Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 7/27/2003 1:09:56 PM EDT
I am looking for a way to get ahold of jon sherman of tacoma washington he screwed me on a pre ban bushy lower and im gonna find him can anyone out there help me?
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 1:35:21 PM EDT
the problem is i trusted someone that i dont know. this all started two years ago I bought a preban bushy lower from jon thru your site before i bought i checked the ser no and bushmaster told me it was made before the ban but it didnt leave the factory as a complete rifle no problem because jon told me that he knows the original owner and he can get me a letter saying it was a complete rifle before the ban but it would take a couple of days so i sent him my money the receiver showed up but no letter so i waited and waited but no letter came i sent him a letter but got no response the phone numbers i have "including the one you gave me I think its a fax number" dont work I called bushmaster to try to get the original owners name and they cant give me that info. but the info they did give me really adds salt to the wound they said that although the lower was made before the ban it didnt ship until after the ban "I wish they told me that before" the reason so much time has passed is that originally i was going to chalk it up as a learning experience but when i look in my gun cabinet lately and see my preban bushy lower sitting stripped and my m-4 upper and coll stock not on it it really pisses me off so i really want to find the sob
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 1:39:12 PM EDT
uh..i really dont see what the problem is, you did get the lower right? it was built b4 the ban , right? who cares when it shipped, as long as the serial numbers jive with bushmaster that it was built b4 the ban. unless im missing sumthing.
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 1:52:48 PM EDT
because from what ive been told to be a pre ban it has to be a complete rifle before the ban
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 2:00:39 PM EDT
honestly im not sure, i know that the biggest gripe i have seen is , That if a preban receiver left the factory as a complete rifle than it was hard or impossible to make it an AR PISTOL. not real sure though.
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 2:04:35 PM EDT
I see your problem. If you would like to sell it as a post-ban, I would be more than happy to take it off your hands at the current market price for post-ban lowers. I have a rifle I am building to post-ban specs, and this would be a good solution for me.
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 2:07:44 PM EDT
Originally Posted By mjp: I am looking for a way to get ahold of jon sherman of tacoma washington he screwed me on a pre ban bushy lower and im gonna find him can anyone out there help me?
View Quote
Send me a e-mail. Cruizer
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 4:30:59 PM EDT
Please DO NOT post any personal information here. [red]CONDUCT GUIDELINES 2.) Posting of personal contact information (home phone #s, home addresses, unpublished E-mail addresses, and the like) is not permitted. Harassing someone via the telephone or the US mail is a CRIME which is something the site doesn't condone and will NOT tolerate.[/red] Keep communications through email or IM. Thanks and good luck.
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 4:42:13 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 4:56:07 PM EDT
Originally Posted By mjp: this all started two years ago I bought a preban bushy lower i checked the ser no and bushmaster told me it was made before the ban but it didnt leave the factory as a complete rifle they said that although the lower was made before the ban it didnt ship until after the ban
View Quote
Ditto to what Aimless said. If you want more info that may just ad to your frustration/confusion you may what to check [url=http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=6&t=197768]here[/url].
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 4:56:47 PM EDT
I don't think it matters if it left the Bushmaster factory as a complete rifle or not before the ban, just as long as it was built up to be a complete rifle in "pre-ban" configuration before the ban. Unfortunately since you bought it as a lower receiver and not a complete rifle (along with the lack of documentation), it loses its preban status.
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 5:05:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/27/2003 5:06:50 PM EDT by neilfj]
bushmaster told me it was made before the ban but it didnt leave the factory as a complete rifle.....I called bushmaster to try to get the original owners name and they cant give me that info. but the info they did give me really adds salt to the wound they said that although the lower was made before the ban it didnt ship until after the ban
View Quote
Unfortunately, he paid a pre-ban price for a lower which can never be a pre-ban.
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 5:22:23 PM EDT
[B] Unfortunately since you bought it as a lower receiver and not a complete rifle (along with the lack of documentation), it loses its preban status. [/B] Where are you getting that from? It has to be assembled before the ban, yes, but a letter saying that it was? I've never read that anywhere official, not even close. This guy is screwed because it left the factory after the ban, not because of a letter. I stand by awaiting clarification.
