- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Updated: Full auto lower laws.. Answer from ATF on page 2
Posted on 11/1/16 at 5:35 pm to Propagandalf
Posted on 11/1/16 at 5:35 pm to Propagandalf
quote:
Reason for owning a 10" barrel: For all lawful purposes, your honor.
I think what he's going after here is that very narrow set of circumstances in various hypos that are sometimes presented (and, so we're completely clear, I defer to Prop ON VIRTUALLY ALL OF THIS because I'm an amateur and he's a professional - that's just the way it works):
If a guy has 4 completed lowers, no stamps, nothing hinky, just 4 completed lowers - all rifles/carbines. AND he has 4 completed uppers - all 10.5s with removable muzzle devices. He has no stamps, no "legal" uppers - literally no way for him to complete a weapon that does not run afoul of the ludicrous provisions of the NFA.
SO - they would attempt to make a case against him for constructive possession in that very narrow set of circumstances. "All lawful purposes" might win out, but they also might get someone to draw the inference.
Ditto for getting caught in a vehicle with a completed lower (no stamp) and a 10.5" - the whole point of the constructive possession is so that folks cannot get around the ludicrous law by merely disassembling the thing.
However, as Prop correctly suggests - the mere possession of a 10.5" cannot be sufficient to establish intent, as there are a shite ton of completely legal end uses for it. There would have to be "other" evidence of this intent to create an illegal SBR other than mere possession. Otherwise, the retailers, postal carriers, just everyone involved in a whole chain of events would be criminalized for literally doing nothing.
This post was edited on 11/1/16 at 5:36 pm
Posted on 11/1/16 at 5:49 pm to Ace Midnight
But can the mere possession of that 10.5 barrel as well as all of the other pieces required to assemble the gun be construed as intent to assemble an sbr? That is where the interpretation comes into play. To me the ATF is nothing to play with so I would say I don't want to mess with it and chance that they would slam me with intent to build the sbr. Aparantly prop and a lot of other people on this board don't believe that to be enough to be charged with intent to build an sbr that is their choice.
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News