What is a reasonaable price for a pre-ban lower?  Bushmaster preferred.  What would be considered a bargain?  How much is too much?

A bargain price is anyhing under $950 or so. Going rate is between $950 and about $1200. Anything over that is too much unless its coming with an upgraded trigger ot stock.

Please be aware that a stripped lower cannot be built into a preban configuration at this time and if a rifle is transfered and not specifically named under the ban (like a Colt) then it must reatain enough preban features to allow it to be transfered as a preban.  Therefore; you must purchase a completed preban lower with collapsable stock to be in compliance with the assualt weapon ban.

Hopefully in a year a reasonable price for one will be $100 stripped.

Yea but a preban bushmaster can be verified at the factory as being a complete rifle before the ban. So the only way anyone will know it has been seperated from its "pre ban parts" is #1 you tell someone (if your stupid) or #2 lets be really stupid.. the secret ATF agent in your bushes video tapes you seperating it from its preban parts..HMMMMM well I think you would be safe but if your worried put a tele stock on it but I doubt anyone will lose sleep if it didnt come with the tele stock IMO.
           FREE

I'm not sure I understand this part. The complete rifle does not have to have a collapsable stock provided it has at least 2 of the named features. The lower receiver by itself, even with a collapsable stock, does not meet the definition of a semiautomatic assault weapon.

yes it does removable mag (#1) pistol grip (#2) and a telestock that makes (#3)so it is an official evil receiver!!
        FREE

Of course you wont get caught I just wanted to let him know the technicality.  My Bushmaster was not a complete rifle it was a lower only.  There is no way for me to really proove it was a preban but it was transfered with the collapsing stock and I had the FFL who sold it to me write "Sepereated from complete preban rifle" on my sales ticket.  I dont like to break the law if its not necessary.  If your going to go through the trouble of buying a preban instead of just putting preban parts on a post ban IMO you might as well do it right.

going rate would be around $550 and up.  what you see advertised is not always the price that's paid.  i sold one a few months ago for $650.  

There is another way to abide by the law and protect yourself at the same time. If it is possible, buy the lower with the upper (a complete rifle) and then the buyer ships the upper back to the original seller. You do not need a FFL for the upper by itself. Now, there is a lot of trust issues here and/or the buyer could just put a deposit on the upper and the seller returns it when the upper is sent back. This can be a PITA, but it is perfectly legal and could keep someone's ass out of trouble.

That's best solution I've read so far if you can get over the trust issues.  ALso, how about sending the seller a pre-ban upper to send with the lower?  That way you don't have to mail back the upper.

If you use a pre-ban upper without a bolt and carrier will it still be concidered a whole rifle?

I mean no disrespect but I'm going to have to disagree. There is no such thing as an evil receiver. The lower receiver is a firearm. It is not a semiautomatic assault weapon and is not, in itself, governed by the AWB.

[b]922(a)(28)[/b] The term [b]semiautomatic rifle[/b] means any repeating rifle which utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing cartridge to extract the fired cartridge case and chamber the next round, and which requires a seperate pull of the trigger to fire each cartridge.

[b]922(a)(30)[/b] The term [b]"semiautomatic assault weapon"[/b] means...

[b]922(a)(30)(B)[/b] a [b]semiautomatic rifle[/b] that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of -
(i) a folding or telescoping stock;
(ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
(iii) a bayonet mount;
(iv) a flash supressor or threaded barrel designed to accomodate a flash supressor; and
(v) a grenade launcher;

While the lower receiver with a collapsable stock has the required number of features it fails to meet the greater requirement that it be a semiautomatic rifle.


Fair enough, just trying to do the same thing.

The ATF deems that a rifle that is a legit preban rifle and is trandsfered without enough features to be considered a preban "neutered" and it becomes post ban.  If you dont like that take it up with the ATF.  Its what THEY say on the matter and I am just repeating it.  I have written more than one leter to the ATF and called them on more than one time too.  As they say, you may beat the rap but you wont beat the ride.  ATF has made its stand.

