Why buy pre-bans?

[kalash]

iMosin.

does that count?

Hex reciever? Tula? Izhevsk? Maybe finnish? 91/30? M38? M44? 91/59? M28? These questions matter

But yeah totally counts. Basically the same thing

I'm very confused by the OP. My pre-ban rifle is from 1939 and it was nowhere near $2500. Just a few hundred bucks bought peak performance.

 

[Grendizer138]

 

[TheGreekFreak]

Why do people buy pre-bans for $2,500 when you can buy a brand new AR-15 for $500 with a fixed stock?

Because every time Healey mentions the word “gun” in a speech, we can immediately flip them in the NES classifieds for even more. They are the equivalent of an NES pension/401K investment.

 

[not new guy]

I’d spend a little more to be able to have a folding stock on a gun but not a collapsing stock that only moves a few inches. And certainly not $2k more.

 

[TJ4]

I’d spend a little more to be able to have a folding stock on a gun but not a collapsing stock that only moves a few inches. And certainly not $2k more.

If you don’t want to deal with the pin and weld nonsense, then the pre-ban also makes sense, IF you could get it at a decent price.

 

[kalash]

If you don’t want to deal with the pin and weld nonsense, then the pre-ban also makes sense, IF you could get it at a decent price.

Honestly, this. Being able to freely swap muzzle devices is the one draw for pre-bans for me. However, $2k pays for a whole lot of pin-and-welds...

 

[usp45ct]

while not admitting to anything…I am of the theory that if an LEO is in my life examining the weld of the muzzle break, pin of my stock and date/capacity of my magazines, I am either completely unlucky at the range or I have seriously done something and have bigger issues than the weld, pins and dates on my mags

 

[M1911]

while not admitting to anything…I am of the theory that is an LEO is in my life examining the weld of the muzzle break, pin of my stock and date/capacity of my magazines, I am either completely unlucky at the range or I have seriously done something and have bigger issues than the weld, pins anddates on my mags

My view is that there may be some uncertainty around actions and intent that my lawyer might be able to argue in court. The problem with killy features on a post-ban is that if the serial number is clearly postban and you have an unsecured muzzle device on it, there is little uncertainty— it is a slam-dunk felony.

 

[Dennis in MA]

Why do people buy pre-bans for $2,500 when you can buy a brand new AR-15 for $500 with a fixed stock?

It's the thing you can't have.

SOME pre-bans will still be worth roughly what they were when the "ban" is over nationally. For instance, your Chinese pre-ban AK's are still worth a pretty penny as-is. The triggers are glass. The finish is amazing. They just did quality work in the 80's and earlier 90's.

Same with pre-ban magazines. Honestly - I've never loaded a 30rd mag at a range and popped it off. I load either 5 or 10 rounds depending on what I'm doing. I guess if I was doing some action-shooting, that would be different. But just basic static range stuff? 5 or 10 rounds. But I've got a PILE of 30rd mags for various guns. Because I can't have them. (And I got all of them around Y2K - back when a preban AK mag was $8 and a preban 30rd AR mag was 12-15.)

 

[Penniepup1]

Do you even “Flobert or Pedestal sink” bro?

 

[M1911]

It's the thing you can't have.

That's why I've got an 80% Glock receiver in my safe. I haven't completed it. I bought it because the feds were trying to regulate them. If the other side starts saying that people shouldn't be allowed to have X, then I'm more likely to go out and buy one -- I guess I'm just an oppositional, ornery cuss at heart.

 

[M1911]

I’d spend a little more to be able to have a folding stock on a gun but not a collapsing stock that only moves a few inches. And certainly not $2k more.

I've got one pre-ban Valmet with a folding stock. Honestly, folding stocks don't do anything for me. Collapsible stocks allow me to tailor the length of pull to my physique and to what I'm wearing that day (T-shirt versus thick winter coat), so I've got more use for collapsible stocks than folding stocks. YMMV.