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 5:28:02 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/27/2003 5:29:06 PM EDT by CRC]
HOW IS THE BATFE GONNA KNOW IT WAS NOT IN PRE-BAN CONFIGURATION BEFORE THE BAN? Think about it! CRC
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 5:41:12 PM EDT
The BATFE will know cus he posted it here! hehe
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 5:45:47 PM EDT
Originally Posted By RenegadeX: I see your problem. If you would like to sell it as a post-ban, I would be more than happy to take it off your hands at the current market price for post-ban lowers. I have a rifle I am building to post-ban specs, and this would be a good solution for me.
View Quote
What are the specs on the upper I might take it if your selling? Glockdog Airborne!!
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 6:01:52 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CRC: HOW IS THE BATFE GONNA KNOW IT WAS NOT IN PRE-BAN CONFIGURATION BEFORE THE BAN? Think about it! CRC
View Quote
The burden of proof falls on the owner of the gun to prove it was complete prior to the ban.
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 6:14:26 PM EDT
The facts he stated are: 1# The lower was made before the ban. 2# Lower was not shipped from the factory till after the ban... So there is no way it was a complete rifle before the ban if the lower didn't ship till after the ban. Think about it ;)
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 6:16:33 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CRC: HOW IS THE BATFE GONNA KNOW IT WAS NOT IN PRE-BAN CONFIGURATION BEFORE THE BAN? Think about it!
View Quote
Well, when I think about it, it goes like this:
Originally posted by mjp: bushmaster told me it was made before the ban but it didnt leave the factory as a complete rifle ...they said that although the lower was made before the ban it didnt ship until after the ban
View Quote
The key phrases being "didn't leave the factory as a complete rifle" and "didn't ship until after the ban" would indicate that it could not have been exempt from the ban.
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 6:17:12 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Defcon: The burden of proof falls on the owner of the gun to prove it was complete prior to the ban.
View Quote
Um, no.
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 6:29:11 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Stickman: This guy is screwed because it left the factory after the ban, not because of a letter. I stand by awaiting clarification.
View Quote
Hey Stick, I think this was in reference to the earlier post -
Originally posted by mjp: bushmaster told me it was made before the ban but it didnt leave the factory as a complete rifle no problem because jon told me that he knows the original owner and he can get me a letter saying it was a complete rifle before the ban
Not to put words in someone elses mouth but it [i]looks like[/i] during the time he thought it had left the factory as a lower only prior to the ban he was trying to get documentation from the original purchaser that it met the criteria to be exempt from the ban. Of course now we know it wouldn't have matered because it wasn't possible.
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 6:34:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/27/2003 6:39:43 PM EDT by MADM16A1]
Just build the preban rifle, If the feds ever question you, just say you bought it as a complete rifle from Jon Sherman of Tacoma :) How many people here who own (non factory assembled) preban AR15's have proof that the guns were built before the ban? For instance, what if you owned a preban Oly rifle (Olympic arms lost many of their records in a fire some years ago), pitched the old upper, replaced it with a new Colt or Bushy preban upper, and no longer have the original receipt. Does the lack of proof automatically turns your rifle into a postban? Can anyone provide any links to cases where the feds have prosecuted and convicted anyone for this crime? I would be very interested to find out how those cases went. I would also be interested to find out how aggressively the BATF goes after this type of offense.
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 6:39:35 PM EDT
mjp, I hate to rain on your parade, and I don't know the guy you bought from so I have no dog in this fight. But it seems to me you did in fact get screwed. And, you do not really have any recourse that I can see. basically, you bought something, it was delivered, and it's status pre or post ban is something you discussed but you have no proof. And, unless the seller is a good guy who steps up and admits it was an error and refunds you the difference, you have no recourse. Small claims court you will lose. There is no obvious case of fraud so no police agency will listen. Sorry man. On the bright side, probably in 13 months you can build that M4 anyway and you do have a quality lower to build on. Best of luck.
