Private sale AR lower?

[.Scarecrow.]

I live in Michigan and was wondering if I can sell an AR stripped lower to a friend who wants to build one. It's coming off my rifle and I'm going to get a different one for myself.

 

[JohnKSa]

Per federal law you can sell it to your friend as long as:

1. You have no reason to believe he is a prohibited person. (Underage, convicted criminal, etc.)
2. He is a resident of your state.

There's one requirement in Michigan law that could pose a bit of a problem depending on the normal interpretation. Michigan requires that you report sales of pistols (defined as firearms under 26" in length) to law enforcement. I don't know how this is interpreted in practice, but it's possible that a stripped receiver might technically be classified as a handgun by Michigan's weird definition since it is shorter than 26" in length.

 

[pjeski]

A stripped lower is not considered a pistol in MI (for the moment).

 

[Frank Ettin]

A stripped lower is not considered a pistol in MI (for the moment).

Then please provide legal authority supporting that contention.

If the OP were to rely on your statement and you're wrong, both he and the buyer could be committing a crime under Michigan law.

Telling someone that something is legal is a very serious matter. If you're wrong, and if he relies on you, he could be getting himself into a lot of trouble.

 

[pjeski]

What the OP should do is ask the question on the legal beagle section of the MGO forum. There an attorney familiar with MI gun law will likely answer.

As far as me providing a cite that a stripped lower is not a pistol, how is that possible? There is no law that says specifically that a receiver is not a pistol. There is also no law that says that it isn't. I can't cite what doesn't exist.

Here is the relevant law:
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(yv...eg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=mcl-750-222

Problem being the definition of a firearm now includes "readily converted to", but that is not defined. So you could say that any part of a gun is a firearm. But you know that is not what the law means.

 

[Frank Ettin]

What the OP should do is ask the question on the legal beagle section of the MGO forum. There an attorney familiar with MI gun law will likely answer.

As far as me providing a cite that a stripped lower is not a pistol, how is that possible? There is no law that says specifically that a receiver is not a pistol. There is also no law that says that it isn't. I can't cite what doesn't exist.

Here is the relevant law:
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(yv...eg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=mcl-750-222

Problem being the definition of a firearm now includes "readily converted to", but that is not defined. So you could say that any part of a gun is a firearm. But you know that is not what the law means.

Now that's a fine and appropriate response to the OP's question. It's certainly a more appropriate response than what you said in post 3.

Thank you for the clarification.

 

[.Scarecrow.]

Thanks guys! I'll look into it further with some local help.

 

[USAF_Vet]

A stripped lower doesn't require anything to transfer. A stripped lower, or a complete lower, both transfer as a "firearm" from an FFL, and there is nothing in Michigan state law that requires an RI-060 or Purchase Permit for a stripped lower via private sales.

 

[grter]

Then please provide legal authority supporting that contention.

If the OP were to rely on your statement and you're wrong, both he and the buyer could be committing a crime under Michigan law.

Telling someone that something is legal is a very serious matter. If you're wrong, and if he relies on you, he could be getting himself into a lot of trouble.

Thank you Mr Ettin.

 

[Frank Ettin]

A stripped lower doesn't require anything to transfer. A stripped lower, or a complete lower, both transfer as a "firearm" from an FFL, and there is nothing in Michigan state law that requires an RI-060 or Purchase Permit for a stripped lower via private sales.

And you know this how?

There seems to be a question as to whether a stripped lower could be considered a handgun under Michigan law. Absent a court decision settling the question, assuming the stripped lower would not be subject to Michigan law applicable to handguns in a private sale places the OP at risk.

 

[USAF_Vet]

I know this based on a history of purchasing and transferring AR stripped and completed lowers via various FFL's. None have transferred as a handgun. Michigan state law is quite precise when it defines what is a handgun, and what is not a handgun. A stripped, or complete, receiver does not meet the definition.

So it's not an assumption, because the receiver fails to meet the definition of a handgun, it does not transfer as a handgun, nor is it registered in the handgun database (unless built as a handgun). It would no more transfer as a handgun than a stripped Mossberg 500 receiver would.