No agruement with that. All I'm saying is that the lower receiver is not a rifle therefore does not meet the definition of a semiautomatic assault weapon regardless of what stock is on it. So transfering a lower only, even with collapsable stock, does not have adequate features to retain pre-ban status in the opinion of ATF.

Are we saying the same thing just differently?

No the ATF says selling a stripped lower or a fixed stock lower has removed enough features that it is not in a preban configuration.  

If you put a post ban upper on the preban fixed stock lower it would be in a post abn form.  If you did the same with a collapsable stock it would still eb in preban form.  If you convert a rifle (the whole rifle barrel and all) to post ban compliant and sell it that way it would be a post ban rifle at that point and could not be rebuilt in to a preban by the next owner.  This made no sense to me at all when I was told it by an ATF agent but it was repeated and clarified.  I have heard others mention it too but to date I dont have a letter backing that one up nor have I seen one.  Nothing is written in stone till its in the form of an offical letter from the technical branch.  I am just repeating what I was told.

Agreed. Likewise, a lower receiver [b]only[/b], stripped or complete, even with a collapsable stock is not in pre-ban configuration either.

Agreed. Semiautomatic rifle lacking 2 or more of the named features.

Agreed, it would be a semiautomatic rifle with 2 of the named features.


Agreed.


Title 18, USC, Chp 44 does a pretty good job.

We agree on most of this. My original impression was that you were talking about something like [url=http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=6&t=206369]this[/url].

SO your trying to me that I paid $1200 for a postban lower with a collapsable stock and when I snapped my upper on it that was a felony?

Then it is legal for Bushmaster to sell a complete postban lower with a collapsing stock becasue its not a semi automatic rifle?

Well I may have a postban configured as a preban then... oh well.

Dang, this is a confusing issue. It makes teh $1900 a dealer is asking for a NIB Colt Lightweight look really good.

"Yea but a preban bushmaster can be verified at the factory as being a complete rifle before the ban. So the only way anyone will know it has been seperated from its "pre ban parts" is #1 you tell someone (if your stupid) or #2 lets be really stupid.. the secret ATF agent in your bushes video tapes you seperating it from its preban parts..HMMMMM well I think you would be safe but if your worried put a tele stock on it but I doubt anyone will lose sleep if it didnt come with the tele stock IMO.
FREE"

With all due respect to FreeFall (I have never heard of a single person being prosecuted for a postban preban config rifle.)

I paid $750 for an OLY ARMS preban lower with chinese telestock attached.  (the chinese telestock and cheap lower completion kit went and I moly coated the worn lower.)

If the ban goes down in January of next year I will sell it for $150 and get a new reciever that has the latest enhancements.  Till then... I am keeping it as a new ban would send prices to double what they are now and I could no longer afford one.

[b]And I'll be happy to lose the $600 knowing that our country has taken a step toward freedom and away from liberal-imposed communism for a change[/b]

Actually the ban does not sunset until Sept. of 2004.

Hey DevL, that's why it's a good thing we're just debating legal terminology on the interent. In the real world, the more relevant questions would be:

#1. Who is really going to know?
#2. Who is really going to care?

Edited to add this-
IMO here are the most likely scenarios. Semi-auto assault weapon comes into question. Serial number checked for date of mfg. Made in 1992 - that's before the ban - no further action likely. Made in 2002 - during the ban - it gets added to whatever else you're being charged with that got you in trouble for in the first place.

I've said it before, but it bears repeating...

All this nit picking & legal hair splitting will fall by the wayside if we do our part to prevent the AW ban from being re-authorized (or made MUCH worse) next September!!!

To this end, I direct you to...

[url=www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=203989]The Essential "End the AW Ban" Contact List & Sample Letter Thread[/url]

Think about it... you guys can continue to expend copious amounts of time & energy debating this topic, OR you can redirect your efforts, and make this whole discussion irrelevant!

Keep your eyes on the prize!

that sounds really nice guys... i live in CT where they took it upon themselves to adopt their own version of the AWB. their version is exactly the same as the federal version with the exception the the CT one NEVER SUNSETS!!

Sorry I'm late...

What's a preban lower worth? To me? Not much at all!