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 6:47:10 PM EDT
I have a preban Eagle Arms lower I owned well before the ban took effect. I also owned a preban Colt before that. Can I prove that it was assembled before September 1994? Well I put the preban Colt upper on the Eagle receiver once, before 1994. Can I prove it? Hell no. Do I care? Hell no. If I write a letter to someone I might sell it to does that prove it? Hell no. If it left the factory after September 1994 and Bushy won't or can't confirm it ever was in a preban configuration, then I'ld say you would be sucking serious gas to say it was.
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 7:12:19 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CRC: HOW IS THE BATFE GONNA KNOW IT WAS NOT IN PRE-BAN CONFIGURATION BEFORE THE BAN? Think about it! CRC
View Quote
No shit. Who needs BATFE when you gunowners are screwing yourselves without their help? Don't get me wrong, I do everything by the books, BUT it seems like some of you guys are just looking for loopholes for BATFE to bust you on. Let them do their job, and stop playing junior G-man. If you want to be 100% sure your are legit, my suggestion is to turn yourself and the seller in to BATFE. Make sure they properly confiscate and destroy your illegally converted rifle. I'm sure they'll give you a 'Good Citizen' medal for your trouble. Then you should send your resume in to HCI...
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 7:35:43 PM EDT
The way I see it, If Bushy has the lower on record that it was not assembled or shipped before the ban, then don't screw with it. Had there been no records, I probably would say go right ahead. Just my 2 cents.
Link Posted: 7/27/2003 8:08:10 PM EDT
Yep, with Bushmaster telling you the lower left their hands AFTER the ban your screwed. Hold out another year and a half and then you can do what you want.
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 4:21:02 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Halfcocked:
Originally Posted By Defcon: The burden of proof falls on the owner of the gun to prove it was complete prior to the ban.
View Quote
Um, no.
View Quote
Um, yes..the way the law was written is that all weapons that meet the requirements are considered AW and are banned, unless they meet the exceptions listed. The Gov. only has to prove it is an AW and is therefore banned. Once they do that, it is the owners burden to prove it falls under one of the exceptions.
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 4:49:05 AM EDT
Wait, if Bushmaster had "assembled" that lower into a pre-ban "rifle" by putting a pre-config. upper on it in orderr to test it before it left their factory, then "dis-assembled" it, in order to sell it as a lower, would it then be considered an "assembled rifle" in pre-config. that was "sold/transfered" as a receiver only?
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 5:05:51 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/28/2003 5:11:13 AM EDT by Halfcocked]
Originally Posted By neilfj:
Originally Posted By Halfcocked:
Originally Posted By Defcon: The burden of proof falls on the owner of the gun to prove it was complete prior to the ban.
View Quote
Um, no.
View Quote
Um, yes..the way the law was written is that all weapons that meet the requirements are considered AW and are banned, unless they meet the exceptions listed. The Gov. only has to prove it is an AW and is therefore banned. Once they do that, it is the owners burden to prove it falls under one of the exceptions.
View Quote
[BS] neilfj, read the law. Their are no exceptions save LEO or Military. If a qualifying rifle was built with 2 or more of the evil features before September 13, 1994 it's grandfathered. In other words it was an assault weapon before the ban took place and is a preban. If it didn't have 2 or more evil features before September 13, 1994, it was not an assault weapon and you can not make it one now. If the BATF can prove it wasn't assembled with 2 or more evil features before September 1994 then of course they have a case. Say the manufacturer will testify that even though it was made before September 13, 1994, it didn't leave until after and that no, it was never assembled with 2 or more evil features while in our possesion, I would call that proof. As far as proving anything the last I heard it was "INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY". Under your scenario that Eagle Arms stripped lower that my brother bought back in 1984, for which he has no proof that it was ever assembled with 2 or more evil features before September '94, along with the hundreds of thousands of other stripped lowers ever sold, prior to 9/94, means it/they are now subject to confiscation and he/those owners, are all felons. Again [BS2] !