 

[bigbravehog]

Hypothetical question:
An AR with all/some of the 2016 "banned" features is used as a defensive weapon by a lawful legal licensed owner during an armed home invasion

Legally, what are the consequences?

 

[M1911]

Hypothetical question:
An AR with all/some of the 2016 "banned" features is used as a defensive weapon by a lawful legal licensed owner during an armed home invasion

Legally, what are the consequences?

A felony conviction for violating the MA AWB, jail time, federally prohibited person status for the rest of your life, lose your job, maybe lose your home, to say nothing of what the prosecutor might say to the jury about how you used an evil, illegal, extra-killy gun while trying to convict you on criminal charges for the use of force incident.

Your lawyer can hopefully find some wiggle room about whether or not your use of force was necessary. But if you've got extra killy illegal features on your post-ban, that's simple factual possession issues (post-ban serial number and it has a threaded barrel with a non-fixed muzzle device, or unpinned collapsible stock) and it's a slam dunk felony conviction for the DA -- you're effed and your lawyer will work hard to convince you to take the plea deal felony conviction with less jail time.

Edited to add: the consequences of possession a post-ban large capacity weapon with evil features is 1-10 years in prison:

Section 131M. No person shall sell, offer for sale, transfer or possess an assault weapon or a large capacity feeding device that was not otherwise lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994. Whoever not being licensed under the provisions of section 122 violates the provisions of this section shall be punished, for a first offense, by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000 or by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than ten years, or by both such fine and imprisonment, and for a second offense, by a fine of not less than $5,000 nor more than $15,000 or by imprisonment for not less than five years nor more than 15 years, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

The provisions of this section shall not apply to: (i) the possession by a law enforcement officer; or (ii) the possession by an individual who is retired from service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited from receiving such a weapon or feeding device from such agency upon retirement.

Full text here: General Law - Part I, Title XX, Chapter 140, Section 131M

In my opinion, it is absolutely not worth it to violate the MA AWB. The risk is too great. If you get caught, it would be a slam dunk conviction and it would change your life dramatically for the worse. I understand that some here on NES disagree with me.

 

[rogersmithiii]

Because there are a lot of pantshitters that believe only preban (1994) ARs are legal to own in MA. Then there are people that think Healeys 2016 press release was an assault weapons ban and therefore only pre-2016 ARs are legal to own in MA

I thought that you could not possess anything with more than two, "assault" features unless it was made prior to the ban??

 

[rogersmithiii]

I’d spend a little more to be able to have a folding stock on a gun but not a collapsing stock that only moves a few inches. And certainly not $2k more.

The collapsing stock is to fit the rifle to different sized bodies. It's not a carry / concealment issue.

 

[jkelly1229]

while not admitting to anything…I am of the theory that is an LEO is in my life examining the weld of the muzzle break, pin of my stock and date/capacity of my magazines, I am either completely unlucky at the range or I have seriously done something and have bigger issues than the weld, pins anddates on my mags

I feel that way about potentially getting an inspection done on an engraving

 

[not new guy]

The collapsing stock is to fit the rifle to different sized bodies. It's not a carry / concealment issue.

My point exactly.

 

[MGnoob]

Do you even HK, bro?

You win the Internet until next year.

 

[paul73]

In my opinion, it is absolutely not worth it to violate the MA AWB

i kinda second that. no one hunts down (yet) for non-compliant rifles, but, if you serve the prosecution all this on a silver plate, and you actually used an evil forbidden gun - well, the law will get you.

so, do not panic, but do not be plain stupid neither. get a hand drill with a cobalt bit and drill a hole in the muzzle break - the metal is soft, fill it with solder. or go pay $200 or so to a smith to do the same.

take off the sliding stock, move it to storage, put this one or similar on the carbine gas tube - those stocks should have inserts to set desired LOP


deal with magazines as you see fit, 30rd pre-bans are available but are also a gamble, if they are not date stamped. mine are not.

