One Month Until the First Annual 80% Day! 7/20/17!

Some thoughts on legality and practicality.
If you are ok with breaking the law ... then just go to a NH, RI, ME, or VT gun show and buy one for cash. ... (this is in violation of Federal law if you are a MA resident.)
Don

Even if a person was of a "law-breaking" mindset, how is a MA resident supposed to do that? It's not like there are tables set up at gun shows with AR lowers and flags saying: "Buy-your-gun-show-loophole-no-paperwork-AR-lower-for-cash-here"
 
I certainly respect and appreciate your view, Don, but I disagree.

I see nothing tin the AG's enforcement notice regarding purchaing 80%'rs, nor do I see anything in the enforcement latter regarding building firearms.

I see and understand that the AG chose not to enforce her interpretation for firearms purchased prior to 7/20/17, but she can change her mind any time at all.

Therefore, there really is little to no difference between owning a pre-2016 lower or AR, and building one from an 80% that you buy today. There is no sale of a firearms involved whatsoever.

In fact, it is likely that purchasing a pre-2016 lower is considered more illegal than just buying an 80%. It would certainly be a lot easier to charge and convict.

Lastly, the fact that Massachusetts companies are actively manufacturing and selling 80% lowers currently, without prosecution or charges, would seem to indicate that yoru interpretation differs from AG Healey's interpretation.

While recent directives from the AG's office are a bit baffling and in contrast with codified MA law, I don't think that you have as good a handle on MA law as you think you do in regard to building an AR15--or the liabilities you risk.

On the Federal level, there are some very specific laws you will want to avoid running afoul of, for instance, if you are talking about "crowd-sourcing" tooling, you absolutely are NOT fluent with some of the more recent ATF findings/rulings on the topic. As I understand it, for this to be a personal build (and legal under Federal law), you must own the tooling personally. You may not use someone elses tooling. You are free, however, to sell the tooling to whoever you wish, at whatever cost you wish, on whatever timetable you feel is appropriate after you are finished with it.

Lastly--all legal jeopardy (of course) is contingent upon what can be proved in a court of law. If a charge can't be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, a case (theoretically) can not be brought against you, and certainly should not be won. What small fortune it might cost you in lawyers and legal defense while winning such a case is a seperate issue.

Enjoy your new gunsmithing hobby--but be sure that you don't get your ass in a sling on a Federal manufacturing charge, much less a MA "engaged in the manufacture of a prohibited assault weapon", because then Private Pyle, you will be living in a world of sh*t.
 
If you're discussing the legality of an 80% build, then it's probably not for you anyways.
 
I machined up a pair of side plates to hold the lower and counted turns to finish a lower - not all that difficult.
And I did it on a Seig X1 micro mill so a bridgeport would be infinitely easier.

Oh believe me I know I am capable. I am also quite lazy. The struggle is real. :) Im taking a member up on his generous offer to let me use his jig. I live in NH so my comment was quite irrelevant to most of this conversation to begin with. Lots of worry down in MA. From all the talk you'd think people get approached at the range and asked when they bought their lowers.
 
While recent directives from the AG's office are a bit baffling and in contrast with codified MA law, I don't think that you have as good a handle on MA law as you think you do in regard to building an AR15--or the liabilities you risk.

On the Federal level, there are some very specific laws you will want to avoid running afoul of, for instance, if you are talking about "crowd-sourcing" tooling, you absolutely are NOT fluent with some of the more recent ATF findings/rulings on the topic. As I understand it, for this to be a personal build (and legal under Federal law), you must own the tooling personally. You may not use someone elses tooling. You are free, however, to sell the tooling to whoever you wish, at whatever cost you wish, on whatever timetable you feel is appropriate after you are finished with it.

Lastly--all legal jeopardy (of course) is contingent upon what can be proved in a court of law. If a charge can't be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, a case (theoretically) can not be brought against you, and certainly should not be won. What small fortune it might cost you in lawyers and legal defense while winning such a case is a seperate issue.

Enjoy your new gunsmithing hobby--but be sure that you don't get your ass in a sling on a Federal manufacturing charge, much less a MA "engaged in the manufacture of a prohibited assault weapon", because then Private Pyle, you will be living in a world of sh*t.

