User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/29/2014 6:15:46 PM EDT
[#1]
Sounds like a mess......I love these laws. It all depends on which state employee gets a hold of your papers. Thats exactly what should be expected from our shit show of a government. Each of us gets treated unfairly because none of them know exactly what to do.....
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2014 6:18:25 PM EDT
[#2]
Quoted:
Lady claims I can't register my 2 pistol barrels. Says the receiver needs to registered, i.e. The pistol itself. I told her my friends have recieved forms back, approved that are just for pistol barrels. I try to explain that it's clearly written that parts can be registered. And if I did register my pistols could I carry them if they had non-threaded barrels put in them. She put me on hold and came back to say she thinks that would be ok. I said no way. She goes on to say she'll talk to her sergeant and call me back tomorrow. She was nice, said she has never been asked the question about carrying a registered AW pistol with a regular barrel?? Really, never.... First fucking day?? I was as nice as I could be. But, no way am I gonna register 2 pistols because these people can't read the law. My inner asshole will be on call tomorrow waiting to pop out. tried the same thing didnt have time that day to talk so i just said ok |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2014 7:01:52 PM EDT
[#3]
I spoke with Det D'Matto<--? back in January, about the same issue. If i had a thrdd bbl for my g23, my daily carry with factory bbl would need to be locked in car unloaded. When I get out, in Walmart parking lot, the state wants me to load my firearm out in the open (loaded firearm a no no in vehicle so I couldn't do it there). He understood the issue and asked what bbl I usually kept in pistol, I said the non-threaded and he said not to worry about registering it
I asked about registering the bbl and he said, "Why would you want to do that?". 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2014 7:29:18 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I spoke with Det D'Matto<--? back in January, about the same issue. If i had a thrdd bbl for my g23, my daily carry with factory bbl would need to be locked in car unloaded. When I get out, in Walmart parking lot, the state wants me to load my firearm out in the open (loaded firearm a no no in vehicle so I couldn't do it there). He understood the issue and asked what bbl I usually kept in pistol, I said the non-threaded and he said not to worry about registering it
I asked about registering the bbl and he said, "Why would you want to do that?". 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2014 8:35:38 PM EDT
[#5]
InB4 No-Knock
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2014 8:37:54 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
InB4 No-Knock Don't worry. I don't have a dog! Their not coming. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2014 8:47:51 PM EDT
[#7]
Nice
We have documented examples of certs issued for threaded pistol barrels and denials for threaded pistol barrels.... 
Fucked up shit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2014 9:43:06 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nice We have documented examples of certs issued for threaded pistol barrels and denials for threaded pistol barrels....
Fucked up shit. Sounds like the atf and CT DPS have been hanging out 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 5:22:20 AM EDT
[#9]
You see how these laws frustrate the public to give up the gun culture. It's working as planned.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 6:53:12 AM EDT
[#10]
This sounds alot like a good basis for a lawsuit.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nice We have documented examples of certs issued for threaded pistol barrels and denials for threaded pistol barrels....
Fucked up shit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 7:27:44 AM EDT
[#11]
Quoted:
Lady claims I can't register my 2 pistol barrels. Says the receiver needs to registered, i.e. The pistol itself. I told her my friends have recieved forms back, approved that are just for pistol barrels. I try to explain that it's clearly written that parts can be registered. And if I did register my pistols could I carry them if they had non-threaded barrels put in them. She put me on hold and came back to say she thinks that would be ok. I said no way. She goes on to say she'll talk to her sergeant and call me back tomorrow. She was nice, said she has never been asked the question about carrying a registered AW pistol with a regular barrel?? Really, never.... First fucking day?? I was as nice as I could be. But, no way am I gonna register 2 pistols because these people can't read the law. My inner asshole will be on call tomorrow waiting to pop out. Good on you, there is nothing in the law legally permitting the carrying of a registered AW pistol even if not in AW configuration and DPS should not be advising people to do such, unless they let you register parts and conversion devices as the law states. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 7:29:05 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This sounds alot like a good basis for a lawsuit. Quote HistoryQuoted:
This sounds alot like a good basis for a lawsuit. Quoted:
Nice We have documented examples of certs issued for threaded pistol barrels and denials for threaded pistol barrels....
