Posted: 6/12/2010 7:26:42 PM EDT
| Anyone know whether there was a model "Ar-15" with Sporter" only stamped on receiver and not Sporter lightweight, Sporter Match Target, Sporter II? I know there is a "AR-15" with "model SP1" stamped on receiver. |
|
Quoted: Anyone else? I've searched and found that their are preban AR-15 A2 but most "sporters" have lightweight,match target and so on. Any reason why you care? If it's a Colt with the word "AR-15" (in any variation) or the word "Sporter" (in any variation) it's still a CT no-go. |
|
Quoted:
Anyone else? I've searched and found that their are preban AR-15 A2 but most "sporters" have lightweight,match target and so on. As others have said, any Colt (pre-ban or not) with "AR-15" and or "Sporter" stamped on it are banned by name in the CT AWB (Sec. 53-202a). Per the actual statute... Link Sec. 53-202a. Assault weapons: Definition. (a) As used in this section and sections 53-202b to 53-202k, inclusive, "assault weapon" means: (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; Chartered Industries of Singapore SR-88; Colt AR-15 and Sporter; Daewoo K-1, K-2, Max-1 and Max-2; Encom MK-IV, MP-9 and MP-45; Fabrique Nationale FN/FAL, FN/LAR, or FN/FNC; FAMAS MAS 223; Feather AT-9 and Mini-AT; Federal XC-900 and XC-450; Franchi SPAS-12 and LAW-12; Galil AR and ARM; Goncz High-Tech Carbine and High-Tech Long Pistol; Heckler & Koch HK-91, HK-93, HK-94 and SP-89; Holmes MP-83; MAC-10, MAC-11 and MAC-11 Carbine type; Intratec TEC-9 and Scorpion; Iver Johnson Enforcer model 3000; Ruger Mini-14/5F folding stock model only; Scarab Skorpion; SIG 57 AMT and 500 series; Spectre Auto Carbine and Auto Pistol; Springfield Armory BM59, SAR-48 and G-3; Sterling MK-6 and MK-7; Steyr AUG; Street Sweeper and Striker 12 revolving cylinder shotguns; USAS-12; UZI Carbine, Mini-Carbine and Pistol; Weaver Arms Nighthawk; Wilkinson "Linda" Pistol; |
|
Any reason why you care? If it's a Colt with the word "AR-15" (in any variation) or the word "Sporter" (in any variation) it's still a CT no-go.
So because it's illegal in CT the question can't be asked? I already know it's listed in CT AWB. Blackhawk 101 reminded me of that and I entertained the reply just to get his opinion. All I'm looking for is someone that might have some info I'm looking for. I am repeating, I am not asking a question of legality. I know what the statutes says and figure that certain people here who are knowledgeable with Colts might have info on it. i.e. your "COLT CARBINE" |
|
Quoted: Any reason why you care? If it's a Colt with the word "AR-15" (in any variation) or the word "Sporter" (in any variation) it's still a CT no-go. So because it's illegal in CT the question can't be asked? I already know it's listed in CT AWB. Blackhawk 101 reminded me of that and I entertained the reply just to get his opinion. All I'm looking for is someone that might have some info I'm looking for. I am repeating, I am not asking a question of legality. I know what the statutes says and figure that certain people here who are knowledgeable with Colts might have info on it. i.e. your "COLT CARBINE" You asked, and then after Blackhawk101 answered, you asked again... so I was curious as to whether there was a specific reason why you were pressing on this. Like, you were writing a book... or you made a bet with a one-legged prostitute... or you were contesting whether an "A2" or "Lightweight" would make a difference. Don't be hatin'.  |
|
Quoted:
Any reason why you care? If it's a Colt with the word "AR-15" (in any variation) or the word "Sporter" (in any variation) it's still a CT no-go.
So because it's illegal in CT the question can't be asked? I already know it's listed in CT AWB. Blackhawk 101 reminded me of that and I entertained the reply just to get his opinion. All I'm looking for is someone that might have some info I'm looking for. I am repeating, I am not asking a question of legality. I know what the statutes says and figure that certain people here who are knowledgeable with Colts might have info on it. i.e. your "COLT CARBINE" I'd ask this question in the Colt Industry section, there are probably some people there who can help you. |
|
http://pics.gunbroker.com/GB/170976000/170976025/pix3510355375.jpg
forgot the Gov't Carbine http://pics.gunbroker.com/GB/170975000/170975120/pix3509614718.jpg or the A3 tactical Carbine |
|
"Sporter" and "AR15" were two different series of rifles, just like "Match Target" is a series of rifles now. SP1 was a specific model.