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 5:16:43 AM EDT
Has ANYONE ever heard the BATF looking at someone's gun to see if it is a pre or post ban? I have been shooting all my life, and NO one has ever checked the serial numbers on my guns. But, I will keep an eye out for roaming gangs of BATF agents, going door to door! Spooge Out!
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 5:17:08 AM EDT
Originally Posted By neilfj:
Originally Posted By Halfcocked:
Originally Posted By Defcon: The burden of proof falls on the owner of the gun to prove it was complete prior to the ban.
View Quote
Um, no.
View Quote
Um, yes..the way the law was written is that all weapons that meet the requirements are considered AW and are banned, unless they meet the exceptions listed. The Gov. only has to prove it is an AW and is therefore banned. Once they do that, it is the owners burden to prove it falls under one of the exceptions.
View Quote
I second you on that also. I will search and find the US code and post it.
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 5:42:30 AM EDT
Mjp the way I read your post was that the lower left the factory before the ban and also before the ban it was assembled buy a friend of the person you bought it from and he was suppose to send you a letter from that person stating such so that you can show if needed that you acted in good faith with all the info available to you that the lower could be assembled as a preban to protect your self leagally in court if needed.. smart and the right way to do things instead of playing loopholes which allways shows your trying to skirt the law which does not fly in most courts.. I would go to all the popular gun boards aksing for anyone knowing him unless he's a crook he'll read it at some point and e-mail you to bad you waited so long something bad could have happened to his health or accidents good luck on your search....
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 5:44:46 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Spooge5150: Has ANYONE ever heard the BATF looking at someone's gun to see if it is a pre or post ban? I have been shooting all my life, and NO one has ever checked the serial numbers on my guns. But, I will keep an eye out for roaming gangs of BATF agents, going door to door! Spooge Out!
View Quote
As much as I hate "me too" type posts. I have to say I agree with Spooge. I think alot of people worry way too much about this . Given the number of people actually convicted of AWB violations compared to say the number of people who could of been saved by wearing a helmet while driving, you should be on some other board trying to figure you the best driving helmet to buy.
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 5:55:54 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/28/2003 6:13:37 AM EDT by neilfj]
Mugzilla...I found it:
(v) (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: (A) any of the firearms, or replicas or duplicates of the firearms, specified in Appendix A to this section, as such firearms were manufactured on October 1, 1993; (B) any firearm that: (i) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action; (ii) has been rendered permanently inoperable;or (iii) is an antique firearm; (C) any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than 5 rounds of ammunition;or (D) any semiautomatic shotgun that cannot hold more than 5 rounds of ammunition in a fixed or detachable magazine. The fact that a firearm is not listed in Appendix A shall not be construed to mean that paragraph (1) applies to such firearm. No firearm exempted by this subsection may be deleted from Appendix A so long as this subsection is in effect. (4) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to: (A) the manufacture for, transfer to, or possession by the United States or a department or agency of the United States or a State or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State, or a transfer to or possession by a law enforcement officer employed by such an entity for purposes of law enforcement (whether on or off duty); (B) the transfer to a licensee under title I of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 for purposes of establishing and maintaining an on-site physical protectionsystem and security organization required by Federal law, or possession by an employee or contractor of such licensee on-site for such purposes or off-site for purposes of licensee-authorized training or transportation of nuclear materials; (C) the possession, by an individual who is retired from service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited from receiving a firearm, of a semiautomatic assault weapon transferred to the individual by the agency upon such retirement;or (D) the manufacture, transfer, or possession of a semiautomatic assault weapon by a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Secretary.
View Quote
Para (1)..outlaws those weapons defined as Assault Weapons. Para (2) addresses the exceptions, but guess who has to prove that you meet the exception? Not the Gov, they only have to prove you are in violation of Para (1). You have to prove you fall under the exception. The BATFE doesn't have to prove what condition it was in when it was sold, when it was manufactured, or the config. it was in when the ban was enacted, only that it is an AW as defined by law. You would have to prove that it was configured with the evil features on or before the ban date and that it remained in pre-ban configuration during all sales and transfers (which is another issue). Most people would think that "innocent until proven guilty" but not the way the law is written.
