How do you know if an AR is pre-ban?

[chinalfr]

Until the owner of the YHM step in and show some pics, it's all speculation. Can't really judge from what he/she said.

Sent from iPhone 5 using Forum Runner

 

[dcmdon]

Sure you can.

YHM did not make receivers any time prior to 1994 - so the gun is a post-ban gun.
Based on direct info from the OP.
Fact - if its got an unpinned telescoping stock then its in a pre-ban configuration by at least one evil feature.
Fact - the brake is fine

Unknown - is the brake "permanently affixed" per ATF standards?

 

[TZCHRIS]

not a neutered gun.

-Mike

From my research so far I would say this YHM + Adj Stock = Bad Gun

Don, Is a 10.5" bbl ok in MA? I may look you up for some help when I get ready to 'upgrade' from my M&P.

 

[dcmdon]

Yes. No statutes against SBRs.

Suppressors are a no-go.

Machine guns require a license at the discretion of your CLEO

 

[TZCHRIS]

OK, searched the internet for 30 minutes, can someone point out the MGL that states or defines an assault weapon with the collapsable stock? Not the GOAL website the MASS website or law. My buddy thinks I am full of S $#@&.

 

[jasons]

OK, searched the internet for 30 minutes, can someone point out the MGL that states or defines an assault weapon with the collapsable stock? Not the GOAL website the MASS website or law. My buddy thinks I am full of S $#@&.

The MGL refers to the old federal AWB, which is where the "Assault Weapon" definitions were found.

 

[Len-2A Training]

The definitions are in MGL C. 140 S. 121

The prohibition is in MGL C. 140 S. 131M & ML C. 269 S. 10(m)

Much more succinct info can be gleaned from the notes to these sections in Glidden's book however.

Be aware that during the Fed Ban, the BATFE ruled that in order to be "pre-ban", the gun HAD TO HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTED (or Kitted) with EVIL FEATURES on/before 9/13/1994 to qualify. A bare AR15 frame unless it was built up (and you can prove it) made prior to that date does not equal (in Fed eyes) a "pre-ban". As for MA, we don't have anyone smart enough to answer technical questions at the state level and those designated by our state gov't to answer questions like this have no idea what the difference is between a barrel and a butt-stock!! You can expect a MA court to rule most strictly here and thus, I would expect them to invoke the Fed rule that was in effect from 1994 to 2004, which the MGL is based upon.

 

[CrackPot]

A bare AR15 frame unless it was built up (and you can prove it) made prior to that date does not equal (in Fed eyes) a "pre-ban".

The burden of proof appears to be backwards. To prove you committed a crime, shouldn't the prosecutor need to prove it is not "pre-ban". Innocent until proven guilty unless it relates to a firearm?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[chinalfr]

OK, searched the internet for 30 minutes, can someone point out the MGL that states or defines an assault weapon with the collapsable stock? Not the GOAL website the MASS website or law. My buddy thinks I am full of S $#@&.

So, who's your buddy that own an evil AR with collapsable stock, possible SBR and muzzle flash?

Sent from my iPhone 5 using Forum Runner

 

[TZCHRIS]

The definitions are in MGL C. 140 S. 121

The prohibition is in MGL C. 140 S. 131M & ML C. 269 S. 10(m)

OK, Sorry that I am retarted (my wife was right) but where in here does it say anything about 'collapsable stock' ? http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXX/Chapter140/Section121

 

[TZCHRIS]

So, who's your buddy that own an evil AR with collapsable stock, possible SBR and muzzle flash?

I don't think names and addresses would be apropriate here but I would say all of them but me. Me, just a M&P Sport, I look ike the kid in class who shops at the second hand store when we go shooting.[sad2]

He told me to see 'Heller decision'.........

 

[jasons]

OK, Sorry that I am retarted (my wife was right) but where in here does it say anything about 'collapsable stock' ? http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXX/Chapter140/Section121

“Assault weapon”, shall have the same meaning as a semiautomatic assault weapon as defined in the federal Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(30) as appearing in such section on September 13, 1994....