Fucked up shit. No kidding. Paging Attorney Rachel Baird... Attny Baird to the courtesy phone please... |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 8:12:05 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No giving up here! <a href="http://s1236.photobucket.com/user/pirrosnet/media/Mobile%20Uploads/2014-07/E71DA679-CA48-4C7B-BFA3-7F0F8C867DD2_zpss3j9na03.png.html" target="_blank">http://i1236.photobucket.com/albums/ff456/pirrosnet/Mobile%20Uploads/2014-07/E71DA679-CA48-4C7B-BFA3-7F0F8C867DD2_zpss3j9na03.png</a> Number 5, that's the one I'll be reading over and over and over to them on the phone today. We already have the exempt class, we don't need another class some with threaded barrels and others that got denied. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You see how these laws frustrate the public to give up the gun culture. It's working as planned. No giving up here! <a href="http://s1236.photobucket.com/user/pirrosnet/media/Mobile%20Uploads/2014-07/E71DA679-CA48-4C7B-BFA3-7F0F8C867DD2_zpss3j9na03.png.html" target="_blank">http://i1236.photobucket.com/albums/ff456/pirrosnet/Mobile%20Uploads/2014-07/E71DA679-CA48-4C7B-BFA3-7F0F8C867DD2_zpss3j9na03.png</a> Number 5, that's the one I'll be reading over and over and over to them on the phone today. We already have the exempt class, we don't need another class some with threaded barrels and others that got denied. Point them to the actual language of the law: Sec. 53-202a. Assault weapons: Definitions. As used in this section and sections 53-202b to 53-202k, inclusive: (1) “Assault weapon” means: .... (F) A part or combination of parts designed or intended to convert a firearm into an assault weapon, as defined in any provision of subparagraphs (B) to (E), inclusive, of this subdivision, or any combination of parts from which an assault weapon, as defined in any provision of subparagraphs (B) to (E), inclusive, of this subdivision, may be assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person; |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 9:05:01 AM EDT
[#15]
Be sure to point out to the State Police that they don't have the statutory authority to offer their opinions on the law; only to accept your registration.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 9:33:09 AM EDT
[#16]
They don't care about what the law says, they care about what they want to do. I think they want as many guns registered as possible, regardless of what the law says.
You want to SBR a pre-ban? Well then you have to register it. You want a threaded barrel on your pistol? Then you have to register your pistol. The letter of the law doesn't matter here, they are the gatekeepers. They tell you what you have to do and they'll arrest you if you don't obey. What is written on paper doesn't matter. They know the judges will back them up no matter what if it ever gets that far, but it likely never will get that far with one of the cases where DESPP is making up the rules as they go. Our only hope is to take the CCDL case all the way to SCOTUS and have this shit-bag law overturned. Oh yeah, one more example. Want to transfer your firearm to a trust? Just do it and pretend it isn't a transfer. We won't approve the transfer, but we won't press charges either. We only care who has possession, not ownership. Unless of course we change our minds later and arrest you for doing what we told you to do at the time. Fucking nut bags. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 9:41:37 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They don't care about what the law says, they care about what they want to do. I think they want as many guns registered as possible, regardless of what the law says. You want to SBR a pre-ban? Well then you have to register it. It should be noted that it is the ATF that is saying you have to register the preban SBR and not DESPP when one goes to create SBR from a preban. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 9:43:13 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Be sure to point out to the State Police that they don't have the statutory authority to offer their opinions on the law; only to accept your registration. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 9:46:19 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It should be noted that it is the ATF that is saying you have to register the preban SBR and not DESPP when one goes to create SBR from a preban. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
They don't care about what the law says, they care about what they want to do. I think they want as many guns registered as possible, regardless of what the law says. You want to SBR a pre-ban? Well then you have to register it. It should be noted that it is the ATF that is saying you have to register the preban SBR and not DESPP when one goes to create SBR from a preban. They couldn't possibly have picked up a phone and talked to each other? At this point they both know what the law states, yet they both are working toward having people register their pre-bans. I guess I'm just a conspiracy theorist. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 9:51:54 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Be sure to point out to the State Police that they don't have the statutory authority to offer their opinions on the law; only to accept your registration. When I spoke to them about my rejection, they had done so after first clarifying my registration submission with me, and then consulting their lawyers. Whoever their lawyers are...... Djc you know these guys? I made it clear on the phone both times that my registration was of conversion parts that would otherwise construe intent if I had ever acquired another gun that the TB could fit into. Then the guy went all cop on me and started questioning why I would want another Gun it could fit Into. Because it's a legal configuration otherwise and none of your business! |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 9:55:37 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They couldn't possibly have picked up a phone and talked to each other? At this point they both know what the law states, yet they both are working toward having people register their pre-bans. I guess I'm just a conspiracy theorist. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They don't care about what the law says, they care about what they want to do. I think they want as many guns registered as possible, regardless of what the law says. You want to SBR a pre-ban? Well then you have to register it. It should be noted that it is the ATF that is saying you have to register the preban SBR and not DESPP when one goes to create SBR from a preban. They couldn't possibly have picked up a phone and talked to each other? At this point they both know what the law states, yet they both are working toward having people register their pre-bans. I guess I'm just a conspiracy theorist. You are not a conspiracy theorist. But that is a ridiculous premis. The laws are simply mutually incompatible. You might as well be trying to comply with California and Zimbabwean gun laws at the same time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 9:59:32 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They couldn't possibly have picked up a phone and talked to each other? At this point they both know what the law states, yet they both are working toward having people register their pre-bans. I guess I'm just a conspiracy theorist. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They don't care about what the law says, they care about what they want to do. I think they want as many guns registered as possible, regardless of what the law says. You want to SBR a pre-ban? Well then you have to register it. It should be noted that it is the ATF that is saying you have to register the preban SBR and not DESPP when one goes to create SBR from a preban. They couldn't possibly have picked up a phone and talked to each other? At this point they both know what the law states, yet they both are working toward having people register their pre-bans. I guess I'm just a conspiracy theorist. ATF says that turning an existing firearm into an SBR is manufacturing a new firearm. CT law only cares about when the firearm was originally manufactured. Lots of conflict here. It would be interesting to see the results from sending in a Form1 SBR for the following 2 rifles, neither of which require a Certificate of Possession: Rifle B Preban AR-15 Barrel length 12.5" Overall length 31" Rifle 2 80% with fixed 10rnd mag Barrel length 12.5" Overall length 31" |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 11:16:32 AM EDT
[#23]
I got a call about my threaded barrel registration back in January. I went as far as engraving a serial number on it.
 I told the detective I was under the impression that a part can be registered. He said he would call me back. I checked online and found the language quoted above. I called his office and left a message reading the law verbatim. He never called me back. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 11:32:54 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I got a call about my threaded barrel registration back in January. I went as far as engraving a serial number on it. http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/lostman518/F8550908-EECB-48A5-BB68-D4ECA3F7BFE8-10227-00000B79F44A3590_zps8a4f4f9d.jpg I told the detective I was under the impression that a part can be registered. He said he would call me back. I checked online and found the language quoted above. I called his office and left a message reading the law verbatim. He never called me back. So, you got it back approved, I'm guessing. That is just one more person that has been approved. I can't wait for my call back....maybe I won't get one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 1:08:20 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You are not a conspiracy theorist. But that is a ridiculous premis. The laws are simply mutually incompatible. You might as well be trying to comply with California and Zimbabwean gun laws at the same time. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They don't care about what the law says, they care about what they want to do. I think they want as many guns registered as possible, regardless of what the law says. You want to SBR a pre-ban? Well then you have to register it. It should be noted that it is the ATF that is saying you have to register the preban SBR and not DESPP when one goes to create SBR from a preban. They couldn't possibly have picked up a phone and talked to each other? At this point they both know what the law states, yet they both are working toward having people register their pre-bans. I guess I'm just a conspiracy theorist. You are not a conspiracy theorist. But that is a ridiculous premis. The laws are simply mutually incompatible. You might as well be trying to comply with California and Zimbabwean gun laws at the same time. Mutually Incompatible? So since ATF considers it making a new firearm, and CT considers it an AW, then nobody can make an SBR regardless of AW registration because making a new AW is not allowed in CT? That would suck but it would be a consistent application of the law. That is not the case though, ATF is approving SBRs as long as they're registered as AW's. Furthermore, creating an SBR clearly is not creating a new assault weapon because it was allowed under the old CT AWB and under the old FEDERAL AWB. That was the same jurisdiction as the ATF and they were allowing people to create SBRs. Clearly they were not letting people make new AWs when they were banned federally. They are making people jump through the hoop of registering their pre-bans even though they know it isn't required. Clearly they are helping CT get as many guns registered as possible regardless of the legal requirements. Any other interpretation of the situation ignores the fact that ATF is allowing SBRs to be made in CT at all and allowed them under the federal AWB as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 1:14:37 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Mutually Incompatible? So since ATF considers it making a new firearm, and CT considers it an AW, then nobody can make an SBR regardless of AW registration because making a new AW is not allowed in CT? That would suck but it would be a consistent application of the law. That is not the case though, ATF is approving SBRs as long as they're registered as AW's. Furthermore, creating an SBR clearly is not creating a new assault weapon because it was allowed under the old CT AWB and under the old FEDERAL AWB. That was the same jurisdiction as the ATF and they were allowing people to create SBRs. Clearly they were not letting people make new AWs when they were banned federally. They are making people jump through the hoop of registering their pre-bans even though they know it isn't required. Clearly they are helping CT get as many guns registered as possible regardless of the legal requirements. Any other interpretation of the situation ignores the fact that ATF is allowing SBRs to be made in CT at all and allowed them under the federal AWB as well. