Bad News For 18-20 Year Old AR-15 Builders

[antsi]

I for one would like to see less19 year olds at the range with a cobbled together POS AR15.

Are there any other combinations of demographic group and firearm that you find offensive?

Elderly men with scoped rimfire rifles? Middle-aged women with German-made semiautomatic pistols? Athletic mid-twenties males shooting skeet with Italian over-under shotguns?

Please bless us with a comprehensive list of everything you find annoying, so that federal laws can be immediately enacted to punish anyone who offends your sensibilities.

Personally, I am annoyed by random guys on the internet who support arbitrary, senseless laws just because they happen to coincide with their own idiosyncratic ideas of what's acceptable and what's annoying. But I still would not support a federal law criminalizing your right to express your petty grievances.

 

[Michiana]

My intention was not to get you "worked up."

Ok I'm glad I just now saw the smiley. I thought I was gonna have to get worked up here. .

Over my lifetime I have eaten a lot of chicken but never had an interest in trying frog legs; they just don’t appeal to me. I have heard people say that frog legs taste just like chicken so it is natural to assume they have eaten both to make that comparison. You brought the subject up; remove foot from mouth.

 

[Old Salt]

I like frog legs, but they only taste similar to chicken. Alligator is also very good and tastes similar, but better than chicken.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Quit my trolling? I said the law might be good in preventing those not quite mature enough to behave at the range from getting one to begin with.

How is this law going to prevent those who in your opinion are not mature enough to behave at the range from getting one? They can still go out and buy a completed one, or a stripped lower with just a stock attached. If they are interested enough to learn how to build one, and pick out the parts they like (whether you approve of said parts or not) would probably make them less likely to be immature than some 18-20 year old that just goes out and buys one off the shelf.

Can you guys all just relax? I don't want anyone to think I don't want 18 year olds to have AR15s. I know that when I was 13 I could be responsible with one and handle it pretty well.

I'm sure the 18 year olds you see at the range think they are responsible and handle it pretty well also.

No better than my garbage scope (yes, I have a barska spotter for seeing better at 100yds when zeroing. beyond that, i just shoot and go check later.) and a lot more money!

Cheap laser sight=tool, cheap spotting scope=?


To anyone jumping in and handing out negative rep without following along, you're truly a moron.

I followed along

18 year olds can still buy an AR15 rifle, right? Did you really want a pistol? You aren't allowed to buy any pistol anyway so it's really no big deal.

A 18 year old can buy a handgun legally, or have one gifted to them. They just cannot purchase one from a ffl dealer.

If they are less responsible they don't deserve the responsibility. Were you trying to say something else perhaps?

I'm sure you are the most responsible one here so I guess none of us deserve the responsibility.

 

[Sinner Man]

Are there any other combinations of demographic group and firearm that you find offensive?

Elderly men with scoped rimfire rifles? Middle-aged women with German-made semiautomatic pistols? Athletic mid-twenties males shooting skeet with Italian over-under shotguns?

Please bless us with a comprehensive list of everything you find annoying, so that federal laws can be immediately enacted to punish anyone who offends your sensibilities.

Personally, I am annoyed by random guys on the internet who support arbitrary, senseless laws just because they happen to coincide with their own idiosyncratic ideas of what's acceptable and what's annoying. But I still would not support a federal law criminalizing your right to express your petty grievances.

I didn't say I support the law. Look again, later on, past where you gave up reading. I don't support it.

Keep your silly comments to yourself about who I "don't like" please.

 

[Sinner Man]

How is this law going to prevent those who in your opinion are not mature enough to behave at the range from getting one? They can still go out and buy a completed one, or a stripped lower with just a stock attached. If they are interested enough to learn how to build one, and pick out the parts they like (whether you approve of said parts or not) would probably make them less likely to be immature than some 18-20 year old that just goes out and buys one off the shelf.



I followed along



A 18 year old can buy a handgun legally, or have one gifted to them. They just cannot purchase one from a ffl dealer.



I'm sure you are the most responsible one here so I guess none of us deserve the responsibility.

What's with the stupid assumptions? Quit putting words into my mouth.

I'm not the most responsible but I'm responsible enough. More than the ones I was talking about.

18 year olds can't buy pistols from an FFL. This law and the forms keep them from doing that. What's so hard to understand and why can't you play along? What 18 year old needs a pistol AR? Just because he could "get around" this before doesn't mean he should have.