Which points to:

The term "semiautomatic assault weapon" means--

(A) any of the firearms, or copies or duplicates of the firearms in any caliber, known as--

(i) Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models);

(ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil;

(iii) Beretta Ar70 (SC-70);

(iv) Colt AR-15;

(v) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, and FNC;

(vi) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9, and M-12;

(vii) Steyr AUG;

(viii) INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and

(ix) revolving cylinder shotguns, such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12;

(B) a semiautomatic rifle that has an 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 suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and

(v) a grenade launcher;

(C) a semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of--

(i) an ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip;

(ii) a threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer;

(iii) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned;

(iv) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; and

(v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm; and

(D) a semiautomatic shotgun that 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 fixed magazine capacity in excess of 5 rounds; and

(iv) an ability to accept a detachable magazine.

- - - Updated - - -

He told me to see 'Heller decision'.........

He's not even close....

 

[Len-2A Training]

The burden of proof appears to be backwards. To prove you committed a crime, shouldn't the prosecutor need to prove it is not "pre-ban". Innocent until proven guilty unless it relates to a firearm?

To convict you, you are correct. HOWEVER, to arrest, charge you and force you to pay 10s of thousands of dollars to defend yourself will not feel like "the burden of proof is on the gov't" when all is said and done. And you don't get to claim reimbursement of all those legal fees or the stress it puts you under either after you win (hopefully, and only if you have a real good firearms knowledgeable attorney and those can be counted on one hand in MA)!

OK, Sorry that I am retarted (my wife was right) but where in here does it say anything about 'collapsable stock' ? http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXX/Chapter140/Section121

I did tell you that the most succinct info defining this was in Glidden's Notes. MGL makes reference to the expired Fed Law that was in effect in 1994-2004. From Glidden's Notes, here are the words that actually were in said referenced Fed Law.

14. Assault Weapons – Federal Definition under 18 U.S.C. sec 921 (a) (30) as it existed on 9-13-1994:


(30) The term "semiautomatic assault weapon" means –

(A)
any of the firearms, or copies or duplicates of the firearms in any caliber, known as -

(i) Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models);

(ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil;

(iii) Beretta Ar70 (SC-70);

(iv) Colt AR-15;

(v) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, and FNC;

(vi) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9, and M-12;

(vii) Steyr AUG;

(viii) INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and

(ix) revolving cylinder shotguns, such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12;


(B)
a semiautomatic rifle that has an 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 suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and

(v) a grenade launcher;


(C)
a semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of -

(i) an ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip;

(ii) a threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer;

(iii) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the non-trigger hand without being burned;

(iv) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; and

(v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm; and


(D)

a semiautomatic shotgun that 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 fixed magazine capacity in excess of 5 rounds; and

(iv) an ability to accept a detachable magazine.

 

[jasons]

I did tell you that the most succinct info defining this was in Glidden's Notes.

You can read the actual law, or you can read Glidden's "interpretation" of the law. I prefer the former. (Granted, in this case it looks like a cut and pasted the actual law.)

 

[TZCHRIS]

MGL makes reference to the expired Fed Law that was in effect in 1994-2004.

So we are using an 'expired law' ? It may be time to sell my M&P and join my buddies...............

 

[jasons]

So we are using an 'expired law' ? It may be time to sell my M&P and join my buddies...............

It expired at the federal level, Massachusetts and a few other states extended it on the state level. In any case it is the law here.

 

[TZCHRIS]

He's not even close....

Why? Help me win this argument, every time this subject comes up I loose.

 

[jasons]

Why? Help me win this argument, every time this subject comes up I loose.

Well first because Heller only applied to "federal enclaves," meaning Washington DC. Even if that wasn't the case it had zero to do with "assault" weapons.

 

[M1911]

Why? Help me win this argument, every time this subject comes up I loose.

Heller did not strike down all gun laws, nor did it rule on the issue of bans in so-called semiautomatic assault weapons.

 

[M1911]

Don, Is a 10.5" bbl ok in MA? I may look you up for some help when I get ready to 'upgrade' from my M&P.

A rifle barrel less than 16" is a short barrel rifle. To own an SBR, you need to pay a $200 tax and jump through a number of ATF hoops.