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They don't care about what the law says, they care about what they want to do. I think they want as many guns registered as possible, regardless of what the law says. You want to SBR a pre-ban? Well then you have to register it. It should be noted that it is the ATF that is saying you have to register the preban SBR and not DESPP when one goes to create SBR from a preban. They couldn't possibly have picked up a phone and talked to each other? At this point they both know what the law states, yet they both are working toward having people register their pre-bans. I guess I'm just a conspiracy theorist. You are not a conspiracy theorist. But that is a ridiculous premis. The laws are simply mutually incompatible. You might as well be trying to comply with California and Zimbabwean gun laws at the same time. Mutually Incompatible? So since ATF considers it making a new firearm, and CT considers it an AW, then nobody can make an SBR regardless of AW registration because making a new AW is not allowed in CT? That would suck but it would be a consistent application of the law. That is not the case though, ATF is approving SBRs as long as they're registered as AW's. Furthermore, creating an SBR clearly is not creating a new assault weapon because it was allowed under the old CT AWB and under the old FEDERAL AWB. That was the same jurisdiction as the ATF and they were allowing people to create SBRs. Clearly they were not letting people make new AWs when they were banned federally. They are making people jump through the hoop of registering their pre-bans even though they know it isn't required. Clearly they are helping CT get as many guns registered as possible regardless of the legal requirements. Any other interpretation of the situation ignores the fact that ATF is allowing SBRs to be made in CT at all and allowed them under the federal AWB as well. No fucking clue man. . Point is that you need to get two enforcement agencies to agree on their own set of poorly written laws to find common ground permitting you a basic right. Good luck with that.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 1:25:13 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So since ATF considers it making a new firearm, and CT considers it an AW, then nobody can make an SBR regardless of AW registration because making a new AW is not allowed in CT? No. Prebans ARE assault weapons under CT law its just one isn't required to register (obtain the certificate of possession) for it. CT doesn't care at this point once a firearm is an AW so long as its either preban or its been registered. The ATF on the other hand, because they treat creating a SBR as creating a "new" firearm, they are asking for the 'certificate of possession') to ensure the firearm you want to make into an SBR is legal in the state of CT. As was previously stated CT is not preventing one from creating a SBR from a preban. One simply has to go to DESPP and apply for the 'certificate of possession' for that preban then submit that document with the rest of your SBR paperwork to the ATF. There is some speculation somewhere here that post ban SBR's would actually not be affected by the laws post 4/4/13. Cannot remember exactly why but I'm sure those more knowledgeable may chime in to explain why. Edit to add: CT as I think was explained earlier doesn't define what an SBR is or care how one is created, rather SBR falls under federal definitions and laws. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 1:25:29 PM EDT
[#28]
And this is complete opposite to before the POSL.
The ATF would let you register an SBR with a bbl length of >12" knowing it would be considered a Salty Pistol. They could care less if you were conforming to CT state law, but all of a sudden they are concerned............ |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 1:32:44 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And this is complete opposite to before the POSL. Yep. They decided to reinterpret the state laws post 4/4/13 in much the same fashion as DESPP did on banned by name prebans. Bad news/good news kind of thing. Bad what the ATF did, good what DESPP did. Very possibly ATF was so confused by the post 4/4/13 laws (as many were) they simply threw their hands up and said fuck it, give us the CoP even if preban and even if we didn't require it prior to 4/4/13 just to ensure the SBR can be legally possessed in CT |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 3:19:32 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So, you got it back approved, I'm guessing. That is just one more person that has been approved. I can't wait for my call back....maybe I won't get one. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I got a call about my threaded barrel registration back in January. I went as far as engraving a serial number on it. http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e363/lostman518/F8550908-EECB-48A5-BB68-D4ECA3F7BFE8-10227-00000B79F44A3590_zps8a4f4f9d.jpg I told the detective I was under the impression that a part can be registered. He said he would call me back. I checked online and found the language quoted above. I called his office and left a message reading the law verbatim. He never called me back. So, you got it back approved, I'm guessing. That is just one more person that has been approved. I can't wait for my call back....maybe I won't get one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 3:56:12 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No. Prebans ARE assault weapons under CT law its just one isn't required to register (obtain the certificate of possession) for it. CT doesn't care at this point once a firearm is an AW so long as its either preban or its been registered. The ATF on the other hand, because they treat creating a SBR as creating a "new" firearm, they are asking for the 'certificate of possession') to ensure the firearm you want to make into an SBR is legal in the state of CT. As was previously stated CT is not preventing one from creating a SBR from a preban. One simply has to go to DESPP and apply for the 'certificate of possession' for that preban then submit that document with the rest of your SBR paperwork to the ATF. There is some speculation somewhere here that post ban SBR's would actually not be affected by the laws post 4/4/13. Cannot remember exactly why but I'm sure those more knowledgeable may chime in to explain why. Edit to add: CT as I think was explained earlier doesn't define what an SBR is or care how one is created, rather SBR falls under federal definitions and laws. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So since ATF considers it making a new firearm, and CT considers it an AW, then nobody can make an SBR regardless of AW registration because making a new AW is not allowed in CT? No. Prebans ARE assault weapons under CT law its just one isn't required to register (obtain the certificate of possession) for it. CT doesn't care at this point once a firearm is an AW so long as its either preban or its been registered. The ATF on the other hand, because they treat creating a SBR as creating a "new" firearm, they are asking for the 'certificate of possession') to ensure the firearm you want to make into an SBR is legal in the state of CT. As was previously stated CT is not preventing one from creating a SBR from a preban. One simply has to go to DESPP and apply for the 'certificate of possession' for that preban then submit that document with the rest of your SBR paperwork to the ATF. There is some speculation somewhere here that post ban SBR's would actually not be affected by the laws post 4/4/13. Cannot remember exactly why but I'm sure those more knowledgeable may chime in to explain why. Edit to add: CT as I think was explained earlier doesn't define what an SBR is or care how one is created, rather SBR falls under federal definitions and laws. So..if I am reading you correctly, a pre-ban stripped receiver or even a pre ban complete rifle...lets say a 20" barrel....does NOT have to be registered with the state as a AW after the FFL transfer is complete.?? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 3:59:40 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So..if I am reading you correctly, a pre-ban stripped receiver or even a pre ban complete rifle...lets say a 20" barrel....does NOT have to be registered with the state as a AW after the FFL transfer is complete.?? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So since ATF considers it making a new firearm, and CT considers it an AW, then nobody can make an SBR regardless of AW registration because making a new AW is not allowed in CT? No. Prebans ARE assault weapons under CT law its just one isn't required to register (obtain the certificate of possession) for it. CT doesn't care at this point once a firearm is an AW so long as its either preban or its been registered. The ATF on the other hand, because they treat creating a SBR as creating a "new" firearm, they are asking for the 'certificate of possession') to ensure the firearm you want to make into an SBR is legal in the state of CT. As was previously stated CT is not preventing one from creating a SBR from a preban. One simply has to go to DESPP and apply for the 'certificate of possession' for that preban then submit that document with the rest of your SBR paperwork to the ATF. There is some speculation somewhere here that post ban SBR's would actually not be affected by the laws post 4/4/13. Cannot remember exactly why but I'm sure those more knowledgeable may chime in to explain why. Edit to add: CT as I think was explained earlier doesn't define what an SBR is or care how one is created, rather SBR falls under federal definitions and laws. So..if I am reading you correctly, a pre-ban stripped receiver or even a pre ban complete rifle...lets say a 20" barrel....does NOT have to be registered with the state as a AW after the FFL transfer is complete.?? Correct. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 4:37:29 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So..if I am reading you correctly, a pre-ban stripped receiver or even a pre ban complete rifle...lets say a 20" barrel....does NOT have to be registered with the state as a AW after the FFL transfer is complete.?? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So since ATF considers it making a new firearm, and CT considers it an AW, then nobody can make an SBR regardless of AW registration because making a new AW is not allowed in CT? No. Prebans ARE assault weapons under CT law its just one isn't required to register (obtain the certificate of possession) for it. CT doesn't care at this point once a firearm is an AW so long as its either preban or its been registered. The ATF on the other hand, because they treat creating a SBR as creating a "new" firearm, they are asking for the 'certificate of possession') to ensure the firearm you want to make into an SBR is legal in the state of CT. As was previously stated CT is not preventing one from creating a SBR from a preban. One simply has to go to DESPP and apply for the 'certificate of possession' for that preban then submit that document with the rest of your SBR paperwork to the ATF. There is some speculation somewhere here that post ban SBR's would actually not be affected by the laws post 4/4/13. Cannot remember exactly why but I'm sure those more knowledgeable may chime in to explain why. Edit to add: CT as I think was explained earlier doesn't define what an SBR is or care how one is created, rather SBR falls under federal definitions and laws. So..if I am reading you