Washington AR kit trick to by-pass I-1639

[wired]

I understand the OP called ATF to ask the question. But we are talking State law here not Federal law. The SBR/pistol thing is a side note.

Right. The Feds dont care. Thats not their problem. The State is requiring rifles go through some silly process. Breaking up a rifle and selling the parts doesnt change the fact that the lower is still a excise tax paid rifle by state and federal law. The OP's dealer needs to be talking to the state not the feds. He might get his license through the feds but he still has to follow state law and he isnt. Rifles ( or pistols ) have an excise tax paid on them at the time of manufacture and are on the manufacturers books as rifles ( or pistols ). Lowers do not have excise tax paid on them and are free agents. A deler breaking up a rifle to sell as parts by skirting the state law is breaking the state law not federal law. He needs to call the WA AG not the Federal ATF. He'll get a different answer from those jerks.

 

[slimmer13]

The big question for me is, does buying a stripped lower sign you up for the lifetime background checks? All the other hoops I could stomach but not that one.

If you're talking about the lifelong HIPPA waiver included in 1639 for SA rifles, no.

 

[gunrnr]

we need some more laws--------NOT

 

[Defense Minister]

Why are you people giving the antis so much info on how to craft the language of their next anti-gun bill???

 

[tinkerbill]

He isnt. He either asked the ATF examiner the question wrong or the ATF examiner flubbed it completely. Ive seen it happen MANY times. If its not in writing from the tech branch it isnt real. Rifles are rifles, pistols are pistols and stripped lowers which have never been transferred are other. lowers that have been transferred as pistols or rifles and have excise tax payments paid as such by an O7 FFL ( the manufacturer ) are pistols or rifles forever ( unless you make a pistol into a rifle as the end user ) . One ATF agents misinformed opinion doesnt change that. Selling split up rifles to skirt the law is going to get the dealer in the state Pen. The feds dont care.

So let's do a theoretical action here.... As a person (ffl or not) I buy a AR platform complete rifle and take it completely apart. I sell some parts together in same box and others separately until I'm down to just the registered receiver. I then sell that receiver as a rifle receiver and buyer goes through the background check successfully no one is in hot water during the whole parts sales routine. If the buyer uses that registered receiver to build another rifle, no problem but if he uses it to build a pistol, he is in hot water! Is my logic good with this whole scenario? I think YES. The only fly in the ointment might be if the pattern of sales for these rifle parts is so clear cut that intent to bypass the law is unmistakable, then the whole transaction is suspect and may still be construed as breaking the law. Intent therefore plays a big part in the whole scenario if the actions are so thinly veiled.

This gets me thinking of another scenario: Although very unlikely lets say a friend borrows a upper from me, adds his lower and goes target practicing out in a remote area of woods. Another fellow soon joins him at that same target practice area and during the course of the day conversing with the other shooter the guy brags about this hot lover he is have a affair with. He describes her in pretty good detail, especially the unique tattoo she has in her "down under" area. Then the guy describes her husband as a bald, fat couch potato that drinks too much all the time and is a all around looser that works at a local gas station the friend suddenly realises that this fellow is the one who his wife is having a affair with! Now my friend gets boiling mad and starts a fight with this guy. In the heat of the moment he grabs his rifle and shoots the guy dead. He then brushes out his foot steps and car tire impressions in the dust and leaves the scene thinking he has covered his tracks and nobody is going to be able to pin him for the murder He gets back home, cleans the upper very well (leaving no fingerprints), then thanks me for letting him use it and gives the upper back to me, none the wiser. Before too many days have passed I get a visit from a couple police detectives who take me down to headquarters for questioning. During that time one of them gets a warrant to search my house and comes up with the AR rifle. They test fire it and examine the bullet riflling against the bullet pulled from the victim. They also inspect some casings left at the crime scene. The bullet rifling and firing pin marks match my gun so now I am accused of murder and jailed without bail! I tell them I loaned my upper to a friend so they pull him in for questioning. They search his home for a AR lower but do not find one nor any 223 ammo. They are unable to pull any fingerprints from the upper and he denies even borrowing it! He was tested for gun powder residue but none was found (he probably scrubbed himself raw trying to make sure he would not test positive for residue and burned the clothing and shoes he wore that fateful day)! His cell phone records showed he was last pinged in the area of town closest to the murder scene but no proof any further because no cell tower reception that far into the woods! I was home alone all day but didn't have a witness so my lawyer advised me to accept a plea deal because my chances of getting a not guilty verdict were slim to none! Boy am I screwed! And all this time I thought he was a good friend!
P.S. Looking back, right about now I'm thinking I ought to become a writer! Thanks if you read the whole thing!