 

[drgrant]

Why? Help me win this argument, every time this subject comes up I loose.

No, you don't lose, your friend is just an idiot or likes living in fantasy land. MA has an AWB that is mostly identical to the old federal one which existed from 1994 to 2004. MA took the fed ban, changed it a little and cast it into its own laws- It is that simple. It has not been invalidated- far from it... as a matter of fact, Romney signed a bill before he left office that basically kicked us in the groin before he left, which cast an AWB renewal into full law, basically stopping the tiniest hope of legally questioning the AWB at the state level. The fact that he cites Heller shows that he is borderline retarded. Heller has the potential to change a lot of things in MA in the long run, but the AWB has not been affected yet by it, and I doubt it will be, at least not in the near term... not without a LOT of solid, high quality legal groundwork getting laid down first.

It's one thing if he says "I know what the law is but I don't care" and it's another if he's just deluded himself into believing he's "running legal".

Any lawyer worth their salt would tell you that both situations are legally perilous but the latter is 10 times worse for the gun owner, because if he "believes" he is legal he may unintentionally act in such a way that exposes him to greater risk of prosecution.

-Mike

 

[dcmdon]

Which brings us full circle.

If you want the "evil" features, just get a pre-ban lower. I have been shooting an evil looking pre-ban SBR in CT for years and have never had anyone even ask me about it. That includes matches at Metacon with several LEOs in attendance.

While I am not advocating that you build a non-compliant rifle, the reality is that you will probably never get called on it as long as you live an honest life.

A rifle barrel less than 16" is a short barrel rifle. To own an SBR, you need to pay a $200 tax and jump through a number of ATF hoops.

Agreed. Although, once you have the proper structure in place, the hoops can be jumped in about 10 minutes. As someone with a trust in place, I can register a receiver in nothing more than the 10 minutes it takes to fill out a Form 1 and make a check out to the ATF for $200.

Don

 

[PaulD]

Why? Help me win this argument, every time this subject comes up I loose.

Dude. Your prize for "winning" won't be worth it, trust me.

 

[chinalfr]

Why? Help me win this argument, every time this subject comes up I loose.

So you win the Internet, what did you get? IMO, I'll MYOFB.Your buddy can do what he want with his evil AR, you just have fun with your own M&P sport.

 

[ScottS]

Unf-ing-believable sometimes. OP, the price difference between a bona fide pre-ban you can screw with to your heart's content and a non-ban-compliant rifle is probably less than 2 hours time of the cheapest attorney you can find. Why chance it? What's the upside of trying to skirt the law, or live in denial of black-letter MGL?

 

[TZCHRIS]

your friend is just an idiot or likes living in fantasy land. he is borderline retarded.
-Mike

Sounds like you know him well! I think I will take Don's advice and look for a pre-ban receiver.

 

[jasons]

Sounds like you know him well! I think I will take Don's advice and look for a pre-ban receiver.

A $600+ premium just so that you can have a legal collapsable stock (OK, and a flash hider and bay lug) is so completely insane to me that I just can't even begin to fathom it. I guess a fool and his money are soon parted.

 

[TZCHRIS]

A $600+ premium

Are you saying that is what a pre-ban receiver will cost me? Oh, in case I forgot to mention it I am married, so I get called a fool almost everyday when it comes to money and guns, because one I have a lot of and the other I have none.

So what is a good price for a pre-ban AR lower? $600 sounds like about $450 too much to me?

 

[jasons]

Are you saying that is what a pre-ban receiver will cost me? Oh, in case I forgot to mention it I am married, so I get called a fool almost everyday when it comes to money and guns, because one I have a lot of and the other I have none.

So what is a good price for a pre-ban AR lower? $600 sounds like about $450 too much to me?

I've seen stripped lowers from crap manufactures like PWA go for as much as $800. If you can be patient you might score one for $500 or $600. Check out gun broker to see what the going rate is these days.

 

[TZCHRIS]

OK, last question then I am done

My dad was an old machinist and has a couple lower receivers he made many years ago with no markings on them. Can I make them into an AR-15?