Another FA-10 question

[JackO]

I apologize if this question was answered befor, I just can't find a STRAIGHT answer, possibly, a strait answer doesn't exist at all .

It's a very simple and common situation. I got an AR-15 lower receiver (pre-ban, but it doesn't matter) and the dealer to CYA along with the federal form filed an FA-10 form for it. I tried to talk him out of this but to no avail. On this FA-10 the dealer put "lower receiver only" and 0" length for the barrel. Nonsense, but what can I do about it.

I'm ready to assemble the said receiver in a complete rifle. But I'm confused with what to do with the paperwork for this rifle. If there would be no FA-10 for this receiver I would simply file an FA-10 with "registration". But there already is one with this specific serial number for the receiver. So what do I do? Am I legal if I do nothing (no additional form)? Am I legal if I file a second FA-10 with the same serial number (nonsense in my opinion)? Would it be good to CYA on my side?

A straight answer with legal advice would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Len-2A Training]

IANAL!

Some will tell you that you "must" file an FA-10 any time you change the config (e.g. change upper to .22LR or change a 16" bbl for a 20" bbl) that changes the data on the form.

Personally (remember IANAL), I don't read it that way and as long as there is one FA-10 filed, that's it for me. [My T/C Contender was purchased with .44Mag and .357Mag bbls back in the dark ages and the FFL did the FA-10 (flimsy tissue paper back then) as a .44Mag. I NEVER ever installed the .44Mag bbl on that gun, it has always had the .357Mag bbl on it from the time I got home with the 3 boxes (they were purchased as 3 distinct items: frame, bbl #1 and bbl #2). I have always slept very well at night with that scenario. ]

I am sure that Scrivener will come along and tell me what "I did" was illegal. And if so, I'll still sleep well at night! [BTW: It is no longer a MA registered gun since the state destroyed all those records! I even know one FFL (Father of a respected NES Member) who told me that I MUST re-register all those guns that MA destroyed the records on. Ain't gonna do it! I still have my copies as proof, the rest is the state's problem not mine.]

 

[Scrivener]

I got an AR-15 lower receiver (pre-ban, but it doesn't matter) and the dealer to CYA along with the federal form filed an FA-10 form for it. I tried to talk him out of this but to no avail. On this FA-10 the dealer put "lower receiver only" and 0" length for the barrel.

What gun shop luminary can you thank for that?

Anyhow, the first FA-10 was a nullity (much like the dealer's mental acuity), as a mere lower receiver for an AR does not constitute a gun under Mass. law.

Once you complete the overpriced paperweight into a functioning firearm, you have 7 days in which to file an FA-10. As the gun will then be complete, you can provide the required information wholly absent from the first (and imbecilic) filing: Barrel length and caliber.

 

[Len-2A Training]

I knew that he'd disagree!!

 

[dd]

Len. By appllication of pure logic, I have to agree with Scrivener. However, you *would* have a case (IMHO) also if challenged since you have a copy of the documentation on the "frame only" registration. (It would be nice if someone could access the CSHB database and see if your frame is listed.) Next, can you clarify the statement that the state destroyed var old records???

Scrivener: I am concerned that what you posted could be the basis for a violation IF a person attached a different upper at a later date which changed the caliber and barrel length.

 

[FPrice]

Interesting.

Suppose for some obscure (and unimportant reason), JackO lost his "right" (priviledge ?) to possess firearms and the constabulary came a knockin' on his door, file copies of his FA-10s in hand (or some sort of printout from CHSB files), and demanded all of his firearms forthwith. Suppose for some strange reason they were unable to comprehend the difference/similarity between the lower receiver only and the henceforth built up complete rifle and demanded both? Or would they be smarter than that?

Inquiring minds get a headache just thinking about this whole dumb mess.

 

[Scrivener]

Suppose for some obscure (and unimportant reason), JackO lost his "right" (priviledge ?) [sic] to possess firearms and the constabulary came a knockin' on his door, file copies of his FA-10s in hand (or some sort of printout from CHSB files), and demanded all of his firearms forthwith. Suppose for some strange reason they were unable to comprehend the difference/similarity between the lower receiver only and the henceforth built up complete rifle and demanded both?

As the FA-10s clearly set forth the serial number of the receiver in question, I fail to see a problem.

 

[JackO]

Gentlemen,
Thank you very much, I appreciate your help.

I tend to agree with Screvener, the first FA-10 is a joke, the receiver is not a firearm per MGL, and FA-10 shouldn't have been filed in the first place. So to follow the letter of the law I MUST file an FA-10 to register a COMPLETE rifle.
My only concern is that there will be TWO FA-10s with the same serial number. But IMHO it's lesser risk on my side then not to file a registration form for a complete firearm.