I confirmed this again last week. I'm putting together a group buy of stripped receivers. Talking to an FFL, who is also a state trooper, about how best to acquire, and individually transfer each receiver to each purchaser. He said it's easier, and cheapest, for one person to have all the receivers transferred to them, on one 4473, with one NICS check (or not, based on CPL status), and have that individual divy them out to each purchaser. He confirmed no additional paperwork would be necessary. I can have him cite the exact codified law as a source if that would help. But then again, it may not even be in codified law, just like Open Carry in Michigan. It's legal because no law exists making it illegal.

If no law specifically covers something and makes the action illegal, by default it is legal, yes?

 

[pjeski]

I know this based on a history of purchasing and transferring AR stripped and completed lowers via various FFL's. None have transferred as a handgun. Michigan state law is quite precise when it defines what is a handgun, and what is not a handgun. A stripped, or complete, receiver does not meet the definition.

So it's not an assumption, because the receiver fails to meet the definition of a handgun, it does not transfer as a handgun, nor is it registered in the handgun database (unless built as a handgun). It would no more transfer as a handgun than a stripped Mossberg 500 receiver would.

I confirmed this again last week. I'm putting together a group buy of stripped receivers. Talking to an FFL, who is also a state trooper, about how best to acquire, and individually transfer each receiver to each purchaser. He said it's easier, and cheapest, for one person to have all the receivers transferred to them, on one 4473, with one NICS check (or not, based on CPL status), and have that individual divy them out to each purchaser. He confirmed no additional paperwork would be necessary. I can have him cite the exact codified law as a source if that would help. But then again, it may not even be in codified law, just like Open Carry in Michigan. It's legal because no law exists making it illegal.

If no law specifically covers something and makes the action illegal, by default it is legal, yes?

Which is why I said "for the moment" in my first post in this thread. As of August, the definition of a firearm includes "or may readily be converted to", which could be argued to include things like receivers, or worse. It's not as clear as it used to be, but in practice the law seems to be applied as it was before. See the link in my second post.

 

[kanook]

I have two questions,

.Scarecrow. I live in Michigan and was wondering if I can sell an AR stripped lower to a friend who wants to build one. It's coming off my rifle and I'm going to get a different one for myself.

This stripped receiver is a "rifle" right now. If it was never a "pistol" "first", shouldn't it always be a rifle now?

Second question,

I confirmed this again last week. I'm putting together a group buy of stripped receivers. Talking to an FFL, who is also a state trooper, about how best to acquire, and individually transfer each receiver to each purchaser. He said it's easier, and cheapest, for one person to have all the receivers transferred to them, on one 4473, with one NICS check (or not, based on CPL status), and have that individual divy them out to each purchaser. He confirmed no additional paperwork would be necessary. I can have him cite the exact codified law as a source if that would help. But then again, it may not even be in codified law, just like Open Carry in Michigan. It's legal because no law exists making it illegal.

Wasn't there a person (LEO) who was arrested for a "straw purchase" when he purchased a Glock for his uncle with money his uncle gave him before the purchase? If everyone gives their money to one person for the group buy and only one transfer on paper takes place, isn't that the same?

 

[dogmush]

I'm putting together a group buy of stripped receivers. Talking to an FFL, who is also a state trooper, about how best to acquire, and individually transfer each receiver to each purchaser. He said it's easier, and cheapest, for one person to have all the receivers transferred to them, on one 4473, with one NICS check (or not, based on CPL status), and have that individual divy them out to each purchaser.

Your FFL said what now?

On the OP:

Michigan law says a pistol is:

(f) "Pistol" means a loaded or unloaded firearm that is 26 inches or less in length, or a loaded or unloaded firearm that by its construction and appearance conceals itself as a firearm.

An AR lower is clearly less than 26" in length, so the pertinent question is is it a firearm under Michigan law?

(e) "Firearm" means any weapon which will, is designed to, or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by action of an explosive.

While it certainly can't shoot in it's stripped state, what does "readily be converted" specifically mean? I couldn't find any Michigan precedent in a quick search.

I did note that Federal law defines firearms as:

(3) The term “firearm” means (A) any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; (B) the frame or receiver of any such weapon; (C) any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; or (D) any destructive device. Such term does not include an antique firearm.

Emphasis mine. That clause is notably missing in Michigan's law.