correctly, a pre-ban stripped receiver or even a pre ban complete rifle...lets say a 20" barrel....does NOT have to be registered with the state as a AW after the FFL transfer is complete.?? Correct it does not have to be registered (certificate of possession) so long as it was manufactured prior to 9/13/94. Out of curiosity why did you think they, "prebans", had to be registered? The state law has long (since roughly 2001) been clear on this issue: Sec. 53-202m. Circumstances when assault weapons exempt from limitations on transfers and registration requirements. Notwithstanding any provision of the general statutes, sections 53-202a to 53-202l, inclusive, shall not be construed to limit the transfer or require the registration of an assault weapon as defined in subdivision (3) or (4) of subsection (a) of section 53-202a of the general statutes, revision of 1958, revised to January 1, 2013, provided such firearm was legally manufactured prior to September 13, 1994. Edit to add: Note that when people here say "registered" they generally are referring to the 'certificate of possession' (Assault Weapon Certificate Application - DPS-414) one has or had prior to 1/1/14 to obtain for so called assault weapons manufactured after 9/13/94. The DPS-3-C form is a separate form that gets submitted to the state and other entities for every single firearm transfer or sale. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 4:45:34 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Correct it does not have to be registered (certificate of possession) so long as it was manufactured prior to 9/13/94. Out of curiosity why did you think they, "prebans", had to be registered? The state law has long (since roughly 2001) been clear on this issue: Sec. 53-202m. Circumstances when assault weapons exempt from limitations on transfers and registration requirements. Notwithstanding any provision of the general statutes, sections 53-202a to 53-202l, inclusive, shall not be construed to limit the transfer or require the registration of an assault weapon as defined in subdivision (3) or (4) of subsection (a) of section 53-202a of the general statutes, revision of 1958, revised to January 1, 2013, provided such firearm was legally manufactured prior to September 13, 1994. Edit to add: Note that when people here say "registered" they generally are referring to the 'certificate of possession' (Assault Weapon Certificate Application - DPS-414) one has to obtain for so called assault weapons manufactured after 9/13/94. The DPS-3-C form is a separate form that gets submitted to the state for every single firearm transfer or sale. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So since ATF considers it making a new firearm, and CT considers it an AW, then nobody can make an SBR regardless of AW registration because making a new AW is not allowed in CT? No. Prebans ARE assault weapons under CT law its just one isn't required to register (obtain the certificate of possession) for it. CT doesn't care at this point once a firearm is an AW so long as its either preban or its been registered. The ATF on the other hand, because they treat creating a SBR as creating a "new" firearm, they are asking for the 'certificate of possession') to ensure the firearm you want to make into an SBR is legal in the state of CT. As was previously stated CT is not preventing one from creating a SBR from a preban. One simply has to go to DESPP and apply for the 'certificate of possession' for that preban then submit that document with the rest of your SBR paperwork to the ATF. There is some speculation somewhere here that post ban SBR's would actually not be affected by the laws post 4/4/13. Cannot remember exactly why but I'm sure those more knowledgeable may chime in to explain why. Edit to add: CT as I think was explained earlier doesn't define what an SBR is or care how one is created, rather SBR falls under federal definitions and laws. So..if I am reading you correctly, a pre-ban stripped receiver or even a pre ban complete rifle...lets say a 20" barrel....does NOT have to be registered with the state as a AW after the FFL transfer is complete.?? Correct it does not have to be registered (certificate of possession) so long as it was manufactured prior to 9/13/94. Out of curiosity why did you think they, "prebans", had to be registered? The state law has long (since roughly 2001) been clear on this issue: Sec. 53-202m. Circumstances when assault weapons exempt from limitations on transfers and registration requirements. Notwithstanding any provision of the general statutes, sections 53-202a to 53-202l, inclusive, shall not be construed to limit the transfer or require the registration of an assault weapon as defined in subdivision (3) or (4) of subsection (a) of section 53-202a of the general statutes, revision of 1958, revised to January 1, 2013, provided such firearm was legally manufactured prior to September 13, 1994. Edit to add: Note that when people here say "registered" they generally are referring to the 'certificate of possession' (Assault Weapon Certificate Application - DPS-414) one has to obtain for so called assault weapons manufactured after 9/13/94. The DPS-3-C form is a separate form that gets submitted to the state for every single firearm transfer or sale. I just didn't know is all. Thanx for the detailed info. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 4:49:29 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I just didn't know is all. Thanx for the detailed info. Keep in mind that while a "preban" doesn't have to be registered and can be bought/sold/transferred the law still treats it as a so called assault weapon in all other respects. This means your limited to the few locations where the preban can be lawfully possessed in this state, and there are guidelines for how preban can be legally transported within this state. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 7:30:14 PM EDT
[#36]
I know a guy who registered an AR 22 conversion bolt as an AW..... It got approved hahah
This shits such a fucking joke. I don't even have any of my AW papers back yet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 8:19:45 PM EDT
[#37]
So, I got my call back.....
