JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Status
Messages
24,252
Reactions
36,660
If a person defines a receiver or frame as the following:

'Frame or receiver' means the part of a firearm that provides housing for the hammer, bolt or breechlock and firing mechanism and that is usually threaded at its forward portion to receive the barrel.

Not counting the last part which says usually threaded.....
It states that a receiver is the part that has three items, hammer, bolt or breechlock and firing mechanism. The AR lower receiver does not contain a breechlock or bolt so wouldn't that make it something other then a receiver based on this definition?

@tiggers97 this is the same language we were discussing today but after rereading it with fresh eyes I came up with the above question.
 
Last Edited:
If a law defines a receiver or frame as the following:

"(5) 'Frame or receiver' means the part of a firearm that provides housing for the hammer, bolt or breechlock and firing mechanism and that is usually threaded at its forward portion to receive the barrel.

Not counting the last part which says usually threaded.....
It states that a receiver is the part that has three items, hammer, bolt or breechlock and firing mechanism. The AR lower receiver does not contain a breechlock or bolt so wouldn't that make it something other then a receiver in the eyes of this definition?

@tiggers97 this is the same language we were discussing today but after rereading it with fresh eyes I came up with the above question.

Any kind of "legal questions" is always risky here, especially when it comes to firearms. IIRC part of what will define what is a "firearm" as far as the Feds go is what has the serial Number on it. I have always been "told" a lower for an AR is a firearm, no matter how many parts are not in it.
 
When you buy a AR LOWER.
they will call it other on the paperwork.
But if you buy a complete AR15 from a FFL .
Depends on the barrel length.
If it is 16 inch or more.
It will be put on the the paperwork as a Rifle.
If it is a pistol it will have pistol brace and a barrel less than 16 inch.
It will be on the paperwork as a Pistol.

Now if you buy a complete Rifle and it says Rifle on the paperwork YOU CAN NOT MAKE IT INTO A PISTOL.
making a Rifle smaller is illegal.
Unless you go get the tax stamp for a SBR .
short barrel Rifle .
 
Now like he said legal Questions are kinda odd .
Besides the dam laws change every month .
Anyway
Not to mention every damn jurisdiction. I have been playing on the net for a long time. When it comes to "gun law" questions I always cringe. So often see stuff that is really out there. So often see someone give "advice" based on Federal law without bothering to tell the one asking that this may or may not cover their local laws.
 
Any kind of "legal questions" is always risky here, especially when it comes to firearms. IIRC part of what will define what is a "firearm" as far as the Feds go is what has the serial Number on it. I have always been "told" a lower for an AR is a firearm, no matter how many parts are not in it.
I understand the feds consider it the receiver but this a state law in question. Maybe I should have posted this in the law section of the forum?
 
I understand the feds consider it the receiver but this a state law in question. Maybe I should have posted this in the law section of the forum?

Did not realize you were asking about a state. Sure put it up for the State in question. Then the standard caveat I always say. Careful taking any kind of legal advice off the net. If you follow what you are told, end up in front of a judge, the judge will not give a rip what you were told. Especially when it comes to guns. So many are so damn anti gun now days they love to pounce on anyone who breaks some law.
 
Well you will probably have a few more reply in the morning .
There are a few guys on here that have a FFL .
They could probably answer you question better than me.
 
Did not realize you were asking about a state. Sure put it up for the State in question. Then the standard caveat I always say. Careful taking any kind of legal advice off the net. If you follow what you are told, end up in front of a judge, the judge will not give a rip what you were told. Especially when it comes to guns. So many are so damn anti gun now days they love to pounce on anyone who breaks some law.
I am going to rephrase the question as I'm after opinions not legal advice:)
 
Now like he said legal Questions are kinda odd .
Besides the dam laws change every month .
Anyway

The ATF knows a receiver when it sees a receiver, then it is legally a receiver, unless it isn't, or until it is.

Same with a machine gun; e.g., a bumpstock or a rubber band or a piece of string, or a drop in trigger.

Ditto with suppressors and suppressor parts.

:rolleyes:
 
The ATF knows a receiver when it sees a receiver, then it is legally a receiver, unless it isn't, or until it is.

Same with a machine gun; e.g., a bumpstock or a rubber band or a piece of string, or a drop in trigger.

Ditto with suppressors and suppressor parts.

:rolleyes:
This is unrelated to feds. It seems to me if the definition is as stated, that the AR lower receiver would fail the test as it only contains two of the three items the definition requires. It would be the same if the upper receiver had two of the required components but not the third. I just want to make sure I was reading the definition correctly and that they didn't mean that it only had to have one or two of the items to be a receiver based on the definition provided.
 
This is unrelated to feds. It seems to me if the definition is as stated, that the AR lower receiver would fail the test as it only contains two of the three items the definition requires. It would be the same if the upper receiver had two of the required components but not the third. I just want to make sure I was reading the definition correctly and that they didn't mean that it only had to have one or two of the items to be a receiver based on the definition provided.

My point was that the legal definition varies with its interpretation by any given agency with rule making authority, or with a court.

Therefore, it changes given a different context. With regards to an AR "receiver" the ATF has more than once officially determined that an 'upper' is a lawful 'receiver' in certain cases - e.g, certain belt fed uppers.

Hence my comment.

Suggestion: if you want to know whether your interpretation is "correct", ask the federal agency charged with interpreting it. My bet is their answer will just confuse you more.
 
My point was that the legal definition varies with its interpretation by any given agency with rule making authority, or with a court.

Therefore, it changes given a different context. With regards to an AR "receiver" the ATF has more than once officially determined that an 'upper' is a lawful 'receiver' in certain cases - e.g, certain belt fed uppers.

Hence my comment.

Suggestion: if you want to know whether your interpretation is "correct", ask the federal agency charged with interpreting it. My bet is their answer will just confuse you more.
This definition was provided by someone at the State level. Keep in mind that same someone is trying to classify unfinished receivers/frames under the same rules as a finished receivers/frames. Even though that is impossible to do on Form 4473. Words matter. I understand where the feds stand on this issue of AR lowers but the state is making up their own rules and definitions.
 
It seems to me if the definition is as stated, that the AR lower receiver would fail the test as it only contains two of the three items the definition requires.

the design of the two piece receiver makes this firearm an exception and the only other choice would be to have both the upper and lowers carry the same number and always be with each other ......be happy they don't care .
There are more that don't meet this exact definition especially in the handgun world .
When it comes to law there is no perfect system, have to go with what works for the majority and make reasonable exceptions for those that do not fit the definition, as opposed to strictly following the black and white with no exceptions .
 
The AK receiver is just a piece of metal without a serial number until you rivet the front trunnion into it. The laws are confusing if you read into them too much.

The FAL lower is just a trigger housing, meanwhile the upper is the receiver. The AR lower is a receiver while the upper isn't.
 
can you expand on that there sir ?
They consider the lower of an AR as the receiver, but they consider the lower of the FAL as a trigger housing. The only difference is the AR lower holds the magazine.

The SCAR's lower holds FCG and magazine but isn't considered a receiver. You can see the government is both consistent and knowledgeable on the laws they wrote.
 
Status

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top