Sounds like a painful lesson:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/gear/a25302/three-years-prison-3d-printed-guns/
 
While recent directives from the AG's office are a bit baffling and in contrast with codified MA law, I don't think that you have as good a handle on MA law as you think you do in regard to building an AR15--or the liabilities you risk.

On the Federal level, there are some very specific laws you will want to avoid running afoul of, for instance, if you are talking about "crowd-sourcing" tooling, you absolutely are NOT fluent with some of the more recent ATF findings/rulings on the topic. As I understand it, for this to be a personal build (and legal under Federal law), you must own the tooling personally. You may not use someone elses tooling. You are free, however, to sell the tooling to whoever you wish, at whatever cost you wish, on whatever timetable you feel is appropriate after you are finished with it.

Lastly--all legal jeopardy (of course) is contingent upon what can be proved in a court of law. If a charge can't be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, a case (theoretically) can not be brought against you, and certainly should not be won. What small fortune it might cost you in lawyers and legal defense while winning such a case is a seperate issue.

Enjoy your new gunsmithing hobby--but be sure that you don't get your ass in a sling on a Federal manufacturing charge, much less a MA "engaged in the manufacture of a prohibited assault weapon", because then Private Pyle, you will be living in a world of sh*t.

I think you'd be hard pressed to define a jig as "tooling." I'm quite sure they are talking about people running CNC shops pumping these out at the press of a finger by customers...err..."friends."
 
I think you'd be hard pressed to define a jig as "tooling." I'm quite sure they are talking about people running CNC shops pumping these out at the press of a finger by customers...err..."friends."

You are correct. That is what the original verbiage was based on. How it gets interpreted by an activist Federal prosecutor--and whether or not the language allows enough wiggle-room for a prosecution based on slop in the language--that you'd have to ask a lawyer about. But I do note that nobody is renting the jigs that I know of--which seems a little strange, as there would no doubt be a decent buck in it based on the economics of building. Many places rent chamber reamers, and they are only $150 or so.
 
A friend did one and he screwed uo by adding an extra hole on each side near the middle top. [smile2]
 
By 2020, we'll be 3D printing lowers, anyway.

Good luck to the state that wants to pursue the 80% issue in the courts....by the time it gets resolved, noone will be doing it any more, at the cost of God knows how many millions of taxpayer dollars.
 
Isn't it also legal to own a 100% lower as long as you don't finish it? In Ma it's still not considered a firearm.

[popcorn]

Could you complete the upper and lower, but just not connect them to be in compliance with the registration laws?
 
I am a gun addict and I approve this message and holiday. Go and celebrate freedom the way the Patriots at Concord bridge meant for it to be celebrated.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
 
Isn't it also legal to own a 100% lower as long as you don't finish it? In Ma it's still not considered a firearm.

IANAL but I imagine "constructive possession" is a difficult charge to beat.

An untouched 80 lower is just a paperweight, no ambiguity there. In Mass. I'm not willing to gamble what I have to lose on a finished 80 lower.

But don't listen to what I say, truly, as I'm just parroting what (I think) I've learned here at NES.
 
I have much too much to lose for playing games and not enough money to pay the lawyers to keep me from being raped at Club Fed.

A quality lower(s) including good parts inside and a bunch of uppers is a safer bet under the current conditions. Want to play w/300BLK? Get an upper. 20" tack driver in 5.56? Ditto. Blast a bunch of cheep ammo into the banking? Same.

It's not like pushing out two pins and maybe a buffer spring change is too difficult. In hind sight buying a LMT because I could easily just change the barrels was kind of silly but I own it. Every time I looked for barrels they were out of stock anyway*. It didn't take food off the table or did buying it prevent us from having gas or fun and the money is long gone not to mention nobody is going to buy it for what I have into it so... It's mine and to be sure it stays that way it's not kept in MA. I can bring it back anytime I want and the paperwork lives in the case to prove it.


* IMO it was a marketing genius tactic to keep the MSRP prices high.
 
I certainly respect and appreciate your view, Don, but I disagree.

I see nothing tin the AG's enforcement notice regarding purchaing 80%'rs, nor do I see anything in the enforcement latter regarding building firearms.

I see and understand that the AG chose not to enforce her interpretation for firearms purchased prior to 7/20/17, but she can change her mind any time at all.

Therefore, there really is little to no difference between owning a pre-2016 lower or AR, and building one from an 80% that you buy today. There is no sale of a firearms involved whatsoever.

