Newbie needs some Help

[pjg43]

I an in the process of planning out my first AR build. My plan is to get a Pre-ban lower and add a 10.5 barrel and build a nice little SBR. But here is the catch. I have heard 2 Different views on the Pre-ban Rifles.
1. The rifle must have been built as a complete rifle before 9-13-94.
2. The Lower must have been built before 9-13-94.
Now here is where the confusion is. I have found a lower that was built before that date. Now I thought lowers were considered the gun? Who is right? I would hate to go through the process of getting this rifle registered and then findinggout the tele-stock is illegal
Any help would be welcome
Pete

 

[jdubois]

n/m

 

[dcmdon]

i was told by my gun dealer that the whole built into a rifle before a certain date did not pertain to the CT law. It did pertain to the expired federal law and the CA law.

Keep in mind one other thing. Even if my dealer was wrong, it is not your responsibility to prove that the lower was assembled. It is their responsibility to prove that it was NOT assembled prior to a certain date.

Finally, the gun (if my dealer was wrong) was even assembled ONCE and then sold off for parts, then it is considered to be eligible.

I've got documentation that all of my pre-ban lowers were made before the date required.

***OK. I was about to click "post" and thought I'd just give the state police a call.

I spoke with 2 Troopers who work in the firearms licensing division(whose names I will provide via IM but not post here) and asked them about the bare receiver vs weapon question. They were both very helpful, courteous and professional.

They both told me that as they understood the law, there was no requirement for the receiver to be built up into a firearm before 1994.

So, given that, I would say just buy the lower.

As an aside, both of these troopers expressed total and utter disgust when I mentioned the assault weapon ban. Both of them laughed when I commented that we have a big problem with bayonettings in CT.

Don