Lower Reciever

[67ray]

While it is important to discuss the law relative to this, and what might happen, for sake of posterity/future rights, if you are pinched for a violation then you have already lost. By the time the AG office is done with you, you will be out tens of thousands of dollars. Unless you can get NRA or Comm2A behind you to foot the bill.

Pretty sure everyone understands this because no engagement = victory and any engagement = loss.

 

[TLB]

For most firearms, all registering does is protect you.
Since there are a half dozen ways for the gun to lawfully no longer be possessed by you but still have you listed as its owner on the registry, the registry is meaningless.

I've personally worked with people who were in this situation in the case of a protective order. The cops ask about the gun. The gun owner says it was sold out of state and shipped to a dealer. The cops ask what dealer. If you were hiding something you could say you don't remember since there is no record keeping requirement. At that point you are lying and breaking the law. But its less risky than building a receiver into a firearm and then refusing to register it.

Unless you just want to burry it in your back yard. If you actually want to take it out and use it. Then not registering it is more risky.
Remember, if they ever actually do ban mere possession of these rifles, you can always just move it out of state and be in compliance. Just like with bump stocks.

Now, I'm not saying that if you were ever in that situation you should register all firearms. My inclination if I wanted to have an off-the books gun would be to do it legally. Keep the receiver as only a receiver. Then there is no legal requirement to register it. And if sh1t goes sideways, you can always build it with parts kept on hand.

The lowest risk action is always to do what you can that is 100% legal and off the books. Even if it means spending more money.

I know CT people who bought a number of pre94-ban ARs or lowers or full rifles on the secondary market prior to Newtown. At that time there was ZERO record keeping requirements. So no DPS3 was filed with the state. There also wasn't a requirment to register post-newtown pre94 guns.

So these people now have 100% legal guns that nobody knows about. Sure it cost them money. But if you have kids and a mortgage, etc. Its worth spending the extra to have a firearm that is both legal and invisible.

There are also many ways for the gun to be legally in your possession and not registered.

As for talking to the cops, just don't.

 

[Varmint]

Just build it 6 days before some cop asks you why it’s not registered.

 

[Mass-diver]

lol @ anyone who thinks the AGs bs actually means anything.... at least not until a court decides or legislature passes a law affirming it, her BS is just an "opinion" and is not law.

-Mike

The ATF is honoring her interpretation and not allowing people to SBR lowers unless you can prove (FA10) that it was bought pre 7/20. That alone makes unregistered lowers less valuable in MA, IMO.

While it’s likely she’ll go after a dealer at some point, who knows? No one saw the 7/20 stuff coming so let’s not pretend we know her whole playbook.

 

[71montess]

The ATF is honoring her interpretation and not allowing people to SBR lowers unless you can prove (FA10) that it was bought pre 7/20. That alone makes unregistered lowers less valuable in MA, IMO.

While it’s likely she’ll go after a dealer at some point, who knows? No one saw the 7/20 stuff coming so let’s not pretend we know her whole playbook.

Didn’t Len S have a pdf of the letter saying only that a lower purchased befor 7/20 , not efa10’d ?

 

[Mass-diver]

Didn’t Len S have a pdf of the letter saying only that a lower purchased befor 7/20 , not efa10’d ?

Yes, you (and Len) are correct, I believe they are accepting proof of sale in lieu of an FA10.

 

[Asaltweapon]

The ATF is honoring her interpretation and not allowing people to SBR lowers unless you can prove (FA10) that it was bought pre 7/20. That alone makes unregistered lowers less valuable in MA, IMO.

While it’s likely she’ll go after a dealer at some point, who knows? No one saw the 7/20 stuff coming so let’s not pretend we know her whole playbook.

I turned in my BATFE paper work prior to the date and followed efa10 after. It’s not like I had another paper trail to shit on.

If she cums she does. If not I’m still 100% legal.
Got unbuilt stuff in the box with papers.

Willing to relocate every piece of blue and black steel I have and keep 1 or 2 pistols or shotguns down here.

Can still move freely between states at this time.... legally. Otherwise they know dick. Not a good time for the grabbers to go full retard.

 

[AntiHippie]

You're first mistake was "i before e except after c."
.

The irony is immensely satisfying.

 

[dcmdon]

lol @ anyone who thinks the AGs bs actually means anything.... at least not until a court decides or legislature passes a law affirming it, her BS is just an "opinion" and is not law.

-Mike

That's not quite true. If the AG says something is illegal. Its just her opinion until its litigated.
Just like you said.

But if you check with the AG and she says something IS LEGAL, and you are later hassled about it, then this documentation is HUUGGGEEE. I can't remember the legal term for this. But essentially you exercised due diligence in attempting to comply with the law and this is essentially a get out of jail free card.