In fact, it is likely that purchasing a pre-2016 lower is considered more illegal than just buying an 80%. It would certainly be a lot easier to charge and convict.

Lastly, the fact that Massachusetts companies are actively manufacturing and selling 80% lowers currently, without prosecution or charges, would seem to indicate that yoru interpretation differs from AG Healey's interpretation.

(To be clear, since now it has been brought up I've already built the ARs I want and am on to other projects. Even if I did want another I would just build another upper and use one of my existing lowers. Were I to actually want to build 80%s I would also not post about it online.)

If you have a lot to lose, I don't know that I would consider the 2016 date a valid date to work off. There is nothing approaching clarity or even legality regarding that date. You would also want to obtain proof that it is pre-not-really-a-legal-ban-but-legislation-by-reinterpretation-moonbats-healy-stupid-wtf.

Were I to look for another AR lower receiver in this state, I would go pre-94. I purchased my lowers pre 7/20 and am comfortable enough with those, but at this point I certainly don't have a lot of trust in the state's legal system not to **** over people who are trying to do the right thing. Then again, the next logical step for me is NFA anyway. It will be a while before I go that route.

Because at this point in time there is no problem. Its a heck of a lot better than making something that is obviously illegal.

For what its worth, the safest bet is actually a pre-94 ban gun.

You guys are arguing about the fringes. The reality is that it IS safe. If you want to "what if" yourself to death, that's fine.
I don't believe that her new guidance is lawful, but that doesn't change the fact that owning a pre-2016 gun is safe. . . for now.

Don
 
I certainly respect and appreciate your view, Don, but I disagree.

I see nothing tin the AG's enforcement notice regarding purchaing 80%'rs, nor do I see anything in the enforcement latter regarding building firearms.

I see and understand that the AG chose not to enforce her interpretation for firearms purchased prior to 7/20/17, but she can change her mind any time at all.

Therefore, there really is little to no difference between owning a pre-2016 lower or AR, and building one from an 80% that you buy today. There is no sale of a firearms involved whatsoever.

In fact, it is likely that purchasing a pre-2016 lower is considered more illegal than just buying an 80%. It would certainly be a lot easier to charge and convict.

Lastly, the fact that Massachusetts companies are actively manufacturing and selling 80% lowers currently, without prosecution or charges, would seem to indicate that yoru interpretation differs from AG Healey's interpretation.

Even if a person was of a "law-breaking" mindset, how is a MA resident supposed to do that? It's not like there are tables set up at gun shows with AR lowers and flags saying: "Buy-your-gun-show-loophole-no-paperwork-AR-lower-for-cash-here"

Uh. Its very simple. Go to a gun show in NH, RI, VT, ME hand the guy cash, he hands you a lower.

This would be 100% legal if you were a resident of the state where the show is being held. But since you aren't you are violating federal law.
No paperwork is required by the feds or the state in NH, VT, or ME for secondary sales.

You can literally hand the guy cash, he hands you a lower.

The same is true of any firearm you see advertised in the clasifieds here. If a NH resident sells to a NH resident, its legal with no paperwork.

Don
 
Uh. Its very simple. Go to a gun show in NH, RI, VT, ME hand the guy cash, he hands you a lower.

This would be 100% legal if you were a resident of the state where the show is being held. But since you aren't you are violating federal law.
No paperwork is required by the feds or the state in NH, VT, or ME for secondary sales.

You can literally hand the guy cash, he hands you a lower.

The same is true of any firearm you see advertised in the clasifieds here. If a NH resident sells to a NH resident, its legal with no paperwork.

Don

Well, that's assuming first that there are many "private sale" tables set up, and they are selling what you want. And then if there were, I *really* doubt that the seller (particularly at a gun show) is not going to check for state ID. Give it a try some time.
I know I've not yet purchased a firearm of any type in NH where the individual "private" seller didn't ask to see NH ID.
 
There are places that sell 80% anodized lowers.

I love the idea, but the practicality is a bit different. I've had an 80% for like 2 years now that I've never finished, the costs are just really dang high.

80% receiver: $60
Decent Jig: $150-200
Tooling: ??
Cerakote: $60
Engraving: ??

At some point, and I know its not the point, it just becomes cheaper to go out and buy someone else's AR.
 
Back
Top Bottom