Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 8/2/2001 7:43:48 AM EST
Is it legal for a non LEO to buy a LE only lower if you remove the collapsible stock and replace it with a standard stock and use a post ban upper?
Link Posted: 8/2/2001 7:52:29 AM EST
As ridiculous as it sounds, No it is not legal. Once a LEO Lower, Always a LEO Lower.
Link Posted: 8/2/2001 2:23:03 PM EST
Actually, a several weeks ago we had a very long discussion on this very topic. Some said 'Yea', some said 'Nea.' Steve in Virginia, the forum moderator, wrote ATF a letter asking for clarification and we are currently awaiting the reply. It may be a few more weeks before we get the response as ATF dosen't exactly burn the midnight oil on answering these questions. They DO answer, but it takes a while. Gov't agency remember?
Link Posted: 8/2/2001 2:29:03 PM EST
It be legal it depends on tree things: #1 How deep is the LEO samped? #2Can you file it off? #3do you have the same paint they origionally used on it? You did not hear this from me but if any one asks my name is Bob Smith[;)]
Link Posted: 8/2/2001 3:09:41 PM EST
If the LE Only rifle was legally obtained by the original dealer and end-user, and not a rifle purchased for the purpose of parting out or any other illegal purpose, then its status as a post-ban, semiautomatic assault weapon (SAW) ends when it is reduced to a stripped lower or when the number of "evil" features is reduced to only one. Since it is no longer a SAW as defined in Title 18, USC 921(a)(30), it is no longer regulated under Title 18, USC 922 (v)(1). There is no law currently on the books making it illegal for a non-LEO or authorized agency to possess a rifle marked for government or law enforcement use only if the weapon is not in SAW configuration as defined in Title 18, USC 921(a)(30). The only problem a non-LEO owner of such a weapon would be how to explain possession to an officer who doesn't know the law. It will be interesting to see BATF's answer since they apparently haven't promulgated any regulations essentially saying "Once a LEO Lower, Always a LEO Lower," as they have with machineguns. We'll see...
Link Posted: 8/2/2001 3:49:43 PM EST
The ruling I was thinking of is: [url]http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/atf_letter11.txt[/url] But rereading it I see this only precludes Dealers from purchasing LEO Assault Weapons with the intention of parting out (selling parts seperately). I am curious what the BATF will rule. I'm thinking that most likely it will be negative.
Link Posted: 8/2/2001 4:35:22 PM EST
Dave G is right. the class 3 dealer, out here in Chandler, AZ, has the lowers. although it is legal for him to sell them to non-LEO's he won't do it. He is concerned about someone configuring it into LE only form, then getting into trouble with the weapon.
Link Posted: 8/2/2001 4:45:43 PM EST
i bet atf will rule once a AW always a AW
Link Posted: 8/2/2001 5:43:48 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/2/2001 5:40:27 PM EST by rkbar15]
The intent of stamping a lower with LE/Export only markings was to restrict it LE and Export transfers. Even though the lower does not define the rifle as a SAW I would venture to guess that the ATF will issue a ruling similar to the restriction already in effect to dealers prohibiting parting them out. Nothing will change as the dealers will buy cheap LE/Export rifles and sell the uppers as they do now. Even if they throw the lowers away they will still make money on the deal. Who wants a LE/Export marked lower anyway?
Link Posted: 8/3/2001 4:04:10 PM EST
Dave_G head it right on the head. IN VERY SIMPLE TERMS: In order for it to be illegal to possess an item there needs to be a law or regulation that says possession of said item is illegal. There is no such Federal law or regulation when it comes to possessing a LEO marked lower. Do note that it is the ATF's position that ownership of rifles marked AR-15 (ie, 6721 and 6520) is restricted.
Link Posted: 8/3/2001 4:38:25 PM EST
There is no such Federal law or regulation when it comes to possessing a LEO marked lower.
View Quote
Actually, there might be. The Assualt Weapons Ban. The AR15 lower receiver is not simply another gun part in the eyes of the BATF its the gun. It could be the BATF's view that simply possessing the lower itself is in violation of the Assault Weapon Ban. Just have to wait and see what BATF says in response to Steve's letter. Gun Laws Suck!
Link Posted: 8/3/2001 6:34:10 PM EST
If you could be so kind as to point this law or regulation out to me I would appreciate it. thanks
Top Top