Legal To Buy & Sell Lucy In Stages?

Howard1955 · May 16, 2015

Suppose I fell in love with a beautiful 1911 that my friend owned. I loved that gun so much, I named her Lucy.

Then - suppose I bought Lucy privately, but in stages... Part A on Monday, part B on Tuesday. Is that legal? Would a background check be required?

Or is there a core element of a gun that would be illegal to transfer privately?

Basically, I'm asking if the new law prohibits the private transfer of gun parts. 'Cause if it doesn't, then what's to stop anyone from simply buying a box of parts, then putting them back together at home?

Maybe there's a "Lucy Law" that would prevent the private transfer of that disassembled 1911 into my hands?

U201491 · May 16, 2015

The part with the serial number is the "firearm"

Howard1955 · May 16, 2015

Thanks for the clarification.

willseeker · May 16, 2015

Taku said:
The part with the serial number is the "firearm"

Yes, and that would be the frame. The slide, barrel, etc are not required.

Classic · May 16, 2015

Taku hit it on the head. It's kinda like the Lower on an AR has to go through an FFL unless you buy an 80% and finish it yourself. The part with the serial number is the firearm.

Page.k · May 16, 2015

The question should be now is "IF" your state looks at receivers as being firearms. In Wa with I-594 passing and the way it's worded frames/receivers are not covered under it "IF" it was never made in to a gun. But on the Fed side they have it covered but in most states bare frames/receivers are not covered. Also the rare as called by the ATF "firearm" is not listed in most states. Like what do you call a 1919 that never had a stock on it? It can't be a rifle due to never having a stock one of the major points of being a rifle. If you're looking for a loop hole it's all in the way the laws are worded. I'm not offering how to but were to look and the questions that maybe helpful to ask. Like I maybe wrong about Wa not having frames/receivers covered but "IF" it's in the laws I've must have missed it or didn't find it yet.....

Have a look at the XO-26 that falls under a firearm.
<broken link removed>

U201491 · May 16, 2015

Has nothing to do with the state! It is A description on the federal laws/ATF that defines what a firearm is.
All other components are irrelevant.
The portion with the serial number IS THE firearm. Makes no difference if it never had a stock or anything else on it.
THAT IS THE FIREARM. Not Rocket science.

Why the questions on circumventing the law or is this just curiosity on your part.

If you are planning to piecemeal out a gun to either buy or sell, talking about it on a public forum only serves to put a noose on you. ???????????????? Or entrap someone that replies to you on how to.............

Suggestion, don't do it after the bill takes effect, and damn sure don't discuss it in public if you do.

Just a logical suggestion.

If you do decide to do something like that, don't drag someone else down with you.

Good people here and hopefully most know how to do things that keep them safe.

There was a great saying all thru WWII and you should try to find it.
It will keep ya busy

.

Howard1955 · May 16, 2015

Taku,

I do appreciate the information. Honestly didn't know the answer, and now I do. Not looking to break the law.

U201491 · May 16, 2015

Answers are all found here.
What you do with them is up to you personally.

https://www.atf.gov/

I just get nervous about someone getting themselves or other in trouble with viewable misinformation or incriminating information being given on the Public forums.
I have made some pretty good friends out here and would hate for them to bury themselves unsuspectingly. This election cycle brought about some serious evil intent at the state level in both Oregon and Washington.
CA was lost a long time go. But folks need to change how they speak and how they do business anymore. Again just suggestions. People will do what they will regardless, but I prefer they do it with eyes open.

Personally I am done buying and selling any firearms, I just barter for the little things anymore

.

U201491 · May 16, 2015

That saying was a simple one "D
Loose Lips sink ships.

Page.k · May 16, 2015

I'm pointing to local, state and Federal laws don't match up with each other. If I understand the OP question it was to a state or local law on buying in parts to complete. So he still need to read his local laws and ask question based on them. It's a cheap thing to mall off a letter asking a question for any local/state law the down side is the time it for them to get back to you.

Taku I think we're not looking at the OP question in the same way.
Sorry but I don't have the time to find some random saying used so long ago.....

U201491 · May 16, 2015

ALL LAWS are available online and that is where people need to be looking. Not
going on the advice of anyone on a forum. They are clear and complete in many many places out there from State Sites, Law Sites, Libraries. and then the Liability lies with the Reader and not with those that might be giving misinformation that can be turned on them later.
Seems like..........
Too many "BAIT CAR" Scenarios popping up out here lately.

Howard1955 · May 16, 2015

'Bait Car'?

Is that like an ice cream truck, for geezers who want to go fishing?

slimmer13 · May 16, 2015

It depends on how OR defines a firearm. In WA it says "capable of firing a projectile" to be a firearm. So when talking about 594 or 941 you would use the states definition of firearm when talking about compliance with state law.

I have never read the RCW where it says it can never have been built.

U201491 · May 16, 2015

Howard1955 said:
'Bait Car'?

Is that like an ice cream truck, for geezers who want to go fishing?

HEY I resemble that.......................

Page.k · May 16, 2015

Slimer13 it's more of being on the safe side of things in my view. If the frame or receiver was never made in to a gun able to fire it can't fall under what I-594 calls a gun and not covered under Wa laws. So at any point "IF" the frame/receiver was able to fall under being a "gun" by Wa law it can be argued that it should still be seen as one. It can also be argued that due to I-594 passing the term "Machine Gun" needs to be changed under Washington State law to match it. And "Three Round Burst" is now no longer a "Machine Gun" due to it is unable to meet the five rounds in under one second with one pull of the trigger. But under Federal Law you'll still need a tax stamp for it due to it still being a "Machine Gun". Sad to say most laws in the US is clear as mud........ And even more so for the ones that have been made in the past 30-40 years.

Also with all the new gun laws popping up and so little case law to review from it asking questions and sending letters is the only option.
As you can read above Taku and I don't see things the same.

U201491 · May 16, 2015

State Laws can be stronger than Federal laws until they are declared Unconstitutional, but if Federal law is stronger than State law the federal law trumps state law and that is what sucks. But it is what it is.
It is like the MJ Laws. The states may legalize it, but under federal law it is still a federal crime. So the proverbial catch 22 is in play.

Page.k · May 16, 2015

My answer to any MJ question is 16 usc chapter 53.
In most law school the rule is Federal rules over state or take the law that is most restrictive as being the ruling law. Just because the federal laws are not being pushed don't mean they don't apply. With federal laws the ones in power at any given time will push the ones they see fit. So two of the same cases can come up at different times and get two very different results as in no charges to massive jail it.

Mark W. · May 17, 2015

There are some exceptions under Federal law for instance the total of the 7 parts required to convert a M1 Carbine to Select fire the parts have no serial numbers but are still considered a firearm by the Feds and such is required to be registered same as a full auto firearm.