 

[drgrant]

That's not quite true. If the AG says something is illegal. Its just her opinion until its litigated.
Just like you said.

But if you check with the AG and she says something IS LEGAL, and you are later hassled about it, then this documentation is HUUGGGEEE. I can't remember the legal term for this. But essentially you exercised due diligence in attempting to comply with the law and this is essentially a get out of jail free card.

It's called estoppel, I believe. Basically, if the kopsch say "oh this is legal" and then you go do the thing, and are arrested for it, you can then go to court and go "entrapment by estoppel" as a defense.

The ATF is honoring her interpretation and not allowing people to SBR lowers unless you can prove (FA10) that it was bought pre 7/20. That alone makes unregistered lowers less valuable in MA, IMO.

Is BATFE mandating an FA10 copy? Or is it that or any other proof of documentation?

ETA: NM, I saw your post in 36...

...
(like a pre 7/20 sales receipt) How do they know its actually valid? Ponder that for more than about, say 10 seconds or so and
you can see why that requirement is laughable. Also what is BATFE using as criteria for stuff that isn't covered by her bullshit doctrine? For example- if I make a side charger and SBR it's lower, that should still get a stamp. Or what if I'm putting a bolt action 50BMG upper on my AR, but I want to cut that barrel down to 12"... are they going to go "no, cuz AR lower is evil?" lol. Or any other configuration which the AGs office has ruled as "okay" etc? Seems pretty bizarre.

Has anyone tried to pull this criteria from them in writing? (probably would be useful to have that up front in case someone wants to get an attorney involved... )

-Mike

 

[RG Sports]

The Target Sports attorney said the AG was full of shit regarding shipping ammo to MA. I bet the AWB would get the same response in court. Especially, since people have been arrested recently and the charges were felon in possession. No AWB charge.

 

[dcmdon]

Well. We will get a chance to find out.

Judge Refuses To Dismiss Lawsuit Against Healey Over 'Copycat' Weapons

 

[Artie]

Yes, you (and Len) are correct, I believe they are accepting proof of sale in lieu of an FA10.

What are people using as proof of sale if there wasnt a FA10 (unbuilt lower)? Giving a copy of the 4473 to the new buyer? Bill of sale that references the pertinent info on the 4473? As a buyer or seller, I guess as long as I had a bill of sale that stated the original date of purchase, S/N, and the sellers/buyers name would be acceptable. Maybe also include the NICS transaction#? What have others done and/or wouldn't do?

 

[CrackPot]

What are people using as proof of sale if there wasnt a FA10 (unbuilt lower)? Giving a copy of the 4473 to the new buyer? Bill of sale that references the pertinent info on the 4473? As a buyer or seller, I guess as long as I had a bill of sale that stated the original date of purchase, S/N, and the sellers/buyers name would be acceptable. Maybe also include the NICS transaction#? What have others done and/or wouldn't do?

What you consider to be evidence to prove you meet a made up law is pretty much up to you

 

[Varmint]

Anyone, registering anything, in any state, at this point in time is a fool in my opinion. Have you seen some of the 'poorly written' (I would say intentionally so - and it's been mentioned in other threads) bills they are trying to pass?

A section of a proposed law that was concerned about detachable magazines causing a gun to be forbidden, then the next part goes into semi-automatics. By the way I read it, my son's Ruger Scout would be banned.

We (the citizenry) had a social/moral compact with the government that said we follow the laws as long as they are not capricious and don't change based on who is in power (term for all that - forget what it is). 7/20/16 BROKE that agreement, at least with me and several other I know.

What happens when Healy decides amend her guidance to weapons obtained post 1998 and you get a Bump-Stock letter with 'AR-15' in it's place?

This. Why are we still playing by the rules they don't even follow?

 

[Squire]

Right before he quit and ran away.

That was Healy's plan too but Hildog lost.

I expect the Guidance to be Amended ahead of the next Election that the Honorable AG participated.

 

[Whiskeywon]

What you consider to be evidence to prove you meet a made up law is pretty much up to you

Like DrGrant said above, how do they even know whatever you used to "validate" your lower as a pre 7/20 is even true or real. Makes me think of last summer when HK started a magazine rebate program for 3 extra magazines that began on 6/30 and I bought my VP9T on 6/29, I promise you the receipt sent into HK was dated 6/30. It's all a joke at this rate and they aren't even playing the game by the rules that have been accepted.
I think crackpot has it down to whatever floats your boat to validate. If you're going to try due diligence, then Receipt, FA10, really your choice.