 

[40 Creedmoor fan]

For some odd reason, folks who make fun of 2016 are assuming that "pre-ban" means the pre-AG 2016 proclamation. Pre-ban has and always was(in MA) a pre-Sept 13, 1994 manufacture date.
$2500 is the price of a pre-'94 rifle. Anyone who sells pre-2016 rifles for $2500 is a swindler who is taking advantage of gullible newbies, sorta like what one well-known individual did with Glock pre-bans by selling them for 3x the price.

Pre-bans will continue to remain expensive until AWB is overturned. The way things are going, we're looking at another 5+ years, if ever, before that happens. If the ban is ruled illegal, all these $2500 rifles will probably remain $2500 purely because the price of a quality(we're not talking BCA junk) AR-15 has been climbing over the past ten years and will probably continue to rise, following inflation trends.

Alternatively, if the ban is overturned in just one or two states(let's say the CA ban is overturned without ever getting to SCOTUS), all the pre-ban rifles will flood the market, and the prices will drop, albeit temporarily.

A good pre-ban rifle can be upgraded to Daniel Defense upper, the stock, and the grip. Add a Geissele, and you have the latest and greatest AR, although by then, you're well into $4000 territory.

And this is why I don't bother with all these ARs. Why anyone would spend 2-4K on a $500 rifle is beyond me.

 

[PappyM3]

Because I can do whatever I want to the rifle

And even with a $800-$1200 lower, the full build isn’t really that much more than other new guns. You could do a preban build for the price of a new Tavor or Bren 2.

Ultimately, a preban will cost ~$700-$1k more than what free state people will pay. Not $2k like you present. It sucks, but that’s what it costs in this state to do whatever you want to the rifle.

But if someone wants to spend bare-bones on an AR, they’ll have to be okay with sacrificing features. Maybe that works in their trade space.

 

[drgrant]

Because I can do whatever I want to the rifle

And even with a $800-$1200 lower, the full build isn’t really that much more than other new guns. You could do a preban build for the price of a new Tavor or Bren 2.

Ultimately, a preban will cost ~$700-$1k more than what free state people will pay. Not $2k like you present. It sucks, but that’s what it costs in this state to do whatever you want to the rifle.

But if someone wants to spend bare-bones on an AR, they’ll have to be okay with sacrificing features. Maybe that works in their trade space.

Or option 3, just be okay with not giving a shit, and just accepting whatever risks that entails. Since 2016 a lot of people have just started doing that, for better or worse given that the state has basically decided it's going to act in bad faith whenever it wants to.

 

[PappyM3]

For some odd reason, folks who make fun of 2016 are assuming that "pre-ban" means the pre-AG 2016 proclamation. Pre-ban has and always was(in MA) a pre-Sept 13, 1994 manufacture date.
…

I make fun of 2016 and only refer to pre- Sep 1994 as “pre-ban”.

Alternatively, if the ban is overturned in just one or two states(let's say the CA ban is overturned without ever getting to SCOTUS), all the pre-ban rifles will flood the market, and the prices will drop, albeit temporarily.

Not necessarily. Quite a few pre-bans have historic value, such as SP1s. As long as the pre-ban owner has the original parts to return it to.

A good pre-ban rifle can be upgraded to Daniel Defense upper, the stock, and the grip. Add a Geissele, and you have the latest and greatest AR, although by then, you're well into $4000 territory.

And this is why I don't bother with all these ARs. Why anyone would spend 2-4K on a $500 rifle is beyond me.

I can assure you this rifle has much better performance and is more reliable than a $500 AR.

And doing a rough calculation of the key parts (not optics/lights), the build was $2.3k. Good quality parts all around, including down to the LPK, and assembled methodically and according to proper procedures and best practices with an QA/QC inspector who I trust (me). Yeah, I’ll take it over a $500 PSA any day of the week, even though it cost a lot more. Overall cost is inline with new premium ARs.

