[doorgunner]

OK, here is the situation, which will lead into my question:

After searching for over a year, I was finally able to purchase a SS factory Ruger GB flash hider, and a brand new, never installed GB front sight with the integral bayonet lug. Although I paid way more than I should have, the bottom line is that I now have both the parts that I wanted.

Question: Being mindful of Sec. 922R, I need to do one of two things. I need either to AGAIN, pay way too much for a preban SS Mini that has enough "evil features" to already exist as an "assault rifle" to add the lug and hider, or I need to machine off the "wings" on the bayonet lug (making it unable to accept a bayonet) and install it on a post ban. It's kind of a sticky situation, either way. I can scrounge around and acquire a existing GB for about the same money as buying and converting a ss preban, or I can modify a very expensive GB front sight/bayo lug and add my flash hider to a post ban with a standard stock.

I would like to hear your suggestions. After doing a cost analysis, I might just end up selling the parts to recoup my losses. I already have a factory 185 series blue GB, but I really would like a stainless mate to it.

 

[Brad D.]

I don’t think you need to pay much of a premium for a pre-ban Mini-14, you should be able to pick one up for about the same price as (or even less than) a new Mini-14. Keep watching the pawn shops, etc. -- I recently saw a pre-ban in a local shop selling for $425, and I suspect you could have bought it for a bit cheaper. Also, watch the gun boards (SUBGUNS.COM, STURMGEWEHR.COM, etc.), they show up periodically.

I’d hate to see you “neuter” a genuine GB front sight with bayonet lug. As you know, they’re hard to find and I’d pursue another option.

Brad

 

[Kalifornia Citizen]

I wouldn't alter any parts yet. The federal assault weapons ban is due to sunset in 2004. Unless the legislation is passed again, it automatically goes away! We can do a lot to make sure our house representatives and senators know we don't like that crap law! We have to keep active on the pro-gun front and make sure we get our rights back!

KC

 

[cajungeo]

Or you could get a permit to posses an evil assult weapon, then its legal.

 

[doorgunner]

What "permit" are you talking about? There are no provisions, other than LEO/Military, in Section 922 to obtain any type of permit. It's either a government designated "assault weapon"or it's not. Although I'm an LEO, I'm referring to a personally owned and utilized weapon here. I'm not even on the same planet as those who contemplate trying to "circumvent" any USC Title 18 provisions. If I can't do it totally legal, I am not going to do it.

Brad: I agree with you, I just cannot justify ruining a GB front sight assembly by bastardizing the bayonet lug. The key here is to find a preban that is in an "assault weapon" format when I acquire it. Without trying to stir up a hornet's nest, I have first hand knowledge from ATF Firearms Technology Branch that weapons leave the factory in assault rifle form (with the evil features) or they don't. Just because it's preban, you cannot make it an assault rifle after the 1994 ban. That requires me to find a Mini with a factory folder, thereby giving it enough "evil features" to be an assault rifle. I realize that tons of people do it, but I cannot afford to make an honest mistake. More power to those who wish to tread on that thin ice. Hell, I've already got one preban factory GB, it's not the end of the world if I cannot acquire another.

Thanks for all the input.

 

[cajungeo]

Hey doorgunner, fill me in on the permits, I didn't know there were different types of assault weapons, factory, and other? So we can't get a permit for our mini's modded into an assault weapon? Is the $200 fee, a one time thing or has to be renewed each year. Do you or anyone else have a link so we can see the permit application?

 

[g8keyper97]

You don't have to find a Mini-14 that is already in "assault weapon" configuration. The evil features that you talk about, ie: the flash supressor, bayonet lug, and a folding stock are just there. I own a preban Mini-14, with with the exception of trying to make it full auto or shortening the barrel to below the legal limit, you can do anything you want to it, like install a flash-hider, folding stock, etc...I own a preban Mini, and I replaced my factory front sight with a bayonet lugged flash-hider assembly. The bottom line is, the only kind of Mini-14 that was in an "assault weapon" configuration is he GB model and to some extent, versions of the AC556. Preban rifles you can add lugs, flash-hiders, and folding stocks to without worry of being illegal...take a look at the AR-15 models....the prebans all have the lug and cage, and the postbans do not...if you have a preban lower receiver, you can buy a brand spankin new upper with all the evil features, and you are not in violation of anything. That is why they say that these uppers are to only be installed on a preban lower, etc...The same is with the Mini, you can buy flash-hiders with bayonet lugs on them, and install them on preban models, and you are not in violation of anything....so there would not be a difference between a GB Front sight with lug and a GB flash-hider being installed as opposed to the M-14 style Front Sight/Bayonet Lugged flash-hider that I installed on my Mini (I have a link to my little Mini website in the Mini-14 gallery up top) that was purchased from: http://www.gunaccessories.com/Mini1430/index.asp

I hope that this was of a little help, and sorry that it was so long.
Talk later.............

