.C. sec. 921(a)(30).  By the way, until your last post, scoobydo's topic concerned a generic "preban lower."  No mention that we were only discussing "AR15s" until you were caught with your shirt tails out and tried, and failed, to cover your error.
Here's the actual language, emphasis added...

[b]18 U.S.C. sec. 921(a)(30)[/b]:
[b][green]The term "semiautomatic assault weapon" means--[/b][/green]

[b](A) any of the firearms, or copies or duplicates of the firearms in any caliber, known as-- [/b]
[*](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](B) a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of-- [/b]
[*](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; [/*]

[b](C) a semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of-- [/b]
[*]((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 [/*]

[b](D) a semiautomatic shotgun that has at least 2 of--[/b]
[*](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.[/*]

[b][red]Note that there is no reference to any date of enactment for the purpose of defining what a semiautomatic assault weapon is.  If it's on the list or meets the criteria, it's a semiautomatic assault weapon.[/b][/red]

[b]18 U.S.C. sec. 922 (v)[/b]:
[*](1) It shall be unlawful for a person to manufacture, transfer, or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon. [/*]
[*](2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of the enactment of this subsection. [/*]
[*](3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to-- [/*]

{18 USC 922(v) goes on with more exceptions.  If you want to read them, go to this URL.  [url]http://www.impactsites2000.com/site3/94bill.htm[/url].  It's the Illinois Firearm Resource Webpage covering the 1994 Crime Bill.

 

Chuck some how you got 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(30) part (A) and (B) separated.  They are both definitions of a semiautomatic assault rifle.  This confusion is no doubt due to the fact that the ATF has largely ignored (A) the list of firearms.  It is pretty safe to assume that this list has not been enforced by the ATF due to the difficult legal history of such lists in State law.  

If the ATF would have interpreted the law stickily any "AR-15 type rifle" such as a Match Target would also be a semiautomatic assault rifle simply because it is a "AR-15 clone".  In such case you would be correct in saying all "AR-15 type rifles" would be grand fathered assault rifles as long as they where legally possessed on 09-13-94.

This is kinda of interesting in that it one could make a strong argument that a rifle such as a 1993 production Eagle Arms Eagle Eye is a grand fathered assault rifle.  Well sure it does not meet the definition of a semiautomatic assault rifle under 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(30)(B) but it does under (A) as in "any of the firearms, or copies or duplicates or the firearms in any caliber, known as..... (iv) Colt AR-15."  Same argument would apply to say a MAK90 or a CAI FAL type sporter.

As I eluded to above there is two problems with the legal idea of grand fathering rifles under 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(30)(A).  First off these types of list have not faired well in court, secondly such interpretation would make any "AR-15 type" rifle (along with a few others) produced after 09-13-94 a semiautomatic assault rifle and thus restricted.

For those into ATF trivia it appears the ATF is prepared to make a case that post 09-13-94 semiautomatic rifle that does not meet the definition of a semiautomatic assault rifle under 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(30)(B), but has the roll mark AR-15 is a restricted semiautomatic assault rifle under 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(30)(A).

Think we will all have this figured out before it expires?  I doubt it.

When does it expire?

Dan

September 13th, 2004.