Is it possible for a gun shop to seperate an upper from a lower?

[draza]

Is it possible for a gun shop to sell an upper receiver from a complete AR separately?
I feel like they SHOULD be able to considering they can just order another upper. But besides that even, they may not even want to if they even could..

Thoughts?

Read More

 

[Joe13]

No reason they can't...

It would be their discretion.

 

[billdeserthills]

Is it possible for a gun shop to sell an upper receiver from a complete AR separately?
I feel like they SHOULD be able to considering they can just order another upper. But besides that even, they may not even want to if they even could..

Thoughts?

Sure, when I sold guns I used to buy some of my AR's from Stag arms--buying them separate used to save me $50-$100 apiece (it was just one way for me to make my prices lower than my competitors)--However as insane as this sounds, the ATF told me I personally was not allowed to put them together!

Now just to ramp up the insanity even more I was allowed (per the ATF) that I could let my employee assemble the lower & upper, as long as he was off the clock/not getting paid to assemble them

 

[rdb241]

Why?............You can buy both upper and lower stripped receivers and build what you want. Purchasing a stripped lower receiver after 7/1/19 does not fall under the Washington State I-1639 definition of "assault rifle". No classes, no BS.

 

[nwslopoke]

Why?............You can buy both upper and lower stripped receivers and build what you want. Purchasing a stripped lower receiver after 7/1/19 does not fall under the Washington State I-1639 definition of "assault rifle". No classes, no BS.

Sounds like a loophole to me. Well, after giving a nanosecond of thought, it was more a poorly put together law. They are the coyote. We have to be the roadrunner that steps around their traps

 

[The Heretic]

Sure, when I sold guns I used to buy some of my AR's from Stag arms--buying them separate used to save me $50-$100 apiece (it was just one way for me to make my prices lower than my competitors)--However as insane as this sounds, the ATF told me I personally was not allowed to put them together!

Now just to ramp up the insanity even more I was allowed (per the ATF) that I could let my employee assemble the lower & upper, as long as he was off the clock/not getting paid to assemble them

Sounds like someone at the ATF has their head on backwards. As we all know, for an AR, the lower is the "firearm" and someone putting an upper on any lower is not "manufacturing". But maybe the ATF has ruled this - first I have heard of it and I kind of doubt it would stand up in court?

 

[billdeserthills]

Sounds like someone at the ATF has their head on backwards. As we all know, for an AR, the lower is the "firearm" and someone putting an upper on any lower is not "manufacturing". But maybe the ATF has ruled this - first I have heard of it and I kind of doubt it would stand up in court?

They used to make up rules all the time--
I'm so glad not to hafta work with those people anymore

 

[rdb241]

Sounds like someone at the ATF has their head on backwards. As we all know, for an AR, the lower is the "firearm" and someone putting an upper on any lower is not "manufacturing". But maybe the ATF has ruled this - first I have heard of it and I kind of doubt it would stand up in court?

That is a legal opinion from a 2nd amendment lawyer who is also a member here. A receiver is just a receiver. It is not under Washington State definition as being an "assault rifle". It is not a complete functioning semi auto rifle. That goes for all stripped receivers. AR/AK/HK/Galil/M1A/M1 Carbine/10-22...............................

 

[Kruel J]

The stripped lower is the only piece that requires a transfer. The rest is just metal (and plastic). The ATF doesn't give a crap about anything but the lower. At least for now. As far as the shop, they may not WANT to separate it and that's their business but there's absolutely nothing legal-wise stopping them from doing so.

 

[rdb241]

The stripped lower is the only piece that requires a transfer. The rest is just metal (and plastic). The ATF doesn't give a crap about anything but the lower. At least for now. As far as the shop, they may not WANT to separate it and that's their business but there's absolutely nothing legal-wise stopping them from doing so.

Under Federal Law, yes I agree. But I am talking about this specific definition in this specific bill in Washington State. You still record the number and go through the background check and or the wait period for the delay with out the stupid safety course and fee. It is handled like a receiver transfer today. Again, this is a legal opinion from a Gun lawyer. This is not my opinion. I did not got to law school for 4 years to make this decision.

 

[Flymph]

Why not just buy the upper online and have shipped to your door?
Maybe a silly question...

 

[The Heretic]

That is a legal opinion from a 2nd amendment lawyer who is also a member here. A receiver is just a receiver. It is not under Washington State definition as being an "assault rifle". It is not a complete functioning semi auto rifle. That goes for all stripped receivers. AR/AK/HK/Galil/M1A/M1 Carbine/10-22...............................