Under your scenario that Eagle Arms stripped lower that my brother bought back in 1984, for which he has no proof that it was ever assembled with 2 or more evil features before September '94, along with the hundreds of thousands of other stripped lowers ever sold, prior to 9/94, means it/they are now subject to confiscation and he/those owners, are all felons.
View Quote
Although this discussion isn't about stripped lowers, as it is a completely different animal, the answer to your question is "Possibly". If your brother ever had to prove the exception, he would probably have a tough time, which is why the original poster wanted the letter from the owner/seller. This discussion has been posted numerous times in the Legal Forum, and Steve-in-VA and Troy have addressed it each time. There are no such things as pre-ban stripped lowers. The definition of AW has nothing to do with the lower, only the evil features of a complete rifle. Once the lower is stripped, it is no longer an AW. If the stripped lower is transferred to someone else, it cannot be built back into an AW since once the evil features are removed as it loses its pre-ban status. Much of the confusion is that ATFE considers the lower as a rifle for serial number purposes. The AWB law considers the entire rifle as the AW, not just the lower. So transferring a lower may meet the ATFE requirements as far as their serial number and bound book is concerned, but it doesn't meet the AWB requirements for maintaining its pre-ban status. Since I don't want to turn this thread into any more of a legal debate than it already has, perhaps you should ask Steve or Troy in the Legal Forum for links to previous discussions. They have hashed it out over-and-over and their is no need to do it again here. Also, don't take this to mean that any of this makes sense, it doesn't, and it hurts to think about it..and it may not be worth thinking about it if it goes away in a year. As for calling BS! That's your prerogative and doesn't matter to me either way. But you are giving out bad information and to anyone taking your advise, proceed at your own risk.
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 6:01:14 AM EDT
Some of you guys are missing the whole point of this law. Sure, you can make all the illegal AWs in your garage you want. And no one has been harrassed for this stupid law yet. Problem is, what if for some other reason, you have pissed off the powers that be? And, they raid your house. You KNOW they will take your weapons and check each and every one for any possible violation to screw you with. Maybe you are in divorce and the wife plays the stalking card. Maybe some neighbor is p issed off that your dog crapped in his yard. Whatever. The fact is, the innocent until proven guilty statement is BS. The earlier poster had it right. They banned ALL weapons with specific features. That means ALL rifles with them. Then, respecting that too many already existed to buy back or whatever, they said those in existance are grandfathered therebye exempt from the ban. So, you ARE guilty when they find an AW. The get out of jail free card is when you PROVE this is one of the exempt ones. Simple enough if it is a Colt SP1. All left the3 factory as complete rifles equipped with the evil features. Not so easy with a PWA who never shipped complete rifles. In this case, the rifle has been documented as leaving the factory AFTER the ban. And it is documented as leaving as an incomplete rifle. IT IS NOT A PREBAN! You are all free to do as you will. But telling someone to not worry about this law is bad advice. Explain the law. Understand the law. Decide for yourself. But don't pretend your unprofessional comprehension of the law will save your ass if some DA gets a hard on for you.
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 6:06:56 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ANGST: As much as I hate "me too" type posts. I have to say I agree with Spooge. I think alot of people worry way too much about this . Given the number of people actually convicted of AWB violations compared to say the number of people who could of been saved by wearing a helmet while driving, you should be on some other board trying to figure you the best driving helmet to buy.
View Quote
Very true and a valid point. There are 3 basic types of people involved here. 1. Those that don't care about the law. 2. Those that know about the law. 3. Those that don't know about the law. #1 has made his choice. #2 has the option of making any choice he wants. #3 has no choice and runs the risk of potentially having problems. I agree with Spooge's sentiments, but don't agree with anyone interpreting this as advice. Just because it hasn't happened, doesn't mean it won't or can't. But I think the person involved should at least be aware of his risks and options.