That being the case, there was never a model that just said "SPORTER" without saying Match HBAR, or Lightweight, etc. There are also no rifles marked "SPORTER" that also say "AR-15" on them. |
|
Quoted:
If you are interested in a CT legal preban Colt and have $4,000 I will part with my LNIB Colt Carbine that I purchased factory new in 1995. 
so u bought it in 95 but i was manufactured in 94 or prior i'm guessing? thats the line they only made like 200 of correct Quoted:
http://pics.gunbroker.com/GB/170976000/170976025/pix3510355375.jpg forgot the Gov't Carbine http://pics.gunbroker.com/GB/170975000/170975120/pix3509614718.jpg or the A3 tactical Carbine you have those in CT? or just google image search for different versions Edit... after i posted that i realized they were hot linked from Gunbroker |
|
Rgaper can confirm but I believe the original Colt Carbines are marked only "Colt Carbine" - they do not, iirc, have AR-15 or Sporter anywhere on them.
The two pics you linked are still illegal as they clearly state "AR-15" on them. If these were in any way legal I guarantee Jo-Jo's would be pumping them out even if they had to be neutered. You appear to be trying to find some wiggle room in a law that has none. Its very clear- "AR-15" is illegal no matter if it says "A2" or "A3" at the end or has "carbine" stamped under it so long as it was produced by Colt. If it said AR-15 on a Spikes lower have a ball. Purchase the above at your own risk- if the FFL knows the laws they won't even accept them for transfer- if they are kind they will box them up and ship them back. If they follow the law they must hand them over to the police. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: If you are interested in a CT legal preban Colt and have $4,000 I will part with my LNIB Colt Carbine that I purchased factory new in 1995. so u bought it in 95 but i was manufactured in 94 or prior i'm guessing? thats the line they only made like 200 of correct Correct. A lot of the preban stuff was still sitting on shelves brand new in late 1994 and 1995. The prices just went up a few hundred bucks. In my case, I bought from a shop that happened to have one of the Colt Carbines on the shelf. It was my 2nd AR, and my 2nd Colt. My first was a MT6551 which I bought right after the 1994 ban started... I was confused why it lacked a lug and flash suppressor like it showed in the catalog. |
|
Quoted: What about that "Government Carbine" I found a while back that your buddy bought? IIRC it was on GB from a outdoors place in Alaska. Serial number started with GC. No AR-15 or Sporter on the receiver at all. Pretty sure those are marked "AR-15 Government Carbine."  |
|
Quoted:
What about that "Government Carbine" I found a while back that your buddy bought? IIRC it was on GB from a outdoors place in Alaska. Serial number started with GC. No AR-15 or Sporter on the receiver at all. It was a "Colt Carbine" just like the one I posted above. That's the only model before the ban that was not marked "AR15" or "Sporter." |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Anyone else? I've searched and found that their are preban AR-15 A2 but most "sporters" have lightweight,match target and so on. As others have said, any Colt (pre-ban or not) with "AR-15" and or "Sporter" stamped on it are banned by name in the CT AWB (Sec. 53-202a). Per the actual statute... Link Sec. 53-202a. Assault weapons: Definition. (a) As used in this section and sections 53-202b to 53-202k, inclusive, "assault weapon" means: (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; Chartered Industries of Singapore SR-88; Colt AR-15 and Sporter; Daewoo K-1, K-2, Max-1 and Max-2; Encom MK-IV, MP-9 and MP-45; Fabrique Nationale FN/FAL, FN/LAR, or FN/FNC; FAMAS MAS 223; Feather AT-9 and Mini-AT; Federal XC-900 and XC-450; Franchi SPAS-12 and LAW-12; Galil AR and ARM; Goncz High-Tech Carbine and High-Tech Long Pistol; Heckler & Koch HK-91, HK-93, HK-94 and SP-89; Holmes MP-83; MAC-10, MAC-11 and MAC-11 Carbine type; Intratec TEC-9 and Scorpion; Iver Johnson Enforcer model 3000; Ruger Mini-14/5F folding stock model only; Scarab Skorpion; SIG 57 AMT and 500 series; Spectre Auto Carbine and Auto Pistol; Springfield Armory BM59, SAR-48 and G-3; Sterling MK-6 and MK-7; Steyr AUG; Street Sweeper and Striker 12 revolving cylinder shotguns; USAS-12; UZI Carbine, Mini-Carbine and Pistol; Weaver Arms Nighthawk; Wilkinson "Linda" Pistol; I think it is pretty clear that the "and" in the statute is meant to diferentiate between models and series the same as it is used in the Bushmaster, Daewoo, Sterling, etc... listings. |
|
Quoted:
Armalite AR180 is also listed correct? Where am I going with this................ Nowhere. I and others have already stated that the only preban Colt that is GTG in CT now is the "Colt Carbine." End of story. EVERY other semi-auto Colt made before 9.13.94 carries either an "AR15" or "Sporter" marking on it. This has been gone over many times. |
|
Quoted:
Armalite AR180 is also listed correct? Where am I going with this................ Well at this point it sounds like where your going is the potential for a felony rap. So I would say quit being coy and simply state where you are going with this versus the lets see how many hairs I can split. |
|
Quoted:
Armalite AR180 is also listed correct? Where am I going with this................ Uh, where are YOU going with this ? Why do you continue to ask questions about buying firearms that are banned, by name, in CT AWB? Are you just trying to be funny with your posts, in your effort to split hairs on the CT AWB language? If you buy any firearm that is listed BY NAME as banned in the CT AWB, be it pre ban or post ban (as the previously posted statues indicate), you are immediately in violation of the state statues, and if caught could be charged and probably convicted of a Class D Felony per the CT Sec. 53-202c statute. This state's AWB sucks and need to be challenged. That will come after a favorable ruling (if we get one) in the SCOTUS decision in the Chicago 2A Incorporation case. At least for NOW we can still buy AR-15's if properly neutered. What is so important about having the banned "by name" rifle that would make you risk a felony arrest? |
|
Here is my original inquiry Anyone know whether there was a model "Ar-15" with Sporter" only stamped on receiver and not Sporter lightweight, Sporter Match Target, Sporter II? I know there is a "AR-15" with "model SP1" stamped on receiver.
All I was looking for was someone who had information to contribute, but no, instead it was sort of derailed to a legality discussion. So I entertained the response but still wanted to hear from someone who could answer my inquiry. Nevertheless, the response is why do I care only because all colt stamped "AR-15 or Sporters" are illegal to own blah, blah, blah then comes in the verbage for CT AWB. Not until RealfastV6 replied did I get someone that answered my question instead of being condescending. Where am I going with this? According to the majority of replies if it's stamped "AR-15" it's illegal including "AR-15 A2." Why? because "AR-15" is on the receiver, well Armalite "AR180" is also listed but Armalite "AR180b" is legal. Yes, I believe this has been discussed a while back. Does anyone remember why AR180b is allow eventhough "AR180" is on the receiver? If we all just accept things without questions or discussion then might as well stop lobbying for gun rights/ownership. When CSP originally interpreted that "all" AK-47 types were illegal, I'm glad there was a gun advocate that questioned and challenged it so now the other calibers are allowed. Mods please close thread, my inquiry has been answered. I will start any future inquiries with "not a legality question" so not to waste anyones time. |
|
Quoted:
Here is my original inquiry Anyone know whether there was a model "Ar-15" with Sporter" only stamped on receiver and not Sporter lightweight, Sporter Match Target, Sporter II? I know there is a "AR-15" with "model SP1" stamped on receiver.
All I was looking for was someone who had information to contribute, but no, instead it was sort of derailed to a legality discussion. So I entertained the response but still wanted to hear from someone who could answer my inquiry. Nevertheless, the response is why do I care only because all colt stamped "AR-15 or Sporters" are illegal to own blah, blah, blah then comes in the verbage for CT AWB. Not until RealfastV6 replied did I get someone that answered my question instead of being condescending. Where am I going with this? According to the majority of replies if it's stamped "AR-15" it's illegal including "AR-15 A2." Why? because "AR-15" is on the receiver, well Armalite "AR180" is also listed but Armalite "AR180b" is legal. Yes, I believe this has been discussed a while back. Does anyone remember why AR180b is allow eventhough "AR180" is on the receiver? If we all just accept things without questions or discussion then might as well stop lobbying for gun rights/ownership. When CSP originally interpreted that "all" AK-47 types were illegal, I'm glad there was a gun advocate that questioned and challenged it so now the other calibers are allowed. Mods please close thread, my inquiry has been answered. I will start any future inquiries with "not a legality question" so not to waste anyones time. It's been, what, 16, 17 years since the ban? You don't think anyone has thought of this before? You don't think some of the "in the know" shops in CT would be stocking and selling preban Colt's if that loophole existed? I think everyone knew where this thread was going which is why you go the answers you got. ETA - did you ever ask the question in the Colt forum here? Because that would be the best place to get the answer without the legalities involved. The Retro forum also has a lot of people who know stuff like this. |
|
Quoted:
Here is my original inquiry Anyone know whether there was a model "Ar-15" with Sporter" only stamped on receiver and not Sporter lightweight, Sporter Match Target, Sporter II? I know there is a "AR-15" with "model SP1" stamped on receiver.