 

[rdb241]

Why are you people giving the antis so much info on how to craft the language of their next anti-gun bill???

So let's do a theoretical action here.... As a person (ffl or not) I buy a AR platform complete rifle and take it completely apart. I sell some parts together in same box and others separately until I'm down to just the registered receiver. I then sell that receiver as a rifle receiver and buyer goes through the background check successfully no one is in hot water during the whole parts sales routine. If the buyer uses that registered receiver to build another rifle, no problem but if he uses it to build a pistol, he is in hot water! Is my logic good with this whole scenario? I think YES. The only fly in the ointment might be if the pattern of sales for these rifle parts is so clear cut that intent to bypass the law is unmistakable, then the whole transaction is suspect and may still be construed as breaking the law. Intent therefore plays a big part in the whole scenario if the actions are so thinly veiled.

This gets me thinking of another scenario: Although very unlikely lets say a friend borrows a upper from me, adds his lower and goes target practicing out in a remote area of woods. Another fellow soon joins him at that same target practice area and during the course of the day conversing with the other shooter the guy brags about this hot lover he is have a affair with. He describes her in pretty good detail, especially the unique tattoo she has in her "down under" area. Then the guy describes her husband as a bald, fat couch potato that drinks too much all the time and is a all around looser that works at a local gas station the friend suddenly realises that this fellow is the one who his wife is having a affair with! Now my friend gets boiling mad and starts a fight with this guy. In the heat of the moment he grabs his rifle and shoots the guy dead. He then brushes out his foot steps and car tire impressions in the dust and leaves the scene thinking he has covered his tracks and nobody is going to be able to pin him for the murder He gets back home, cleans the upper very well (leaving no fingerprints), then thanks me for letting him use it and gives the upper back to me, none the wiser. Before too many days have passed I get a visit from a couple police detectives who take me down to headquarters for questioning. During that time one of them gets a warrant to search my house and comes up with the AR rifle. They test fire it and examine the bullet riflling against the bullet pulled from the victim. They also inspect some casings left at the crime scene. The bullet rifling and firing pin marks match my gun so now I am accused of murder and jailed without bail! I tell them I loaned my upper to a friend so they pull him in for questioning. They search his home for a AR lower but do not find one nor any 223 ammo. They are unable to pull any fingerprints from the upper and he denies even borrowing it! He was tested for gun powder residue but none was found (he probably scrubbed himself raw trying to make sure he would not test positive for residue and burned the clothing and shoes he wore that fateful day)! His cell phone records showed he was last pinged in the area of town closest to the murder scene but no proof any further because no cell tower reception that far into the woods! I was home alone all day but didn't have a witness so my lawyer advised me to accept a plea deal because my chances of getting a not guilty verdict were slim to none! Boy am I screwed! And all this time I thought he was a good friend!
P.S. Looking back, right about now I'm thinking I ought to become a writer! Thanks if you read the whole thing!

You simply watch way too much TV. That is such a far stretch it's almost not worth saying anything. Explain to me how the LEO's could possibly trace a non-numbered upper receiver to you?

 

[turbo_vanner]

maybe he gets his supplier to ship separate assembled uppers and lowers, and just sells them as such. If that keeps them selling faster, I'm sure it would be worth someone's while.

 

[Eric in Oregon]

Rifles are rifles, pistols are pistols and stripped lowers which have never been transferred are other. lowers that have been transferred as pistols or rifles and have excise tax payments paid as such by an O7 FFL ( the manufacturer ) are pistols or rifles forever

Nah. For this to be true it would have to be illegal for the dealer to split up the rifle and sell the lower by itself. You seem to care greatly about what 'excise tax' is paid, but as long as it was paid properly at the time the government wouldn't. The only thing paying an extra tax would do is raise the price of the lower, which neither the feds or the state would care about.

 

[nwslopoke]

It was a people's bill and they just can't change it to suit them because there might be a loophole.

Not a loophole. It's the law.

 

[wired]

Nah. For this to be true it would have to be illegal for the dealer to split up the rifle and sell the lower by itself. You seem to care greatly about what 'excise tax' is paid, but as long as it was paid properly at the time the government wouldn't. The only thing paying an extra tax would do is raise the price of the lower, which neither the feds or the state would care about.