I don't think that it's a problem if I ever change the upper and the caliber of this rifle in the future. At least I can't find anything related in the MGL requiring to file a new form in the this case.

 

[JackO]

IANAL!
Some will tell you that you "must" file an FA-10 any time you change the config (e.g. change upper to .22LR or change a 16" bbl for a 20" bbl) that changes the data on the form.

Personally (remember IANAL), I don't read it that way and as long as there is one FA-10 filed, that's it for me.

Len,
I respect your opinion, thank you.
But I think we are talking two different issues.
I did not "change config" in my case. The first FA-10 was filed for a "lower receiver only", i.e. describing no configuration at all. My reading on this is that the letter of the law was not followed in that case at all. The dealer was wrong because he "tried to register" a non existing firearm (again, per MGL, not feds).

 

[OAR348]

What gun shop luminary can you thank for that?

Anyhow, the first FA-10 was a nullity (much like the dealer's mental acuity), as a mere lower receiver for an AR does not constitute a gun under Mass. law.

Once you complete the overpriced paperweight into a functioning firearm, you have 7 days in which to file an FA-10. As the gun will then be complete, you can provide the required information wholly absent from the first (and imbecilic) filing: Barrel length and caliber.

So, in theory, someone who only posses an FID could legally buy/posses a AR-15 lower receiver, but could not build it into a functioning firearm correct?

 

[Len-2A Training]

Dave,

Time to research the old stuff . . . it was discussed back when MAF was a real eList (when this happened) back in 1998 and it is also here in the Gun Laws forum.

Short story:

- MSP at 1010 Comm Ave used to handle all firearms matters. All FA-10s and Blue Cards went to them. They stacked them in cartons in the hallways, under stairwells, etc. Lots of pigeon shit and mouse droppings (not to mention chewed up forms) led them to conclude in 1998 (as they started to computerize) that it was a health hazard to handle these old records. Thus, they made an administrative decision to destroy ALL Blue Cards and all Dealer transactions (FA-10s) prior to 1986. [NOTE: I'm sure that some newer FA-10s were also destroyed if they were covered in crap.]

- Thus, the state has NO RECORD of those transactions at all.

BTW, the dealer didn't register my "frame" on the T/C, he registered it as a gun . . . but he chose one bbl/caliber over the other. All three items were bought at the same time from the same dealer.

I think a "key piece of info we need" here is WHAT does CHSB DO with "Frame Only" FA-10s?? Scrivener can easily get this info by asking his friend Caroline and report back. If they trash them, then indeed JackO should file a complete gun FA-10. If they process them, it's a toss-up and you already know my position on the matter.

[I watched someone (non-dealer) write a FA-10 for a 1911 frame only. At least he could guess it was 5" and .45 . . . he wrote it as if he sold the whole gun, even though it was a bare frame.]

 

[Len-2A Training]

Interesting.

Suppose for some obscure (and unimportant reason), JackO lost his "right" (priviledge ?) to possess firearms and the constabulary came a knockin' on his door, file copies of his FA-10s in hand (or some sort of printout from CHSB files), and demanded all of his firearms forthwith. Suppose for some strange reason they were unable to comprehend the difference/similarity between the lower receiver only and the henceforth built up complete rifle and demanded both? Or would they be smarter than that?

Inquiring minds get a headache just thinking about this whole dumb mess.

My uneducated guess is that they will either "ask permission" or bring a warrant and search the house for any/all guns, ammo and mags. They confiscate everything they see. One can safely assume that they will "toss the house" in any case . . . since they can't leave you with ammo or mags either and we don't register them . . . yet.

I would consider it highly unlikely that they would come with a "check list" of guns and ONLY go looking for those.

I'd also bet that if they found an old musket or other black powder gun, they would confiscate that as well (regardless of the fact that you don't need a LTC/FID to possess or buy them).

 

[LoginName]

One foreseeable problem...

Assuming a CA style AWB is in works, it would probably be a good idea to submit a second FA-10 on a completed/functional firearm even though any stripped reciver (AR-15/AK-47/FAL/etc), already has an FA-10 on file.

Having that second FA-10 on file will be the only proof a person has that the EBR in their posession was a completed firearm before any cut-off date.

 

[JackO]

Having that second FA-10 on file will be the only proof a person has that the EBR in their posession was a completed firearm before any cut-off date.

Yes, this second FA-10 will be a good proof. Another additional step might be helpful: a dated photo of the completed rifle showing all the "evil" features and the serial number.