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 6:23:07 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/28/2003 6:24:35 AM EDT by shaggy]
Originally Posted By Halfcocked:neilfj, read the law. Their are no exceptions save LEO or Military. If a qualifying rifle was built with 2 or more of the evil features before September 13, 1994 it's grandfathered. In other words it was an assault weapon before the ban took place and is a preban. If it didn't have 2 or more evil features before September 13, 1994, it was not an assault weapon and you can not make it one now. If the BATF can prove it wasn't assembled with 2 or more evil features before September 1994 then of course they have a case. Say the manufacturer will testify that even though it was made before September 13, 1994, it didn't leave until after and that no, it was never assembled with 2 or more evil features while in our possesion, I would call that proof. As far as proving anything the last I heard it was "INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY". Under your scenario that Eagle Arms stripped lower that my brother bought back in 1984, for which he has no proof that it was ever assembled with 2 or more evil features before September '94, along with the hundreds of thousands of other stripped lowers ever sold, prior to 9/94, means it/they are now subject to confiscation and he/those owners, are all felons. Again [BS2] !
View Quote
Sorry Halfcocked, You are wrong. 18 USC 922(v)(2) is a defense, not an exception to 922(v)(1), for which the burden of proof falls upon the defendant. BATF merely has to show you were in possession of an "assault weapon", as defined under 18 USC 921(a)(30). Its up to the defendant to make out and prove their own defense (ie. that it was configured as a statutorily defined assault weapon prior to enactment of the ban). The fact that a particular weapon may in fact be a preban is not an essential element of the charge, and therefore not an element necessary for the prosecution to affirmatively disprove. While I know of no cases specifically interpreting the 'grandfathering' provision of 922(v)(1)-(2), note the similar construction of 922(o) which has been more thoroughly addressed in the courts. In at least two cases the courts have recognized that the the first clause sets up the general applicability with the second clause (the grandfathering clause) creating a defense, for which the burden falls upon the defendant. (See U.S. v. Gonzales, 121 F.3d 928 (5th Cir. 1997), U.S. v. Just, 74 F.3d 902 (8th Cir 1996).)
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 6:38:53 AM EDT
Originally Posted By neilfj: I agree with Spooge's sentiments, but don't agree with anyone interpreting this as advice. Just because it hasn't happened, doesn't mean it won't or can't. But I think the person involved should at least be aware of his risks and options.
View Quote
Amen to that. This is not about telling anyone what they should or shouldn't do. We're all big boys (and girls) here and we're all responsible for our own actions. If you want to break the law, good luck to you, but do so with your eyes wide open and with full knowledge of the risks involved...because if you are caught, you will be held accountable whether you knew the law or not. I'm in complete agreement that the chances of actually being caught are pretty slim, but the potential consequences can be very high (in addition to possible prison time, a felony conviction means you can never legally purchase or possess a gun again, you can't vote, your guns would be confiscated and destroyed... and don't forget the tens of thousands of dollars in lawyers fees you'll have to spend on your defense). Personally, my freedom and my peace of mind is worth a few hundred extra.
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 6:39:08 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/28/2003 7:00:22 AM EDT by Halfcocked]
Originally Posted By neilfj: Mugzilla...I found it:
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law [red]on the date of the enactment of this subsection[/red]. As for calling BS! That's your prerogative and doesn't matter to me either way. But you are giving out bad information and to anyone taking your advise, proceed at your own risk.
View Quote
The part I'm calling bullshit on is that the burden of proof is on the person possessing an assault rifle. If the BATF can prove it wasn't assembled with the 2 required evil features, then that's one thing, but short of a signed and noterize statement from a trusted public official, no one has proof that their preban was a preban if it ever left the factory as a stipped lower. I have no "proof" that I assembled that lower I bought back in 1993, into a weapon with 2 or more evil features. I have all kinds of evidence and opertunity to do so prior to September 1994 but no proof. Hell even if I had a bunch of invoices from Amalite listing front site base w/bayonet lug, collapsable stock and flash hider prior to 1994 it still wouldn't prove I ever installed them. Even though I have a "left the factory as a pre-ban Colt" it doesn't prove I put that upper on the lower once before September 1994. Edited to add; even if I sell the rifle to you and write a letter stating 'Yes, I had 2 evil features on it before September 1994 and they stayed on it all the time, even after I sold it neilfj' it still doesn't prove a damn thing. However, and this is the part most people aren't getting, [size=5][red]if the BATF CAN PROVE I'M LIEING[/red][/size=5] then you're in deap shit, or someone is.