I care if the excise tax is paid because ...as a former dealer ond 02/07 SOT manufacturer... I had to care. It does make a difference in the eyes of the ATF as to whether a receiver was originally sold as a rifle. The once a rifle always a rifle bit applies whether you are the original owner of said receiver or not. All it takes is a simple ATF trace to determine whether that gun ...that receiver... was originally a rifle, a pistol or was sold as a bare stripped receiver. It is not illegal for a dealer to sell a receiver by itself but by the ATF's definition it is an other that cannot be built as a pistol but by state law it is a rifle. The dealer entered it into his books as a rifle before he split it up. The feds arent going to care if he splits it and sells it as an other but the state will. That dealer can be putting his clients at considerable risk of serious jail time. Say you shoot someone defending your home with an AR pistol you built from a bare receiver you bought from a dealer who split a rifle up to evade a state law. Now defend yourself in criminal ( or civil for that matter ) court from a slimy lawyer who makes one call to the ATF and finds out it was a rifle receiver you illegally made into a pistol. Once a rifle, 100% provable by excise tax records, always a rifle.

 

[gmerkt]

Question, is a new Aero Precision complete lower, never originally assembled as a rifle, sold new post-I-1639 considered an assault rifle or an "other"?

 

[osprey]

Should have been transferred as other unless the transferring ffl f-ed up.

 

[EPS]

So I had one of those PSA freedom Kit's .
And @Melmelhunter wanted a AR .
I told her to order a lower from PSA .
had it shipped to local gun shop.
I was not sure about the process.
So I told her to go to Sporting Systems and do the class .that was free by the way.
Thanks .
But we didn't need it.
Sold as Other. Did the background check and had to wait 10 days. Pick up lower.
And today we where Shooting her AR15 .

 

[jnynetwk]

Question, is a new Aero Precision complete lower, never originally assembled as a rifle, sold new post-I-1639 considered an assault rifle or an "other"?

I am certainly not a dealer, I don't even play one on TV, but what I was told by my local gun shop was: if the complete lower comes with a stock, it is classified as a rifle. If it doesn't have a stock or a brace(?), even if otherwise "complete" (e.g. has internals like trigger, safety, etc but no stock) it is an "other". I presume this would mean if it comes with a brace it is a pistol? But I guess you could put a brace on a rifle so I'm not sure if that assumption is correct.

 

[wired]

I am certainly not a dealer, I don't even play one on TV, but what I was told by my local gun shop was: if the complete lower comes with a stock, it is classified as a rifle. If it doesn't have a stock or a brace(?), even if otherwise "complete" (e.g. has internals like trigger, safety, etc but no stock) it is an "other". I presume this would mean if it comes with a brace it is a pistol? But I guess you could put a brace on a rifle so I'm not sure if that assumption is correct.

He's wrong BTW. A rifle has a rifle barrel attached. The stock has zero to do with it. If he entered a virgin receiver ( that did not come in as a completed gun ) in his books as a rifle because it has a stock attached he's dumber than a box of hair and is doing his customers a great injustice.

 

[Ops]

you cant bypass a law. sounds like your FFL is smoke blowing trying to over inflate his ego.

if hes buying a rifle than selling them separately. than hes acting like a idiot and deserves jail

 

[coop44]

OK brainiacs, if I buy a thompson center contender frame/receiver used, what is it? A pistol or a rifle? Or an "other"?

 

[American123]

I'm not sure why people are getting this wrong. Does an FFL have to sell firearms as complete pieces? Are they not the owner of their business. If they bought Glocks and sold every Glock as a lower receiver and a upper slide separately to allow customers to mix and match on colors of receiver, the 4473 still has to be filled out for the receiver, just like with AR's, where is there a law that says an upper receiver and a lower receiver must be sold paired together. It would seem once the merchandise is bought from the supplier, the FFL is now the owner and they are able to sell their property in whatever manner they prefer, as long as they are not altering it in an illegal manner.

So far it sounds like several people are so used to being told what to do that the notion of side stepping a unconstitutional law, in a legal manner, makes them feel uncomfortable and they don't want others doing that.

 

[wired]

Theres these things called laws. A lot of have to follow them whether we agree with the constitutionality or not. The feds pass them and most only apply to the feds. Some apply to the states. The states pass them and they apply to people and businesses in the state. A dealer might have a dealers license issued by the feds but he also has a business license from the state saying he must follow state laws and even the federal license says the dealer has to follow his state laws. The stuff he sells is tightly regulated by the stats and the feds. If a dealer is bringing in a rifle, splitting it in half and selling both halves to the same person he is probably going to get his butt in a ringer by the state authorities. In a world where there is little common sense that is just common sense. A dealer might get a rifle in stock and then split it up and sell the upper to someone else and then try to sell the receiver as an "other" . Its not. Its a rifle receiver and should ALWAYS from that point on be transferred as such IF the dealer wants to keep himself in business and out of jail and his customers out of jail. If said dealer is selling what IS a rifle receiver as a rifle as is required by federal law then he may be in violation of state law for selling it as a rifle to a prohibited person in this case a person who has not been vetted as required by law

 

[Unka-Boo]

It kills me that this is so hard to understand for some people.