I guess I don't understand the point of one anyway and therefore think it's no big deal. If you told me you couldn't get an AR pistol until you were 35, I wouldn't be whining.

Unless you read EVERYTHING I've written, quit stirring the crap and quit negative repping me. This not only shows YOUR immaturity but it also shows your lack of reading comprehension.

The ATF finding ways to uphold or enforce existing laws is a GOOD thing. Right? Don't we always say "don't make new laws, enforce the ones we have"??

Yes so that's what they're doing.



Timjoe- cheap spotting scope = didn't feel the need to buy the best. This one does it's job and is getting sold to the old man anyway. Buy right, buy once, cry once. I didn't buy the scope because I didn't know any better or because I thought it would make me look cool and all "tactical".

 

[wally05]

What's with the stupid assumptions? Quit putting words into my mouth.

I'm not the most responsible but I'm responsible enough. More than the ones I was talking about.

18 year olds can't buy pistols from an FFL. This law and the forms keep them from doing that. What's so hard to understand and why can't you play along? What 18 year old needs a pistol AR? Just because he could "get around" this before doesn't mean he should have.

I guess I don't understand the point of one anyway and therefore think it's no big deal. If you told me you couldn't get an AR pistol until you were 35, I wouldn't be whining.

Unless you read EVERYTHING I've written, quit stirring the crap and quit negative repping me. This not only shows YOUR immaturity but it also shows your lack of reading comprehension.

The ATF finding ways to uphold or enforce existing laws is a GOOD thing. Right? Don't we always say "don't make new laws, enforce the ones we have"??

Yes so that's what they're doing.



Timjoe- cheap spotting scope = didn't feel the need to buy the best. This one does it's job and is getting sold to the old man anyway. Buy right, buy once, cry once. I didn't buy the scope because I didn't know any better or because I thought it would make me look cool and all "tactical".

I apologize to the mods, but I must continue this at least one more post...

Sinner, what you are saying and then what you are saying that you are saying do not match up... so please, quit acting like everyone else are idiots and leave it be.

 

[TFin04]

Open letter restricting anyone under the age of 21 from purchasing a stripped or complete (less stock) frame or receiver.

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/070709openletter.pdf

I didn't read the entire thread so maybe this has been covered, but your post is misleading.

It should say "open letter restricting anyone under the age of 21 from purchasing a stripped or complete frame or receiver from an FFL."

 

[Sinner Man]

I apologize to the mods, but I must continue this at least one more post...

Sinner, what you are saying and then what you are saying that you are saying do not match up... so please, quit acting like everyone else are idiots and leave it be.

I apologize to the mods as well but "Wally" what you just said is complete gibberish. It's not whether I agree with it or not- it's that it's not English.

I don't care what you "assumed" from my first few posts. I still have the same opinion I always did. I'm just trying to put a finer point on it for those that think I was trying to offend them- I most certainly was not.

<21 can't buy handguns from FFL.

Now <21 can't buy AR from FFL unless it's a complete receiver.

Is that so bad? Why make an issue of it? It's the same rule, just enforced more. Same thing as "Gemtax"- the rules were always there, just not enforced so much.

 

[Flintlock]

Now <21 can't buy AR from FFL unless it's a complete receiver.

Wrong. It needs only to have a stock attached to it. Internals don't matter. All the FFL has to do is screw a stock onto the lower and then it can be transferred to under 21's.

 

[Michiana]

Not entirely correct

Now <21 can't buy AR from FFL unless it's a complete receiver.

The catch is the complete receiver MUST have a stock attached that is used to make a RIFLE. A good example is the ad below for RRA. The two lowers on the left cannot be sold to a person under 21; the two on the right can be sold to a person under 21 IF they have a rifle stock attached as shown in the photo. A FFL cannot sell a complete lower receiver without a rifle stock attached to a person under 21 years of age. The under 21 person could buy either item on the right hand side and go home and remove the stock and have a receiver that they cannot buy from a FFL.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Quit your whining. It's a done deal. Go ***** to someone else. I didn't write the law nor would I have supported it. I'm just explaining why it's probably the way it is.

I didn't say I support the law. Look again, later on, past where you gave up reading. I don't support it.

I for one would like to see less [edited -shooter521] 19 year olds at the range with a cobbled together POS AR15.

