Preban AR 15

[JES Consulting]

Hi guys.
Open question. Why would you, or would not pay extra for a preban AR-15 or a preban lower in Mass.

I would , all my ar rifles are built on preban colt lowers. As Mass resident I already take enough from our lovely Commonwealth on gun related issues, so the only way to stick it back by building another rifle with all evil features possible.

What are you think?

Thank you for your input.

 

[dcmdon]

I agree with you. I have 3. They are all used on the guns I shoot most.

I probably wouldn't choose a Colt because they use a front screw rather than a standard pin, and they are machined specifically not to accept a DIAS. But other than that, I'm on board totally. When you look at what you spend overall on this hobby. Whats a one time cost of $500 or $600 extra.

Don

 

[JES Consulting]

Thank you for reply.It is possible to find colt lower with front push pin. Hard but possible. Are we now the only state that can get some use for preban ar?

 

[Varmint]

I'd pay $500 just to be able to use those cool 30 round Magpul magazines.

 

[dcmdon]

I'd pay $500 just to be able to use those cool 30 round Magpul magazines.

Then get yourself a FFL. $200 for 3 years.

Get an 07 and its $150 and you can play with silencers also.

- - - Updated - - -

Thank you for reply.It is possible to find colt lower with front push pin. Hard but possible. Are we now the only state that can get some use for preban ar?

Prebans are still legal in CT. They can be bought and sold freely. In fact, prebans are the only types of centerfire ARs that can be bought or sold at all in CT in any kind of a standard configuration. (Semi auto with detachable mags)

 

[rkwjunior]

Personally i really don't care about evil features anymore, i did when i first got into firearms. I pin a stock 2 clicks from fully collapsed so it really doesn't concern me to adjust it, a muzzle brake/ comp is way more useful and effective IMHO than a Flash hider. I honestly like the look of billet receivers than forged, and i personally think it's to much of a gray area to assume it's legal to maintain the evil feature count with a pre-ban lower.
My pre ban colt wasn't originally built with a collapsible stock so therefore i feel it's risky to add a feature that wasn't original. If you find yourself in a situation with your pre-ban lower and evil features, the leo's probably won't understand your interpretation of the law, they have their own and anything with evil features is a no no, you may find yourself explaining it to the judge, not worth the extra 500 in my eyes, a lawyer costs way more. Chances are if you find yourself in this situation you may have other problems to worry about.

Just my 2cents

 

[rkwjunior]

I'd pay $500 just to be able to use those cool 30 round Magpul magazines.

Not sure what u mean by this?? Even though you have a pre-ban firearm, it doesn't mean u can use post ban magazines, hi-caps also must be pre-ban no matter what the age of the firearm.

 

[Fetch]

Well now... This is pretty fascinating. Is this some sort of supremacy clause thing? This is one of those things I should look into seeing as its Friday and I don't have shit to do.

Then get yourself a FFL. $200 for 3 years.

Get an 07 and its $150 and you can play with silencers also.

- - - Updated - - -



Prebans are still legal in CT. They can be bought and sold freely. In fact, prebans are the only types of centerfire ARs that can be bought or sold at all in CT in any kind of a standard configuration. (Semi auto with detachable mags)

 

[JES Consulting]

I think definition of preban/postban is very clear, no grey areas. It is lawful to add collapsible stock,flash hider,bayonet lug. And I think flash hider and stock are very useful features.

 

[Mass-diver]

Depends, for a 20" rifle I don't think it's worth the extra cost.

 

[Reptile]

I do not think it is worth it anymore.

All you get out of it is a collapsable stock. A muzzle brake is better than a flash hider.

You can't even use a premium modern upper with out extra mods because it won't fit.

You have a lower than is 20 years old and looks it. The newer lowers are much better and (not sure about this but) you can have a Full Auto BCG without having to hack up the part that Colt welds in the lower. Even if a FA BCG works it still looks like crap with that hunk of metal in there.

It is not like you are buying a 20 year old Glock that is actually better then the Glocks of today.

Pros: collapsable stock

Cons: ugly old lower with a hunk of metal welded inside, can't use a modern upper too well

 

[rkwjunior]

I think definition of preban/postban is very clear, no grey areas. It is lawful to add collapsible stock,flash hider,bayonet lug. And I think flash hider and stock are very useful features.

It's clear as far as a full blown pre-ban colt Ar's, but it's not clear about adding features to pre ban firearms that didn't already exist, such as a stock. Show me where in the law it specifies the legality of adding collapsable stock to preban lowers that previously didn't have a collapsible stock. A leo isn't going to take your word for it just because you say so, he has a one track mind, evil features.

I guess if you have a use for hiding flash?? Meh, i see them as collectors items now, i'll put the extra $500 towards ammo.

 

[dovecoon]

I absolutely understand why people would want all the extra stuff, and I know it should be protected under our rights and everything, but I just don't really need or want any of the banned features.

Now, in my carry gun, I want high-cap magazines, but that's about it.

 

[saltydude]

i personally think it's to much of a gray area to assume it's legal to maintain the evil feature count with a pre-ban lower.
My pre ban colt wasn't originally built with a collapsible stock so therefore i feel it's risky to add a feature that wasn't original. If you find yourself in a situation with your pre-ban lower and evil features, the leo's probably won't understand your interpretation of the law, they have their own and anything with evil features is a no no, you may find yourself explaining it to the judge,

I don't care for this mentality. Fear perpetuates myth.

 

[Reptile]

Show me where in the law it specifies the legality of adding collapsable stock to preban lowers that previously didn't have a collapsible stock..

Laws don't tell you what you CAN do, they tell you what you CANT do.

I am pretty sure that even Glidden would not say that a collapsable stock on a pre ban lower is illegal.