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 7:26:49 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/28/2003 7:27:50 AM EDT by neilfj]
Originally Posted By Halfcocked: The part I'm calling bullshit on is that the burden of proof is on the person possessing an assault rifle.
View Quote
That is specifically what is required. If you are ever pulled in, all the ATFE has to prove is that your rifle meets the definition of being an Assault Weapon. You have to prove, to the Court/Jury's satisfaction that you meet the exception.
If the BATF can prove it wasn't assembled with the 2 required evil features, then that's one thing, but short of a signed and noterize statement from a trusted public official, no one has proof that their preban was a preban if it ever left the factory as a stipped lower.
View Quote
Sure they do, or at least those that know the law do and are extremely paranoid about following it. A receipt for a pre-ban upper would help, although not absolute proof. A notarized letter and photo of your rifle in pre-ban config dated prior to 9/94 would serve as absolute.
I have no "proof" that I assembled that lower I bought back in 1993, into a weapon with 2 or more evil features. I have all kinds of evidence and opertunity to do so prior to September 1994 but no proof. Hell even if I had a bunch of invoices from Amalite listing front site base w/bayonet lug, collapsable stock and flash hider prior to 1994 it still wouldn't prove I ever installed them.
View Quote
Absolutely true, and there lies the problem. Most owners don't have absolute proof of the history and heritage of their pre-ban. If it was ever decided to start making people prove it, there would be a lot of weapons confiscated and a lot of people in jail.
Even if I sell the rifle to you and write a letter stating 'Yes, I had 2 evil features on it before September 1994 and they stayed on it all the time, even after I sold it neilfj' it still doesn't prove a damn thing. However, and this is the part most people aren't getting, [size=5][red]if the BATF CAN PROVE I'M LIEING[/red][/size=5] then you're in deap shit, or someone is.
View Quote
All the letter does is 'help'. It doesn't provide absolute proof. It would be up to the jury to decide to believe it or not. It is something that would be better to have than to not have. The part that you aren't getting is that ATFE DOESN'T have to prove you are lying. All that they have to prove is that you are in possession of an Assault Weapon. [red][b]You have to prove that it meets the exception![/red][/b]
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 7:27:08 AM EDT
When I had to defend myself in MY home from two guys, (one that I killed), I had cops all over my house. They went through all my guns and checked ALL of them. I had bought my SW40F after the ban. It had a 15 round mag in it, that I bought separately. It was the gun I used in the attack, and the cops NEVER made one bit of intrest in the fact I had a pre-ban mag in a post-ban pistol. Just my experience. YMMV. Spooge Out!
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 7:31:48 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 7:32:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/28/2003 7:46:45 AM EDT by neilfj]
Originally Posted By Spooge5150: When I had to defend myself in MY home from two guys, (one that I killed), I had cops all over my house. They went through all my guns and checked ALL of them. I had bought my SW40F after the ban. It had a 15 round mag in it, that I bought separately. It was the gun I used in the attack, and the cops NEVER made one bit of intrest in the fact I had a pre-ban mag in a post-ban pistol. Just my experience. YMMV. Spooge Out!
View Quote
This really has nothing to do with anything (at least as far as Fed Law is concerned), since it is not illegal to have a pre-ban mag in a pistol, just as it is not illegal to have a pre-ban mag in a post-ban AR15. Not to mention the fact that most local cops don't care or know the details of most Fed laws.
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 7:47:11 AM EDT
If it didn't ship till after the ban you bought a post-ban receiver since it wasn't a complete rifle. It is worth about $250 if it is a complete lower, about $120 stripped.