I said the law might be good in preventing those not quite mature enough to behave at the range from getting one to begin with.

Sounds like you support it to me.

You put a $30 NC star green laser on your rifle- you are a tool, no matter your age. It won't hold zero and is therefore useless.

Timjoe- cheap spotting scope = didn't feel the need to buy the best. This one does it's job and is getting sold to the old man anyway.

Cheap laser=tool, cheap spotting scope=you don't need anything better.

Perhaps that cheap laser does the job for what they want it for and didn't feel the need to buy the best. Where cheap spotting scope that can't count the hairs around a bucks * at 1000 yards is junk and therefor=tool.

This whole "you leave me alone, I'll leave you alone" idea is silly. Why say that? Who are you defending? The truckload of hillbillies that showed up to the range with one AR and one AK between the 7 of them and 3 pairs of hearing protection and two sets of eyepro?

Why is it silly? Are they harming you in any way? Other than your elitist sensibilities? Is it safe for themselves? Probably not. Does it harm you in any way? Nope.

What 18 year old needs a pistol AR?

You stated that you have a AR, what do you need it for? How many firearms do you own? Or cars? Or whatever? Do you "need" all of them? What does need have to do with it?

The new 4473 forms now have a place to check receiver besides rifle or handgun. Sort of like "other" catch all from my prospective. I have never seen a AR-15 pistol up close and have no interests in them so really can't say if there is any difference in the receiver setup except the stock area.

I believe so. As long as the receiver is transferred to you without a stock, it is simply a receiver. You can then do whatever you like on the receiver; whether you decide to make it a pistol or rifle, it does not matter. At least that is how I understand it to be.

Now <21 can't buy AR from FFL unless it's a complete receiver.
The catch is the complete receiver MUST have a stock attached that is used to make a RIFLE. The under 21 person could buy either item on the right hand side and go home and remove the stock and have a receiver that they cannot buy from a FFL.

I have a question. Lets say someone buys a stripped receiver with a stock attached by the dealer not manufacturer. Then takes off the stock and sells the receiver to me. I take said receiver and make it into a ar pistol. Am I guilty of building a unregistered sbr? How about if we went to a ffl and transferred it just as a receiver? Is a FFL required to contact the manufacture or dealer that originally sold the reciever to find out if it ever had a stock on it? Or any previous owner to find out if they ever put a stock on it?

Could this make it "legal" to turn a shotgun into a AOW ie a guy purchases a moss 870 and strips it down to a receiver, we go to a ffl and transfer it as a receiver only, then I build a AOW after receiving proper forms and paying the tax. I'm genuinely curious wondering how this would work with the new forms.

ETA Sinner man why did you give me rep in another thread, when it was for a post in this one?

 

[techres]

I have a question. Lets say someone buys a stripped receiver with a stock attached by the dealer not manufacturer. Then takes off the stock and sells the receiver to me. I take said receiver and make it into a ar pistol. Am I guilty of building a unregistered sbr? How about if we went to a ffl and transferred it just as a receiver? Is a FFL required to contact the manufacture or dealer that originally sold the reciever to find out if it ever had a stock on it? Or any previous owner to find out if they ever put a stock on it?

Once a rifle, it is a rifle. You would be in legal trouble.

Could this make it "legal" to turn a shotgun into a AOW ie a guy purchases a moss 870 and strips it down to a receiver, we go to a ffl and transfer it as a receiver only, then I build a AOW after receiving proper forms and paying the tax. I'm genuinely curious wondering how this would work with the new forms.

ETA Sinner man why did you give me rep in another thread, when it was for a post in this one?

People would try and get around the $200 transfer and into the $5 build tax by playing games like these. The ATF has no sense of humor.

 

[Michiana]

I would have to call the ATF office on this one but my guess is a dealer can assemble a rifle as long as it is stock parts and sell the final product. What happens to it after it leaves his business is beyond his control. Now if you told him you were planning on removing the stock and make a pistol out of the lower I would think he has an obligation to not sell the firearm to the minor knowing he was going to break the law after he leaves the FFL. Just a logical guess but who knows the actual ruling on this.


If you have a receiver and are under 21 you can't go to a FFL to have it transferred, the FFL cannot transfer a receiver to a minor unless it has a rifle stock attached. What difference does it matter what was on the receiver before, the actual configuration of the lower at the FFL's is what he is concerned with relative to the new law?