All I was looking for was someone who had information to contribute, but no, instead it was sort of derailed to a legality discussion. So I entertained the response but still wanted to hear from someone who could answer my inquiry. Nevertheless, the response is why do I care only because all colt stamped "AR-15 or Sporters" are illegal to own blah, blah, blah then comes in the verbage for CT AWB. Not until RealfastV6 replied did I get someone that answered my question instead of being condescending. Where am I going with this? According to the majority of replies if it's stamped "AR-15" it's illegal including "AR-15 A2." Why? because "AR-15" is on the receiver, well Armalite "AR180" is also listed but Armalite "AR180b" is legal. Yes, I believe this has been discussed a while back. Does anyone remember why AR180b is allow eventhough "AR180" is on the receiver? If we all just accept things without questions or discussion then might as well stop lobbying for gun rights/ownership. When CSP originally interpreted that "all" AK-47 types were illegal, I'm glad there was a gun advocate that questioned and challenged it so now the other calibers are allowed. Mods please close thread, my inquiry has been answered. I will start any future inquiries with "not a legality question" so not to waste anyones time. It should be noted that the AK-47 question was not challenged- the Soviet version of AK-47s are all 7.62x39 whereas other calibers have different designations. Effectively what happend was politicians, not being the brightest on the planet, put in a model type versus a gun type. If the AWB stated "all AK varients" then we would not be allowed even alternate round AKs. The same holds true for the AR platform- of they had stated "all AR variants" as opposed to naming 2 specific model types we would be screwed in that direction. However, feel free to be the test case. |
|
Actually, the AK47 type question was challenged.
From June of 2002 through early February of 2003, there was effectively a ban in Connecticut on all retail sales of any Kalashnikov semi auto variants. During this time, no dealer would transfer a Kalashnikov variant, regardless of caliber. CSP SLFU when asked about for example, SAR-2's or Romak 3's, declared them to be "assault weapons" under the CT AWB. Dealers at gun shows were told to remove all Kalashnikov variants, regardless of caliber or model, from the premises. All this came about due to the January 2002 Ct Superior Court case in Bantam, where the CSP SLFU unveiled their new interpretation/criteria on what exactly AK-47 "Type" meant. In June of 2002, the CSP issued letters and fliers to all CT retail firearm dealers, announcing that sales of all AK-47 variations would no longer be considered legal. The flyer outlined the new criteria as to what AK-47 TYPE meant........1. Looks like an AK-47 2. Interchanges parts with an AK-47 3. Functions like an AK-47 However, out of arrogance or lack of any real knowledge about Kalashnikov derived models, standard operating procedure for the SLFU was to label ANYTHING Kalashnikov a "No Go", based largely on the infamous quote.."If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, than it must be a duck." After several dealers balked at doing a SAR-2 transfer for me, I decided to challenge the the CSP SLFU on their all encompassing ban, focusing on calibers and parts interchangeability. Took a few months of letters and phone calls, all the way up the chain of command at SLFU, but it ended well. |
|
Quoted:
Actually, the AK47 type question was challenged. From June of 2002 through early February of 2003, there was effectively a ban in Connecticut on all retail sales of any Kalashnikov semi auto variants. During this time, no dealer would transfer a Kalashnikov variant, regardless of caliber. CSP SLFU when asked about for example, SAR-2's or Romak 3's, declared them to be "assault weapons" under the CT AWB. Dealers at gun shows were told to remove all Kalashnikov variants, regardless of caliber or model, from the premises. All this came about due to the January 2002 Ct Superior Court case in Bantam, where the CSP SLFU unveiled their new interpretation/criteria on what exactly AK-47 "Type" meant. In June of 2002, the CSP issued letters and fliers to all CT retail firearm dealers, announcing that sales of all AK-47 variations would no longer be considered legal. The flyer outlined the new criteria as to what AK-47 TYPE meant........1. Looks like an AK-47 2. Interchanges parts with an AK-47 3. Functions like an AK-47 However, out of arrogance or lack of any real knowledge about Kalashnikov derived models, standard operating procedure for the SLFU was to label ANYTHING Kalashnikov a "No Go", based largely on the infamous quote.."If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, than it must be a duck." After several dealers balked at doing a SAR-2 transfer for me, I decided to challenge the the CSP SLFU on their all encompassing ban, focusing on calibers and parts interchangeability. Took a few months of letters and phone calls, all the way up the chain of command at SLFU, but it ended well. I never knew that! Well in that respect I guess I was wrong. Thanks for running that to ground. |