Short answer, can't register threaded barrels. Long answer, lady says people upstairs said you can't register a barrel, has to be a receiver. I mention the section of the law and read it to her. She says previous people that got barrels approved were not supposed to. They slipped through. But, just because you got a barrel registered, doesn't mean you can drop it in your pistol if the pistol itself isn't registerd. You would be making an AW. And that's a no no. So, she goes on to tell me my options. Come down and register my 2 pistols as AWs. Or she returns the threaded barrel forms, not approved, and I get rid of my barrels. I ask if I did register my pistols, could I carry them with a regular non-threaded barrel. Her answer..no. Kinda knew that anyway. So I tell her there's no way I'm gonna register my 2 pistols. If I did I cant carry them, I'd have to buy 2 new pistols. I ask her about option 3, if I buy 2 preban pistols for my barrels. Then I don't have to register those. She got my point and understood why I would go that route and why I want to register just the barrels. This whole thing is a waste of time and money. I hate this state and wish I could just up and leave. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 8:20:30 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, I got my call back..... Short answer, can't register threaded barrels. Long answer, lady says people upstairs said you can't register a barrel, has to be a receiver. I mention the section of the law and read it to her. She says previous people that got barrels approved were not supposed to. They slipped through. But, just because you got a barrel registered, doesn't mean you can drop it in your pistol if the pistol itself isn't registerd. You would be making an AW. And that's a no no. So, she goes on to tell me my options. Come down and register my 2 pistols as AWs. Or she returns the threaded barrel forms, not approved, and I get rid of my barrels. I ask if I did register my pistols, could I carry them with a regular non-threaded barrel. Her answer..no. Kinda knew that anyway. So I tell her there's no way I'm gonna register my 2 pistols. If I did I cant carry them, I'd have to buy 2 new pistols. I ask her about option 3, if I buy 2 preban pistols for my barrels. Then I don't have to register those. She got my point and understood why I would go that route and why I want to register just the barrels. This whole thing is a waste of time and money. I hate this state and wish I could just up and leave. I bet if you call back tomorrow, you'll get a different answer 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 8:24:49 PM EDT
[#39]
Oh, forgot this part.
She said I could get my lawyer involved and see where it goes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 8:35:59 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oh, forgot this part. She said I could get my lawyer involved and see where it goes. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 8:49:55 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I bet if you call back tomorrow, you'll get a different answer Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So, I got my call back..... Short answer, can't register threaded barrels. Long answer, lady says people upstairs said you can't register a barrel, has to be a receiver. I mention the section of the law and read it to her. She says previous people that got barrels approved were not supposed to. They slipped through. But, just because you got a barrel registered, doesn't mean you can drop it in your pistol if the pistol itself isn't registerd. You would be making an AW. And that's a no no. So, she goes on to tell me my options. Come down and register my 2 pistols as AWs. Or she returns the threaded barrel forms, not approved, and I get rid of my barrels. I ask if I did register my pistols, could I carry them with a regular non-threaded barrel. Her answer..no. Kinda knew that anyway. So I tell her there's no way I'm gonna register my 2 pistols. If I did I cant carry them, I'd have to buy 2 new pistols. I ask her about option 3, if I buy 2 preban pistols for my barrels. Then I don't have to register those. She got my point and understood why I would go that route and why I want to register just the barrels. This whole thing is a waste of time and money. I hate this state and wish I could just up and leave. I bet if you call back tomorrow, you'll get a different answer haha this is what I think too
but cmon jeff you know you want to just buy two "new" preban pistols 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 10:31:49 AM EDT
[#42]
When I was called in January the detective also told me if I registered the pistol I would still be able to carry it if it is not in AW configuration. Weird that they told you the opposite.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 5:45:45 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
When I was called in January the detective also told me if I registered the pistol I would still be able to carry it if it is not in AW configuration. Weird that they told you the opposite. The law is so bad even the ones who enforce it are confused. One day if someone gets busted on this AW law, it will go to the courts to weed out the mess and rule one way or another. Our law makers are AWESOME! Hey Danny boy, check out the poll numbers, your time screwing things up in CT are coming to an end. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 5:59:30 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