I was speaking to the ATF opinion regarding putting an upper on a lower, not to the WA state law. Not that I disagree with the opinion on WA state law - I haven't read it - but that is something I have been thinking about regarding many state laws (not just WA); i.e., you get a stripped lower, no "features", no mags, no bolt, nothing except the bare lower - with most state "bans"/et. al., it doesn't meet their definitions for 'Assault Weapons' (or whatever terminology they use). It isn't semi-auto because the BCG and upper are not assembled to it yet - so it isn't capable of any mode of firing yet - whether semi, full-auto, pump, bolt or single shot - any of which it could be configured to be with different uppers - it could even be an airgun. Ditto with '80%' lowers, even more so.

Which segues into what happens when they come around to confiscate guns and the owner just gives them a stripped lower?

What about 'constructive intent'? Do states have such a ruling for state laws on 'banned'/regulated firearms? Precedence in court? Or is that only at the federal level?

Does the new WA state laws on '80%' lowers have a definition of what these lowers are? What about a simple rectangular piece of alloy that could be machined into a complete but stripped lower? Where is the line drawn?

 

[notazombie]

FWIW, OP is in Oregon.

I guess I'm not fully comprehending the question. Can they sell it separately? Legally, yes. Of course they may not wish to separate it for whatever personal reasons.
The only legal issue I could foresee is if the lower was originally designated "long gun" and the removed upper were to be replaced with a pistol -- essentially creating an SBR.
At least that's the way I understand current law to be today. Of course, it's Oregon.

I am not, nor do I wish to be, an attorney.

 

[draza]

I'm just looking to trade my AK74 but I don't want to trade it towards a whole 1600-1800 DD.
I already have a good lower so the upper itself should only be 1k roughly.
This was also just pure curiosity aswell.

 

[The Heretic]

I'm just looking to trade my AK74 but I don't want to trade it towards a whole 1600-1800 DD.
I already have a good lower so the upper itself should only be 1k roughly.
This was also just pure curiosity aswell.

DD uppers show up used or NIB on the forum from time to time, or you can order them online - both of which will probably be less $$$ than if you ask a LGS to separate one from a rifle they have in stock.

Whether someone wants to trade or not is a separate issue.

 

[arakboss]

Sure, when I sold guns I used to buy some of my AR's from Stag arms--buying them separate used to save me $50-$100 apiece (it was just one way for me to make my prices lower than my competitors)--However as insane as this sounds, the ATF told me I personally was not allowed to put them together!

Now just to ramp up the insanity even more I was allowed (per the ATF) that I could let my employee assemble the lower & upper, as long as he was off the clock/not getting paid to assemble them

If you purchased assembled ar and separated the recievers. Then sold the lower to somebody using that lower for a pistol build. It seems that they would be violating the once a rifle always a rifle rule?

 

[The Heretic]

If you purchased assembled ar and separated the recievers. Then sold the lower to somebody using that lower for a pistol build. It seems that they would be violating the once a rifle always a rifle rule?

it depends on whether it was originally a pistol or 'other' (stripped lower or 80%). If its first config (manufacture) is as a pistol then it can go back and forth between being a pistol and rifle. If it was first config'd as a rifle, then it stays a rifle.

The ATF lost in court (1992) when they tried to argue that if you reconfigured a pistol as a rifle then it had to stay a rifle.

https://www.atf.gov/file/55526/download
United States v. Thompson/Center Arms Co. - Stephen P. Halbrook, Ph.D.

 

[billdeserthills]

If you purchased assembled ar and separated the recievers. Then sold the lower to somebody using that lower for a pistol build. It seems that they would be violating the once a rifle always a rifle rule?

Just another good reason not to split them up--I had no interest in knowing all the rules surrounding that nightmare

 

[clearconscience]

I would think if buying a complete rifle they would NOT want to do that.

What if you don't pass the BGC?

Then they need to sell half a rifle?
Or if it was shipped to them they can't return half a rifle.

Only if you bought them separately would it make sense for an FFL to do that.

 

[Aero Denezol]

Sorry to revive an old thread, but I think this is an interesting question considering 114 as I personally will never apply for a permit to buy or register anything.

As an FFL can I order a rifle, keep the upper and resell the lower? I've never had to deal with this before... It is recorded as a "rifle" in the A&D book when rec'd but is then Dispositioned as a receiver only.. So not sure how to record that. Or if it matters at all.

The "once a rifle always a rifle" thing is confusing.