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 7:55:00 AM EDT
Posted By neilfj "Not to mention the fact that most local cops don't care" _______________________________________________ Exactly! I know about the Crime Bill. The point I am trying to make, is that, they could have nit picked ie: questioned me. They did not. Ok! Here! Does anyone have a legitimate story having to do with a BATF visit???????? I am not saying anything to the original post about breaking the law. If you pay for a pre-ban lower, and find out you get a post-ban, I would be pissed too!! Just don't be so PARANOID! Hey guys got news for ya! Speeding is breaking the law too! Who here doesn't do that?? Here comes the flaming!!! Spooge Out!
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 8:08:13 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Spooge5150: The point I am trying to make, is that, they could have nit picked ie: questioned me. They did not.
View Quote
True, but it is not something you or anyone can count on 100% of the time. Most people would never have an issue or a problem.
Ok! Here! Does anyone have a legitimate story having to do with a BATF visit????????
View Quote
Probably not going to find too many responses in the positive. Although there have been plenty of charges made about violation of the AWB, all I have ever heard reported is that those violations are usually tossed away as part of plea negotiation.
I am not saying anything to the original post about breaking the law. If you pay for a pre-ban lower, and find out you get a post-ban, I would be pissed too!!
View Quote
Definately! There is no doubt that his lower was a post-ban.
Just don't be so PARANOID!
View Quote
Not a question about being paranoid. Its about knowing the law and making the decision yourself.
Hey guys got news for ya! Speeding is breaking the law too! Who here doesn't do that??
View Quote
Yes it is, and yes I do it, but I know it is illegal and choose to do it anyway. Quite a bit different from not knowing and someone telling me it is legal if I do it between 1am - 3am. Whether I know the law or not, in either instance I'd be guilty.
Here comes the flaming!!!
View Quote
For what?
View Quote
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 8:24:48 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 8:57:48 AM EDT
Spooge, So long as you make an informed decision, up to you. Just don't continue the innocent until proven innocent rap. It ain't so! And just because there are no cases YET of someone getting screwed for this, don't assume it won't happen. Again, it depends on if you have pissed off the powers that be. I don't want to be the test case. Finally, compared to speeding (a fine? at worst loss of license), if you ARE prosecuted for an illegal AW, the penalties are jail time (in years friend) and cash in tens of thousands of dollars. And no more guns - ever. My opinion? WHY DO IT. Who needs a bayonet lug anyway? If you do - pay the price for a complete Colt rifle shipped from the factory in that configuration. And keep the original upper it comes with. Is this a stupid law? You bet. We all agree on that. If someone wants to break it, no skin off my nose. I just want to be sure anyone on this board that reads this understands the law and possible penalty. Then they can do as they please.
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 9:21:16 AM EDT
Aimless: It's.. If you "OR" anyone else wants to violate the AWB! And first of all. I have all pre-ban AR's!! I am NOT telling ANYONE to break the law, I'm am just saying.. don't be so paranoid if you happen to find, by ACCIDENT, or by the fault of others, like the person who started this thread, that you have an illegal gun. Just fix it and move on. There is no big red siren that goes off in the BATF, when a post-ban gun gets made into a pre-ban. There are alot of people just getting into this hobbie/addiction, that have NO idea what the whole pre/post thing is about, and there are people who will prey on that knowledge. jimmybcool: Just don't continue the innocent until proven innocent rap. It ain't so! ????? Innocent until proven guilty! Last time I checked that is what AMERICA is all about! [;D] P.S. I love all of you. Let's go out for wings and beer! [beer]
Link Posted: 7/28/2003 10:06:00 AM EDT
Sorry if this ruins your day but from a BATF viewpoint your lower is now a post ban, Period. Since you bought it as a lower only it is no longer a grandfathered rifle but a post ban lower. IIRC they have issued an opinion that once the upper and lower are sold as seperate parts the parts are no longer covered by the grandfather provisions of the law. I am not a lawyer so you chould check with one but I think even if you had the letter it does not matter. 'guzzi
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top