Posted: 2/2/2010 7:23:01 AM EDT
|
I know that the Colt AR-15 and Sporters are banned by name in Connecticut,
are there any Colt AR rifles that are OK to purchase/own in Connecticut? I am not knowledgeable on their models, either long before or long after "The Ban", maybe someone can enlighten me. Supposedly, the quality is top-notch, not sure if it's worth the hassle, though... |
|
The "Colt Carbine" is the only preban Colt that is legal to purchase and own now in CT. It was the only pre 9.13.94 Colt without "AR15" or "Sporter" markings.
Any non "AR15" or "Sporter" marked Colt is legal to own. The Match Target series is already post ban compliant. If you wanted to get a 6920 "LE Carbine" or 6921 "M4 LE" they would have to be made ban compliant before entering the state. In factory configuration they are in voilation of the AWB. |
|
Quoted:
so just the name of the model, thanks. I thought they had other feature that regular AR's did not have. Just to be clear- the models listed by name are banned no matter what you do to them to bring them into compliance. The only way you can own a "Colt Sporter" for example is that you had to have had it in your possession prior to the AWB *and* have it registered with the state prior to the registration cut-off date. If you bought a "Colt Sporter" now and pinned on a brake its still illegal. A registered named weapon cannot be sold- it must stay with the original owner and may only be passed on at death to an inheritor, abandoned to DPS, or sold out of state. Other ARs- barring non-named pre-bans- must still comply with the AWB which means no folding/collapsing stock, no flashhider, no threaded barrel, etc The only pre-ban Colt that can be owned without restriction is the one marked "Colt Carbine". That model and any other non-named pre-bans are not covered by the AWB which means you can add any evil feature you want to them. As a side note- some seem to think that if you SBR an AR that it does not have to comply with the CT AWB- this is incorrect. You can still make a post-ban an SBR but it must still comply with the AWB restrcitions. |
|
Quoted: As a side note- some seem to think that if you SBR an AR that it does not have to comply with the CT AWB- this is incorrect. You can still make a post-ban an SBR but it must still comply with the AWB restrcitions. That's right. The only thing that SBR'ing relieves you of is 922r compliance. (US parts count) For most guns that really doesn't matter, but for HK-clones it's a very good thing because it means you can dump out crappy US-made internals and install HK (German) goodies. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
As a side note- some seem to think that if you SBR an AR that it does not have to comply with the CT AWB- this is incorrect. You can still make a post-ban an SBR but it must still comply with the AWB restrcitions. That's right. The only thing that SBR'ing relieves you of is 922r compliance. (US parts count) For most guns that really doesn't matter, but for HK-clones it's a very good thing because it means you can dump out crappy US-made internals and install HK (German) goodies. SBR/Sing a firearm does not relieve you from haveing to comply with 922r. 922r says any semi-automatic rifle or any shotgun. While there is a good argument for SBS and SBR to not be covered by 922r (which ATF FTB has used in the past) they tend to be leaning towards 922r does apply in their current letters. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
As a side note- some seem to think that if you SBR an AR that it does not have to comply with the CT AWB- this is incorrect. You can still make a post-ban an SBR but it must still comply with the AWB restrcitions. That's right. The only thing that SBR'ing relieves you of is 922r compliance. (US parts count) For most guns that really doesn't matter, but for HK-clones it's a very good thing because it means you can dump out crappy US-made internals and install HK (German) goodies. SBR/Sing a firearm does not relieve you from haveing to comply with 922r. 922r says any semi-automatic rifle or any shotgun. While there is a good argument for SBS and SBR to not be covered by 922r (which ATF FTB has used in the past) they tend to be leaning towards 922r does apply in their current letters. I thought it was pretty widely understood that NFA items are not covered by 922r. It always has been in the past and many dealers have sold rifles under this understanding. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: As a side note- some seem to think that if you SBR an AR that it does not have to comply with the CT AWB- this is incorrect. You can still make a post-ban an SBR but it must still comply with the AWB restrcitions. That's right. The only thing that SBR'ing relieves you of is 922r compliance. (US parts count) For most guns that really doesn't matter, but for HK-clones it's a very good thing because it means you can dump out crappy US-made internals and install HK (German) goodies. SBR/Sing a firearm does not relieve you from haveing to comply with 922r. 922r says any semi-automatic rifle or any shotgun. While there is a good argument for SBS and SBR to not be covered by 922r (which ATF FTB has used in the past) they tend to be leaning towards 922r does apply in their current letters. I thought it was pretty widely understood that NFA items are not covered by 922r. It always has been in the past and many dealers have sold rifles under this understanding. There's at least one BATFE Technology Branch letter floating around that confirmed this. That's not to say that contradictory letters don't exist (this is the government we're talking about) but it sure doesn't seem like there is much disagreement on this point. ETA - here's the latest thread I found on the subject. Good reading and as always, super-helpful, clear & correct information. /sarcasm http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=6&f=22&t=302593 |