Posted: 1/16/2013 9:55:41 AM EDT
|
|
Quoted:
I don't see anything in this law about Constructive Intent. We all know that in the AR world the lower is considered "the gun". So why can't he just separate the upper and lower (and remove the pistol grip) and store them separately. Also, attach one of those god awful California hunting stocks to the lower. At that point the lower is "a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable" but has NONE of the characteristics listed below. Therefore he owns no "Assault Weapons" requiring registration or exportation. I'd like to see the OP's question answered. I reworded it slightly to remove the California aspect. Yes, CA AR's are hideous, but I don't think that is where he wanted this discussion to go. |
|
Quoted:
You guys would "REALLY" give up owning instead of having that? Wow, well alrighty then. As for me I think this is a perfect firearm that complies with the laws that may come to pass. That thing in the picture is a monstrosity that shouldn't have to exist in any state |
|
I think you should be able to strip a gun down to the components, and technically you don't have a non-complacent AR, If you have a blocked mag, and compliant rifle parts, you could always claim you were going to make that version. Although you are subject to interpretation.
|