G8

:ar15:

 

[cajungeo]

This permit thing is kinda new to me as I've not had to deal with it before. I spent a couple hrs. digging this up. I suspose it would deal with makeing a Post Ban into an Assault weapon legally?

NFA weapons are: machine guns, sound suppressors (a.k.a. silencers), short barreled shotguns, short barreled rifles, destructive devices and "any other weapons".
you can make any NFA weapon, except for machine guns (see below), by filing ATF Form 1, "Application to Make and Register a Firearm", and paying the $200 making tax, which applies to all of these weapons, including AOW's. You may not make the proposed weapon until the Form 1 is returned to you approved.

I got this from http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/use...ist/nfa_faq.txt

Simply stated; If I wanted to make my 196 series into a legal assualt gun, I would first apply for the permit, pay $200 then when I get approved I can convert it. If I get carried away and do the work first then apply for the permit, I can be fined up to $250,000 and 10 years in a nice federal facility with room and board included. Is this correct ? Please correct me if I interpet wrong.

BTW, I have no intention of doing this. Just clearing up the process for anyone wanting to go this route.

 

[doorgunner]

Cajungeo: Did I miss something? Again, I pose the question....What permit are you referring to? If your referring to an NFA weapon, such as a SBR (Short barreled Rifle), there is a $200 making tax (one time deal), and a $200 transfer tax whenever it changes hands. Other than that, I don't understand what prompted you to bring up the topic of a "assault rifle permit". There is no such permit, either here inTexas or in accordance with USC Title 19, Section 922. Your the one who brought up the subject of a permit, not me.

G8keyper97: The factory (standard) Mini-14, as shipped from the factory has a sufficient number of "evil features" to fall into the government's definition of an assault rifle, as well as does the GB models. The ATF Firearms Technology Branch, acting under the authority of the Secretary of Treasury has issued it's opinion that a preban weapon must have been in an assault rifle status prior to the date of the ban, to be "grandfathered". The add the evil features to a preban Mini-14 after the date of the ban, is considered to be "making an assault rifle". I don't like it, or agree with it anymore than you do. I will do my best to find a link to the acutal scanned copy of the ruling, and post it here for all to see. I realize that if someone who owns a preban and added the evil features, making it a government defined assualt weapon, the government would bear the burden of proof that the weapon was not in that status prior to the ban. That is most likely why we haven't seen arrests and prosecutions for making those darned evil assault rifles.

I will spend some time searching out that ATF ruling, and post it here. Please rest assured that it is not my intent to "beat the dead horse" regarding what constitutes an assault rifle or the "can I do this" debate regarding adding flash hiders and bayonet lugs. My position is unwavering on the topic. If you guys want to debate the issue, get after it. I'll observe from the sidelines. If your a mature adult, and you want to add folding stocks, bayonet lugs, flash hiders, or whatever to your weapon, go for it. I love collecting and shooting preban assault rifles as much as the next guy, but I'll make my decisions based on case law and ATF laws and rulings, rather that discussion forum legal interpretations.

I hope that I didn't flame anyone out, as this thread is only my position on the issue. As I said earlier, it's a free country, and your welcome to configure your weapons, and interpret the law as you wish. Stand by for an additional post on the ATF ruling. Thanks. Doorgunner

 

[Brad D.]

doorgunner has it right with respect to “assault rifles” – technically, a rifle must be in assault configuration before the Sept. 1994 ban to currently be legal in assault configuration today.

From a practical standpoint, I think a Mini-14’s serial number is the bottom line. For example, if you buy a pre-ban Mini-14 (based on the serial number) from someone claiming the rifle was in “assault” configuration prior to the ban, all you can do is go by his word. This is very tough to prove or disprove, and I don’t think BATF would pursue a case once the serial number proves the rifle left the Ruger factory before the ban.

Caveat: I’m not an attorney -- my remarks above are based on common sense, and we all know how much common sense is worth in a court of law.