When I was called in January the detective also told me if I registered the pistol I would still be able to carry it if it is not in AW configuration. Weird that they told you the opposite. Even though it may not meet the technical definition of being an AW once the threaded barrel is removed, it would still be registered with the state as an AW. Not sure I'd want to trust the LEO to know the minutia of the law if I was stopped carrying such a handgun. If they ran the gun saw it was an AW they may simply arrest you and let a couple of lawyers figure it out for you at a later time. Don't know who would want to be a test case for that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 6:14:31 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Even though it may not meet the technical definition of being an AW once the threaded barrel is removed, it would still be registered with the state as an AW. Not sure I'd want to trust the LEO to know the minutia of the law if I was stopped carrying such a handgun. If they ran the gun saw it was an AW they may simply arrest you and let a couple of lawyers figure it out for you at a later time. Don't know who would want to be a test case for that. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
When I was called in January the detective also told me if I registered the pistol I would still be able to carry it if it is not in AW configuration. Weird that they told you the opposite. Even though it may not meet the technical definition of being an AW once the threaded barrel is removed, it would still be registered with the state as an AW. Not sure I'd want to trust the LEO to know the minutia of the law if I was stopped carrying such a handgun. If they ran the gun saw it was an AW they may simply arrest you and let a couple of lawyers figure it out for you at a later time. Don't know who would want to be a test case for that. That's exactly the problem with having to register a pistol as an AW and not being able to simply register the parts to convert it into an AW...as the law specifies you can. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 7:10:38 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Even though it may not meet the technical definition of being an AW once the threaded barrel is removed, it would still be registered with the state as an AW. Not sure I'd want to trust the LEO to know the minutia of the law if I was stopped carrying such a handgun. If they ran the gun saw it was an AW they may simply arrest you and let a couple of lawyers figure it out for you at a later time. Don't know who would want to be a test case for that. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
When I was called in January the detective also told me if I registered the pistol I would still be able to carry it if it is not in AW configuration. Weird that they told you the opposite. Even though it may not meet the technical definition of being an AW once the threaded barrel is removed, it would still be registered with the state as an AW. Not sure I'd want to trust the LEO to know the minutia of the law if I was stopped carrying such a handgun. If they ran the gun saw it was an AW they may simply arrest you and let a couple of lawyers figure it out for you at a later time. Don't know who would want to be a test case for that. Probably better just to get rid of those evil and deadly assault weapons then- play it safe and enjoy your BB guns:) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 7:17:51 PM EDT
[#47]
Just join the horse guard
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 7:29:40 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's exactly the problem with having to register a pistol as an AW and not being able to simply register the parts to convert it into an AW...as the law specifies you can. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
When I was called in January the detective also told me if I registered the pistol I would still be able to carry it if it is not in AW configuration. Weird that they told you the opposite. Even though it may not meet the technical definition of being an AW once the threaded barrel is removed, it would still be registered with the state as an AW. Not sure I'd want to trust the LEO to know the minutia of the law if I was stopped carrying such a handgun. If they ran the gun saw it was an AW they may simply arrest you and let a couple of lawyers figure it out for you at a later time. Don't know who would want to be a test case for that. That's exactly the problem with having to register a pistol as an AW and not being able to simply register the parts to convert it into an AW...as the law specifies you can. Yep. The stupid lowering of the feature count to one caused several here to scramble to find a way around it for their handguns.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 8:02:59 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yep. The stupid lowering of the feature count to one caused several here to scramble to find a way around it for their handguns.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
When I was called in January the detective also told me if I registered the pistol I would still be able to carry it if it is not in AW configuration. Weird that they told you the opposite. Even though it may not meet the technical definition of being an AW once the threaded barrel is removed, it would still be registered with the state as an AW. Not sure I'd want to trust the LEO to know the minutia of the law if I was stopped carrying such a handgun. If they ran the gun saw it was an AW they may simply arrest you and let a couple of lawyers figure it out for you at a later time. Don't know who would want to be a test case for that. That's exactly the problem with having to register a pistol as an AW and not being able to simply register the parts to convert it into an AW...as the law specifies you can. Yep. The stupid lowering of the feature count to one caused several here to scramble to find a way around it for their handguns.
Yup. I'll be shopping for preban pistols I guess. Oh well, hopefully malloy gets his ass handed to him in November. And down the road things change....for the better. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/2/2014 11:01:56 PM EDT
[#50]
Just received my AW certs today, I registered 3 threaded bbls and they were approved. One thing I think I did different was I had that guy in New Britain engrave serial numbers on them. That could be why they were approved, or overlooked.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
