Posted: 5/21/2006 8:16:04 AM EDT
|
I am under the impression that you cannot own a pre ban Bushmaster unless it was registered way back when the AWB was signed in CT. Am I mistaken? I ask because I posted a Want to Buy ad for a preban and I stated no colts no bushmasters. Then I get an IM from someone stating that I could own a preban bushmaster? Someone help please . |
|
By reading this, I am under the impression that you can not own a bushamster preban because it is listed under the specific rifles named??? Totally fucking confused (1) Any selective-fire firearm capable of fully automatic, semiautomatic or burst fire at the option of the user or any of the following specified semiautomatic firearms: Algimec Agmi Armalite AR-180 Australian Automatic Arms SAP Pistol Auto-Ordnance Thompson type Avtomat Kalashnikov AK-47 type Barrett Light-Fifty model 82A1 Beretta AR-70; Bushmaster Auto Rifle and Auto Pistol Calico models M-900, M-950 and 100-P
|
HMMM!!! Better to be safe than sorry. Anyone else out there have a Bushy Pre Ban purchased after the CT AWB???
|
|
A Preban Bushmaster is not an Assault Weapon in Ct. Also, as far as a rifle being in pre-ban (or "assault weapon" configuration) when the ban went into effect, you don't need to worry about it. The exemption in CT law only states that the firearm has to have been "manufactured" prior to the ban. Here is the exact wording: 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, provided such firearm was legally manufactured prior to September 13, 1994. Bags |
|
Hornetdriver, what is your point? I think we all agree that a pre-ban Bushmaster is legal. We were just discussing serial numbers. When I said checking with "them" I meant Bushmaster. Send them an email and they will let you know when it shipped and if it was a rifle or lower only. I think my Dissipator is about as close to the end of preban you can get at 9/3/94. I'm sure there are other rifles that were made in the 10 days left after mine but I haven't seen any. The Bushmaster sight lists L052000 to L062999 as questionable status and to conctact them, but I always contact them when looking to buy a Bushmaster. They respond within a couple days and if the rifle sells before that so be it. I skipped on a rilfe that was supposed to be preban and it sold before I got the info from Bushmaster. The info from Bushmaster said it was post ban so you have to be careful. If you know anyone in a non banned state have them send them home to CT. |
|
audibk, My point is that a lot of people in Ct. think that a rifle that is pre-ban also has to have been in the AWB configuration before the ban, just like the old Federal AWB language. That is not true for Ct. Although our language was brought into line with the federal AWB language in 2001, it was not exact. For instance, we don't have a Hi-cap mag ban in Ct. like the federal ban did. The exemption Sec. 53-202m was added to the law because there were hundreds (if not thousands) of guns in the state that would have had to be registered when they added the federal language to our ban in 2001. The nightmare that was the original registration process was fresh in their minds and they just didn't want to go there again. An example of another state is Massachusetts. Theirs specifically say it must have been an AW prior to 9/13/94. Ours just says the firearm must have been "manufactured" prior to 9/13/94 to be exempted. That was my point and it was aimed at the original Post in this section. Bags |
|
Thanks for the clarification Hornetdriver. Towgunner, we're having a good discussion here but thanks for your concern. Unfortunately, the SLFU interprets it as having to have been in pre-ban condition prior to the ban. This means bayonet lug, FH, etc..... If you read the law it could be interpreted either way but it does mention "as defined in subdividion 3 ........." I won't buy a "lower only" unless I get a notarized letter that it was in preban configuration prior to the ban. That's also why I like Olympic prebans. No records, just date ranges. 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, provided such firearm was legally manufactured prior to September 13, 1994. |
| Thanks for the clarifications. With each reading(3times) of the statues I get more confused. I think I may be reading to "deep" there are some confusing issues. Like my original post. I thought for the last decade all Bushmasters where banned. Never knew a "Bushmaster auto rifle" existed. Thanks for the information. |
|
I sent a letter asking if I could convert a Remington 1100 that is more than 20 years old and add a pistol grip and extended mag ( I added enough information to meet the definition of an assault weapon based on the shotgun info in the law). They said that it had to be an "Assault Weapon" by definition prior to the ban and that I could not convert it now that the ban is in effect. I will have to look for the letter. I will scan it in when I find it. I did not want to use an AR as an example hoping to get a true interpretation of the law without the scary AR15 clouding their vision. I talked to an officer there and he made the assumption that if it was a lower only and made far enough prior to the ban like 6mos to a year it would most likely be assumed to have been assembled as a completer rifle because of the Federal ban. Proving it wasn't assembled into a complete rifle if it was shipped as a lower only is what they have for burden of proof. So, you could go with the fact that they can't prove it wasn't assembled into a complete rilfe with evil features or be more conservative like me and get someone to sign something that it was or have a letter stating it shipped as a complete rifle, or have no data (no proof) like Olympic. |