Brad

 

[doorgunner]

FWIW, I have emailed my contact who has a copy of the ATF ruling on this issue.

Brad: I think your 100% correct regarding the issue of burden of proof. We haven't seen, nor will we probably see any significant increase in prosecutions for these types of violations.

 

[doorgunner]

OK, I got a copy of the letter. It's long, I don't have a scanner, nor the energy or the inclination to retype it, word for word. So, in the interest of those with inquiring minds, here we go:

************************************************

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO AND FIREARMS
WASHINGTON, DC 20226

NOV 16, 2001

Dear Mr. XXXXXXXXXXX

This refers to your letter of March 19, 2001, in which you ask about the status of certain semiautomatic assault weapons which have been altered to another configuration.

As defined in section 921(a)(30), of Title 18, United States Code, the term "semiautomatic assault weapon" includes certain named weapons and certain semiautomatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns that have a combination of enumerated features. Title 18 USC section 922(v)(1) probibits manufacture, transfer, and possession of semiautomatic assault weapons; however, section 922(v)(2) provides that any semiautomatic assault weapon that was lawfully possessed under Federal law on September 13, 1994, is excluded from prohibition.

A frame or receiver of a semiautomatic assault weapon, meets the definition of a "firearm" in 18 USC section 921(a)(3); however, a firearm frame or receiver alone, without the additional qualifying features, does not meet the definition of a "semiautomatic assault weapon" in section 921(a)(30). Therefore, a firearm, frame or receiver does not meet the exemption in section 922(v)(2).

If you are interested in determining the status of a particular receiver or semiautomatic assault weapon, you should contact the manufacturer or importer and ask about the date that it was manufactured and the configuration at the time of sale. It may also be necessary to contact subsequent dealers and owners who possessed the firemarm.

We regret the delay in responding to your inquiry. If you have further questions concerning this matter, please contact us.

Sincerely yours,

Curtis H.A. Bartlett
Chief, Firearms Technology Branch

***************************************************

I hope that the portion of the letter (The above is not in it's original long format) helps explain the reason that I have based my opinion. If you have any additional comments, you might want to address them to the BATF.

Cajungeo: I personally contacted ATF several years ago, regarding the SBR (short barreled rifle) issue. I was advised that I could certainly pay the tax, file the form 1, and upon approval, manufacture a SBR. However, it may not have the "evil features", unless it was a preban. Even though it was a registered SBR, it could not become a semiautomatic assault rifle, unless it was originally manufactured as a semiautomatic assault rifle.

So folks, do as you may, but I'm gonna play it safe.

 

[cajungeo]

Yawn , read thru the NFA, GCA, FAQ, again. I had a brain lock, the NFA is not Assault weapons, therefor no permit. Thanks doorgunner for straighting us out, and your effort. Sorry for the divergence from your origional post.

 

[doorgunner]

Cajungeo: Yea, I was thoroughly confused with your question regarding permits at first. After waiting a few days and coming back and re-reading, it hit me like a Louisville Slugger. Don't think for a second that I wasn't thinking about the post ban SBR thing also. I thought that would be an easy $200 remedy to the silly assault rifle ban, but ATF put a cork in that one really fast.

No problem on veering off course on the original post. The only way to get to the bottom of this stupid law is to network with others who dealt directly with ATF. Despite popular opinion, these folks are really easy to deal with. I have dealt with the Firearms Technology Branch both as a civilian and as a LEO, and they have always been helpful and respectable. Heck, they treat me better than some of the gun dealers that I have done business with.

I hope that this post was helpful to at least one person. Looks like I'm going to have a GB front sight/lug and flash hider for sale if you know anyone who wants to buy them. Take care.

 

[cajungeo]

You might want to start with a new thread with your parts for sale. It will get more attention.

 

[Brad D.]

doorgunner,

If you're still looking, there's a preban Ranch Rifle for sale at AR15.COM, here's the link:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=7&...7&f=93&t=146757

If you figure the 30-rd factory mag is worth $100 or so, the rifle at $400 isn't too bad of a deal. The guy's willing to provide a notarized statement regarding the assault rifle configuration, too. If I had $500 laying around, I might go for the deal myself.

I don't know the seller, just passing on the info.

Brad

 

[doorgunner]

Thanks Brad, but a Ranch Rifle in a GB configuration is DEFINATELY not something that I ever want to lay eyes on. Thanks for keeping your eyes open for me anyway.