I have a question. Lets say someone buys a stripped receiver with a stock attached by the dealer not manufacturer. Then takes off the stock and sells the receiver to me. I take said receiver and make it into a ar pistol. Am I guilty of building a unregistered sbr? How about if we went to a ffl and transferred it just as a receiver? Is a FFL required to contact the manufacture or dealer that originally sold the reciever to find out if it ever had a stock on it? Or any previous owner to find out if they ever put a stock on it?

Could this make it "legal" to turn a shotgun into a AOW ie a guy purchases a moss 870 and strips it down to a receiver, we go to a ffl and transfer it as a receiver only, then I build a AOW after receiving proper forms and paying the tax. I'm genuinely curious wondering how this would work with the new forms.

ETA Sinner man why did you give me rep in another thread, when it was for a post in this one?[/quote]

 

[Timjoebillybob]

People would try and get around the $200 transfer and into the $5 build tax by playing games like these. The ATF has no sense of humor.

I've never dealt with nfa items, but I thought it was a $200 build and $5 transfer tax?

If you have a receiver and are under 21 you can't go to a FFL to have it transferred, the FFL cannot transfer a receiver to a minor unless it has a rifle stock attached. What difference does it matter what was on the receiver before, the actual configuration of the lower at the FFL's is what he is concerned with relative to the new law?

I think I may have phrased the question awkwardly. I am over 21 and I want to purchase a stripped AR receiver that someone else has. They want to be super cautious and transfer through a ffl. What would you check on the form, receiver or rifle? If it appears to be a new never assembled receiver.

Or if you as a ffl purchased a stripped, never appears to have been assembled receiver off a person for resale. And then sold it?

Would you have to check with the manufacturer and/or original retailer that sold it, to make sure it never had a rifle stock attached? If not and you sold/transferred it as a receiver. And the purchaser built it into a pistol, would he still be liable under the law for making a sbr?

 

[techres]

I've never dealt with nfa items, but I thought it was a $200 build and $5 transfer tax?

Umm... yeah.... Brain fart... You got it right.

 

[mdroz3]

Umm... yeah.... Brain fart... You got it right.

The stamp price for AOW is $5.00 not the $200 for full auto, sbr's, and silencers. BTW you can not cut down a shotgun with to make an NFA item, it has to have a 16" barrel. there are short barrel shotguns out there, but they come from the manufacturer that way.

 

[Sinner Man]

Once a rifle, it is a rifle. You would be in legal trouble.



People would try and get around the $200 transfer and into the $5 build tax by playing games like these. The ATF has no sense of humor.

+1

Thanks Techres. Obviously some people don't know what they are talking about and are jumping all over me because it seems it's easier than anything else in this thread.

 

[Sinner Man]

Michiana- one good turn deserves another. When someone reps me like you did, I click your name, find a recent post and return the favor. It doesn't matter the post. You are the only one that sees the negative rep anyway.

TJBB- I support adhering to current laws. Please adhere to the current laws AND any new ways they come up with to enforce them. When you don't, they make up new stupid laws and use this as a reason. I didn't buy a pistol until I was over 21 so I don't believe any other 18-20 year olds need to either. I don't advocate drinking by minors either. Do I hate minors because of this? No, just follow the rules.

As far as cheap lasers- what good does it do if it doesn't hold zero? Don't give me the "if it works for them" line because the ones I AM talking about won't work for them.

Some people can't comprehend well. Some (like me) just can't get their true point across in writing. I don't dislike kids so let's please let's chalk this up to a misunderstanding. Ok? This snowballed into a mess that none of us need.

 

[Michiana]

I think I may have phrased the question awkwardly. I am over 21 and I want to purchase a stripped AR receiver that someone else has. They want to be super cautious and transfer through a ffl. What would you check on the form, receiver or rifle? If it appears to be a new never assembled receiver.

Or if you as a ffl purchased a stripped, never appears to have been assembled receiver off a person for resale. And then sold it?

Would you have to check with the manufacturer and/or original retailer that sold it, to make sure it never had a rifle stock attached? If not and you sold/transferred it as a receiver. And the purchaser built it into a pistol, would he still be liable under the law for making a sbr?

If you come to me as a FFL with a stripped receiver that is what it is and I would check the 4473 as a receiver. If it was once a rifle and someone stripped the rifle for parts and sold the stripped receiver it is now a stripped receiver. This is how I would handle this situation.