If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
LOL she'll only be pissed if she doesn't get to shoot it.Any pistol is A-OK according to Fed law.
The mass law is signed, sealed, and delivered.
Now go build up that 50 Beowulf 5” pistol with your 8/1 lower and piss off Ms. Mountain.
Put a barking spider on it lolLOL she'll only be pissed if she doesn't get to shoot it.
All kidding aside, what fvcking language do you speak fluently? A friend wants to know.
I have to apologize. It could be all the concussions too… with a side of retardAll kidding aside, what fvcking language do you speak fluently? A friend wants to know.
yes
I'm not sure that's clear. In my understanding, if the lower is now a firearm on its own, an AR lower is a banned firearm. Are banned firearms in exempted configuration "washed"?
Not sure why, but reading this inspired me to ask if NES (paying members) could do a class action law suit against mura for deprivation of constitutional rights?
Just a curious thought. I’m sure if it was a thing I’d absolutely not be the first to suggest it.
Dumb hypothetical but not unexpected.
Is this working on the new definition of "frame or receiver"?An AR lower is NOT a banned firearm.
I have to apologize. It could be all the concussions too… with a side of retard
All shotguns and rifles so long as they are not otherwise prohibited.So what post 8/1 rifles and shotties are you selling?
Is this working on the new definition of "frame or receiver"?
I can do Braille if it helps.I have to apologize. It could be all the concussions too… with a side of retard
I’m terrified. I’m gonna miss this appointmentI can do Braille if it helps.
Have you ever boarded a aircraft looked at the retard flying and thought of f*** I’m gonna have to leave this plane myself.. goddamn miracle of survive this…Frames (subject to the firearm roster) and receivers are now regulated under MGL but not prohibited.
Group buy!What’s the upper and muzzle device?
I want!!!!
ETA: what mags does it take?
Going to duplicate it!!
Have you ever boarded a aircraft looked at the retard flying and thought of f*** I’m gonna have to leave this plane myself.. goddamn miracle of survive this…
I’m pretty sure I’m gonna die. But to get an Uber cause I didn’t have $1500 for an ambulance.Unfortunately not. The amount of time I spent on NES has normalized retards for me that they no longer stand out.
An AR lower is NOT a banned firearm.
Frames (subject to the firearm roster) and receivers are now regulated under MGL but not prohibited.
Er..
An AR lower falls under "Assault-style firearm", therefore if it was not IN MASS on 8/1, possession is in fact banned.
Not *ALL* AR lowers are banned, because 8/1 ones exist and are legal to own.
But unlike handguns where you can have anything so long as you didn't break any laws to acquire it, new AR lowers are essentially banned.
[[Citation Needed]]
Maybe a little birdie told her that even her packed MASJC can't uphold that part because it is a violation of black letter federal law. FFL's cannot legally comply with it either. They could lose their FFL. But then maybe that is why Healey wants.
Ch. 135
Section 20: An unfinished frame or receiver is a firearm
Section 16, paragraph f: An AR (or lower since that is now defined as a firearm) is a copy or duplicate of an enumerated assault style firearm, unless it was made originally with a fixed mag. Cannot have had the ability to accept a detacheable magazine previously,
You can’t even legally have a new bolt action AR if it could accept a Colt AR-15 upper, now that I’m reading it. **
The enumerated assault style firearm paragraph (e) of Section 16 does not apparently depend on the rifle/pistol being semi-automatic. And all the current bolt action/lever action ARs have interchangeable receivers with Colt AR-15s (one of the checks for copy/duplicate status).
** But, further thinking, the original Colt AR-15 had a larger pivot pin. So modern mil-spec lowers are not interchangeable with a Colt AR-15s. It would be dependent on “substantially similar internal construction and configuration”