There are only 2 justifications for paying premiums for preban weapons.

1. The weapon has a historical value assigned to it independent of this AWB bullshit, i.e., a Colt marked "AR-15".

2. You are either too impatient to wait a year for a NIB "properly configured" rifle once the AWB sunsets, or you are paranoid that congress will drop everything and tackle this issue just in the nick of time.

Is $1000 a worthwhile insurance policy for the AWB? Not for me!

No matter what you choose, be sure to do your part & stamp this AWB bullshit to the ground: write your reps!

Exactly right. I have no idea why people want to beat this issue into the ground so much. It's not like people are getting arrested for this, plus it would confuse the hell out of any jury if it did goto trial.

I have to admit that it is a very confusing subject. The BATF considers the serial-numbered part (lower receiver in the AR-15 rifle's case) to be the firearm, but does not consider an AR-15 to be a grandfathered AW unless it is complete and had the qualifying features before the ban. A "pre-ban" lower receiver sold without the upper is considered a post-ban by the BATF, even if it has a telestock and pistol grip attached (the 2 "evil" features needed), due to the fact that it is not complete.

Granted, as long as the Form 4473 doesn't say "lower receiver only", who would ever know? It's a mute point.

[b]Dear Mr. XXXXX:

This refers to your letter of March 19, 2001, in which you ask about the status of certain semiautomatic assault weapons which have been altered to another configuration.

As defined in section 921(a)(30), of Title 18, United States Code (U.S.C:), the term "semiautomatic assaultic weapon" includes certain named weapons and certain semiautomatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns that have a combination of enumerated features. Title 18 U.S.C. section 922(v)(1) prohibits manufacture, transfer, and possession of semiautomatic assault weapons; however, section 922(v)(2) provides that any semiautomatic assault weapon that was lawfully possessed under Federal law on September 13, 1994, is excluded from the prohibition.

[red]A frame or receiver of a semiautomatic assault weapon, meets the definition of a "firearm" in 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(3); however, a firearm frame or receiver alone, without the additional qualifying features, does not meet the definition of a "semiautomatic assault weapon" in section 921(a)(30).[/red] Therefore, a firearm frame or receiver does not meet the exemption in section 922(v)(2).

We have also determined that a semiautomatic assault weapon in knockdown (unassembled) condition consisting of a receiver and all parts needed to assemble a complete semiautomatic assault weapon are subject to regulation if the parts are segregated or packaged together and held by a person as the parts for the assembly of a particular firearm.

You describe an AR15 type rifle that met the definition of a semiautomatic assault weapon and was lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994. At some subsequent time the rifle was temporarily reassembled in a configuration such that it no longer had the qualifying features of a semiautomatic assault weapon. You asked if the original components could then be lawfully reinstalled on the rifle.

Provided that the original components were held by the owner and reinstalled on the rifle, it is our opinion that the rifle would still qualify as an exempted semiautomatic assault weapon even though it had been temporarily assembled in a different configuration. We note, that mere disassembly of a semiautomatic weapon by an owner would not remove the firearm from the definition of a semiautomatic assault weapon nor would the reassembly constitute manufacture of a prohibited semiautomatic
assault weapon.

Your second question concerns a semiautomatic assault weapon that also meets the exemption in section 922(v)(2). However, this firearm was disassembled and the receiver, without other components, was sold. [red]Since the receiver is no longer possessed with all parts necessary to assemble a complete semiautomatic assault weapon, it no longer meets the definition of a semiautomatic assault weapon.[/red] The receiver does not meet the exemption in section 922(v)(2) and assembly of this firearm in the configuration of a semiautomatic assault weapon would be prohibited under section 922(v)(1).

If you are interested in determining the status of a particular receiver or semiautomatic assault weapon, you should contact the manufacturer or importer and ask about the date that it was manufactured and the configuration at the time of sale. It may also be necessary to contact subsequent dealers and owners who possessed the firearm.

We regret the delay in responding to your inquiry. If you have further questions concerning this matter, please contact us.

Sincerely yours,
Curtis H.A. Bartlett[/b]