Admittedly, there are some extra costs that could be swapped like the Geissele trigger/handguard, Badger safety/charging handle and Surefire flash hider. Those are purely preference and could easily be substituted with cheaper parts. A quality build can easily be sub-$2k.

 

[PappyM3]

Or okay with not giving a shit and just accepting whatever risks that entails. Since 2016 a lot of people have just started doing that, for better or worse given that the state has basically decided it's going to act in bad faith whenever it wants to.

Understood and more power to those people. Glad they exist. I’m not willing to assume that risk for my little kids.

 

[M1911]

i kinda second that. no one hunts down (yet) for non-compliant rifles, but, if you serve the prosecution all this on a silver plate, and you actually used an evil forbidden gun - well, the law will get you.

Exactly, no one is hunting for it. But unexpected things have happened. I attended a law seminar taught by Jon Green a couple years ago. My memory of the story that he told is somewhat hazy, but I think this is what he described: a kid got pulled over and had some prescription pills that weren't in a scrip bottle. He was arrested on drug charges, car was searched, found his post-ban AR with collapsible stock. The kid later produced the prescription bottle from the physician, so the drug charges were dropped, but he was convicted on the AWB charges, sent to prison.

 

[M1911]

Understood and more power to those people. Glad they exist. I’m not willing to assume that risk for my little kids.

Yeah. I'm 63. I want to retire in a couple years and would prefer to do that in the comfort of my own home, rather than a jail cell.

 

[bigbravehog]

A felony conviction for violating the MA AWB, jail time, federally prohibited person status for the rest of your life, lose your job, maybe lose your home, to say nothing of what the prosecutor might say to the jury about how you used an evil, illegal, extra-killy gun while trying to convict you on criminal charges for the use of force incident.

Your lawyer can hopefully find some wiggle room about whether or not your use of force was necessary. But if you've got extra killy illegal features on your post-ban, that's simple factual possession issues (post-ban serial number and it has a threaded barrel with a non-fixed muzzle device, or unpinned collapsible stock) and it's a slam dunk felony conviction for the DA -- you're effed and your lawyer will work hard to convince you to take the plea deal felony conviction with less jail time.

Edited to add: the consequences of possession a post-ban large capacity weapon with evil features is 1-10 years in prison:



Full text here: General Law - Part I, Title XX, Chapter 140, Section 131M

In my opinion, it is absolutely not worth it to violate the MA AWB. The risk is too great. If you get caught, it would be a slam dunk conviction and it would change your life dramatically for the worse. I understand that some here on NES disagree with me.

Thank you. That's exactly what I expected.

I brought it up because when I aak about the Maura 2016 enforcement, so many are quick to laugh and say just buy the evil non compliant weapon. What good is it if you can't use it for defensive purposes.

 

[MAJoe]

Hypothetical question:
An AR with all/some of the 2016 "banned" features is used as a defensive weapon by a lawful legal licensed owner during an armed home invasion

Legally, what are the consequences?

Also take a step back. You don’t need to have used that rifle. How about self defense shooting with your MA compliant whatever pistol with low cap mag? They’re going to hold everything you own and suspend your license while the investigation is ongoing. Wasn’t it Dedham PD that smashed open a fixed mag AR pistol (compliant) and said it was an AW? Took the manufacturer to come into court and prove it was indeed compliant. Think they won’t wrench on that fake pinned brake?

Or, medical emergency while you’re cleaning a gun. Or, car accident coming back from the range.

This risk is greater than people calculate. But, you do you. Your guns your choice.

 

[PappyM3]

Thank you. That's exactly what I expected.

I brought it up because when I aak about the Maura 2016 enforcement, so many are quick to laugh and say just buy the evil non compliant weapon. What good is it if you can't use it for defensive purposes.

Those are possible results. Far from guaranteed though. The fact that they have yet to prosecute anybody and are currently trying to tighten the ban in the legislature hint at them realizing the 2016 decree is meaningless.