********** AW Question, RE: AR-15's


PDA






marklbucla
April 12, 2004, 12:27 AM
Ok, so I know that the AR-15 is considered an assault weapon, but would a lower (or stripped lower) by itself be legal for purchase? It's not really a gun since it hasn't been built up.

I'm just wondering because it would sound like a fun project to build up a .22LR AR-15. I wouldn't have thought to ask before, but I just found out earlier that the Vulcan Arms V15 in .22LR is supposedly California legal. It appears to be built up on a .223 V15 lower with a V22 .22LR upper on it.

I just thought I'd ask here first before I go straight to the DOJ because it doesn't sound like they really have everything together when it comes to the California AWB.

If you enjoyed reading about "********** AW Question, RE: AR-15's" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
stv
April 12, 2004, 12:30 AM
No, AR receivers are illegal to transfer in any form, stripped or complete, within the state of California. They are banned by name, so the number of evil features is moot. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but that's the way it is.

Pendragon
April 12, 2004, 03:11 AM
There was a company making an AR 15 compatible lower that was a welded box and used stripper clips or something else to make it only hold 10 rounds and not use magazines.

Good luck finding it - I thought it was made in Marysville CA, but could be wrong.

marklbucla
April 12, 2004, 03:15 AM
Sounds like you're talking about the FAB-10.

stv
April 12, 2004, 03:30 AM
Yes, that's the FAB-10, which has been certified by the DOJ to be Not An AR-15 and is thus legal in this state.

artherd
April 12, 2004, 05:00 AM
Mark- the only way to get a clear answer may actually be to SEND THE GUN to the DOJ and ask them point blank "You have inspected it, is this CA legal or not?"


A friend of mine sent an e-mail letter in to the DOJ specifically adressing the Vulcan .22LR. The DOJ responded in the affirmative, in essence that "Indeed .22LR rifles are not considered assault weapons under SB23, however make sure it complies with federal regs, because they do not exempt .22LR".

Now, is that good enough to hold up in court? I don't know.


In answer to your question, the ATF considers the striped lower to be 'the firearm' component of the gun (since it contains the hammer IIRC.)

However, the CA regs to not adress a 'firearm' they adress specifically a fully built up 'rifle'. It's a grey area, and they would probally prosecute you for running around with a Bushmaster lower (as "Bushmaster" is on their specific 'bad words stamped on reciver' list.)


However, the DOJ was forced to provide a COMPLETE list (category 2 Roberti-roots guns) by the court systems, and "Vulcan Arms .22LR" sure does not appear there.


Retain a damn good CA firearms lower. Do it too, keep up the fight.

If you enjoyed reading about "********** AW Question, RE: AR-15's" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!