I second pjeski's suggestion to seek more local knowledge, but this may very well be a question that hasn't been settled yet. (Is an AR lower readily convertible to a firearm)

 

[dogmush]

I have two questions,This stripped receiver is a "rifle" right now. If it was never a "pistol" "first", shouldn't it always be a rifle now?

Kanook, that issue (Rifle ->pistol->rifle) and the BATFE's various changes of mind on it are a federal law. It may or may not have any bearing on state laws.

FWIW, The "made from a rifle" phrasing exists in Michigan law, but only in the SBR definition. a separate kettle of fish.

 

[danez71]

I know this based on a history of purchasing and transferring AR stripped and completed lowers via various FFL's. None have transferred as a handgun. Michigan state law is quite precise when it defines what is a handgun, and what is not a handgun. A stripped, or complete, receiver does not meet the definition.

So it's not an assumption, because the receiver fails to meet the definition of a handgun, it does not transfer as a handgun, nor is it registered in the handgun database (unless built as a handgun). It would no more transfer as a handgun than a stripped Mossberg 500 receiver would.

I confirmed this again last week. I'm putting together a group buy of stripped receivers. Talking to an FFL, who is also a state trooper, about how best to acquire, and individually transfer each receiver to each purchaser. He said it's easier, and cheapest, for one person to have all the receivers transferred to them, on one 4473, with one NICS check (or not, based on CPL status), and have that individual divy them out to each purchaser. He confirmed no additional paperwork would be necessary. I can have him cite the exact codified law as a source if that would help. But then again, it may not even be in codified law, just like Open Carry in Michigan. It's legal because no law exists making it illegal.

If no law specifically covers something and makes the action illegal, by default it is legal, yes?

I'm not questioning your posts content as it was your experience/conversation.


IMO, that sounds like its 'easier' for him and is selling you on the idea by pointing out that its 'cheaper' for you.

There is no way I'm going to buy a bunch of 'firearms' for the purpose of immediately 'divy'ing' them out to a bunch of buyers.

Even if you're having all of the individual sales go thru an FFL and you didn't make a dime doing it... IMO... its flirting with a grey area of acting as a dealer that I wouldn't want to be a part of.

Plus... Obama just made a '50 private sales in a year is a dealer' comment.


Something to consider............

 

[Frank Ettin]

...I'm putting together a group buy of stripped receivers. Talking to an FFL, who is also a state trooper, about how best to acquire, and individually transfer each receiver to each purchaser. He said it's easier, and cheapest, for one person to have all the receivers transferred to them, on one 4473, with one NICS check (or not, based on CPL status), and have that individual divy them out to each purchaser. He confirmed no additional paperwork would be necessary.....

Wow!

Once again we have an excellent illustration that FFLs sometimes really don't know the law and that sometimes local LEOs can't be expected to know anything about federal law.

That is pretty clearly a straw purchase and illegal under federal law. Straw purchases are discussed in some depth in the thread, What is a "Straw Purchase?" (see post 23).

The person buying all the receivers would be lying if he claims to be the actual purchaser in question 11a on the 4473. He would be the actual purchaser of only one, and he would be buying the other receivers as the agent of the other participants in the group buy. A misrepresentation on the 4473 violates 18 USC 922(a)(6) and is a federal felony.

Each participant in the group buy would be chargeable for the crime as well (18 USC 2):

(a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal.

(b) Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal.

...Wasn't there a person (LEO) who was arrested for a "straw purchase" when he purchased a Glock for his uncle with money his uncle gave him before the purchase? ...

Yes.

Bruce Abramski bought a Glock for his uncle, at his uncle's request, with his uncle's money (in this case to secure a law enforcement discount). The U. S. Supreme Court upheld Abramski's conviction for the federal felony of lying on the 4473 (as to who was the actual purchaser of the gun). See Abramski v. US, 134 S. Ct. 2259 (2014).

 

[heyjoe]

ive participated in group buys several times now and the individual getting the handgun always had to fill out their own 4473 and get their own NICS check. I think that is bad advice that you are getting.

 

[Frank Ettin]

The OP has what is probably the best answer he's likely to get here, and we're starting to drift off-topic. Let's call it a day.