Posted: 11/8/2008 11:53:54 AM EDT
|
If this has already been covered I apologize.
Is having lowers enough in case of a AWB, or do they have to be complete? |
|
Quoted:
Well gee it would depend on the text of a bill that has neither been writtten nor voted upon, so how would anyone know? In the last AWB you had to have complete rifles or kits - a stripped lower was not good enough. Well gee, thanks for answering my question. |
|
Quoted:
Well gee it would depend on the text of a bill that has neither been writtten nor voted upon, so how would anyone know? In the last AWB you had to have complete rifles or kits - a stripped lower was not good enough. How would the gov know if it was complete or not? Parts are not registered. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well gee it would depend on the text of a bill that has neither been writtten nor voted upon, so how would anyone know? In the last AWB you had to have complete rifles or kits - a stripped lower was not good enough. How would the gov know if it was complete or not? Parts are not registered. Indeed!? |
|
No.
Threaded bbl's Flash suppressors Folding/collapsable stocks High capicity magazines These were what the last AWB was all about. There was also the bayonet lugs but personally a bayonet on an AR is silly to me. ETA: I took two bbl's in today to get threaded, bought two flash suppressors and two collapsable stocks. |
|
Quoted:
Well gee it would depend on the text of a bill that has neither been writtten nor voted upon, so how would anyone know? In the last AWB you had to have complete rifles or kits - a stripped lower was not good enough. And the last AWB was never challenged in court . So maybe just a stripped lower would of held up . I don't think anyone was ever charged federally even. There was one case of a dealer being charged but I think that was for the CA state ban. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well gee it would depend on the text of a bill that has neither been writtten nor voted upon, so how would anyone know? In the last AWB you had to have complete rifles or kits - a stripped lower was not good enough. How would the gov know if it was complete or not? Parts are not registered. They didn't need to - it was up to you to PROVE the rifle was a kit or completed rifle. Lots of people missed that point in the orginal AWB. It was illegal to have an banned weapon (with the features) PERIOD. The law provided a positive defense of saying if the rifle had been in that configuration prior to 13 Sept 94 then the law would not apply., In writing the law that way all they had to prove is you had a rifle with the banned features - it was up to you to show your rifle falls under the 'grandfather clause'. IIRC it's the same setup as some drug laws. |