 

[Varmint]

Not sure what u mean by this?? Even though you have a pre-ban firearm, it doesn't mean u can use post ban magazines, hi-caps also must be pre-ban no matter what the age of the firearm.

Oh right, brain fart, sorry.

 

[rkwjunior]

I don't care for this mentality. Fear perpetuates myth.

It's not a myth, it's a very real possibility, leos don't ask questions anymore, "collapsible stock... your coming with me". Like i said, if you find your self in this situation you probably have other problems.

 

[saltydude]

It's not a myth, it's a very real possibility, leos don't ask questions anymore, "collapsible stock... your coming with me". Like i said, if you find your self in this situation you probably have other problems.

Yeah well, you're entitled to conduct your practice however you want. I personally feel people have the freedom to do what they wish without apprehension while staying within the law.

That mentality I assimilate to a cancer that spreads throughout the firearm community. Especially new shooters. We all need to be on the same page to combat the very folks you speak of that want to erode our right with any means possible.

 

[dovecoon]

Yeah well, you're entitled to conduct your practice however you want. I personally feel people have the freedom to do what they wish without apprehension while staying within the law.

That mentality I assimilate to a cancer that spreads throughout the firearm community. Especially new shooters. We all need to be on the same page to combat the very folks you speak of that want to erode our right with any means possible.

Case in point: I'm a new shooter and I'm terrified of breaking a gun law, partly because of these forums and partly because my gun instructor, while very good, spent about half of the class talking about how to not get in trouble. Makes me think that if I so much as look at a gun the wrong way, I'll get in trouble.

 

[rkwjunior]

Yeah well, you're entitled to conduct your practice however you want. I personally feel people have the freedom to do what they wish without apprehension while staying within the law.

That mentality I assimilate to a cancer that spreads throughout the firearm community. Especially new shooters. We all need to be on the same page to combat the very folks you speak of that want to erode our right with any means possible.

It's a very real possibility and i'm not going to ignore it just because i don't agree with the stupid laws as a whole. Whether it's legal or not someone could find themselves in front of a judge cause of a d-bag cop. So i'm not going to tell someone it's 100% legal when it's could easily happen to someone trying to interpret convoluted laws. I feel people should know it's not necessarily clear cut. I never said it was illegal or legal, i just gave an example of a real possibility when it comes to interpreting laws.

Ive done that configuration many times with a pre ban lower and i prefer other features and billet lowers more than i care about John law being a d-bag.

 

[saltydude]

Case in point: I'm a new shooter and I'm terrified of breaking a gun law, partly because of these forums and partly because my gun instructor, while very good, spent about half of the class talking about how to not get in trouble. Makes me think that if I so much as look at a gun the wrong way, I'll get in trouble.

I agree with rkwjunior in terms of

Like i said, if you find your self in this situation you probably have other problems.

However this isn't about being a moron or a criminal. I'd wager there's probably not a lot of unsuitable people out there who somehow obtained a pre-ban lower with the intention of configuring it with evil (and I dislike that terminology) features.

 

[rkwjunior]

I agree with rkwjunior in terms of



However this isn't about being a moron or a criminal. I'd wager there's probably not a lot of unsuitable people out there who somehow obtained a pre-ban lower with the intention of configuring it with evil (and I dislike that terminology) features.

No one likes the media terminology but we use them just so we are on the "same Page"

 

[saltydude]

No one likes the media terminology but we use them just so we are on the "same Page"

Um...... Yes thank you.

 

[Terminator03]

If I bought one it would only be as an investment, and even then it would have to be for a good price compared to whatever current market is because I couldn't care less about moving the stock once it is in the position that I'm comfortable with, nor do I ever feel the need to slap a knife on the end. With regard to the muzzle device I don't worry about that because I've never talked to a single cop yet that can tell a FH from a brake anyway. For the going rate of a single old lower you could buy at least 7 current production lowers so I could never justify buying one for anything other than investment as I said.

 

[TonyDedo]

Would I pay 3x the cost for a 20+ year old rifle part of subpar quality just so I could install benign features on a rifle all because the government says I can't have it? Just because a bunch of mall ninjas say it's "cool?"

No. Just, no.

I think definition of preban/postban is very clear, no grey areas. It is lawful to add collapsible stock,flash hider,bayonet lug. And I think flash hider and stock are very useful features.

Your understanding of the law is lacking; there is plenty of gray area. But that aside, even if you are technically in the right, you don't ever want to have to prove it.

 

[josh2600]

evil (and I dislike that terminology)

It's said with heavy sarcasm bro. That's a given.

 

[DarthRevan]

I bought one, an old Colt Sporter 2 HBAR. It hurt the wallet, but knowing I can flip the bird to the state and get away with it is worth it.

Every day I touch it I need to fight the urges to slap a bayonet on the end of my carbine upper and stab all the children, though. /sarcasm

 

[Coyote33]

I don't care about the collapsible stock, but would like a "birdcage" flash hider. I find it odd that the "pre-ban" has collapsible stock ability, even though those are a newer addition.

Silencers would also be cool. Are silencers banned/allowed state by state, or is that a federal thing?

 

[rkwjunior]

Your understanding of the law is lacking; there is plenty of gray area. But that aside, even if you are technically in the right, you don't ever want to have to prove it.

This is exactly what I was taking about^^^^^^^^
I guess I just didn't know how to put it this simple.

 

[Finalygotabeltfed]

Case in point: I'm a new shooter and I'm terrified of breaking a gun law, partly because of these forums and partly because my gun instructor, while very good, spent about half of the class talking about how to not get in trouble. Makes me think that if I so much as look at a gun the wrong way, I'll get in trouble.

Massachusetts government's mission has been accomplished!