Stripped lowers and private party sales question

[sportbikeco]

I was wondering if stripped lowers were subject to good old hb1229 so I read it.

The state uses the word firearm in the text.

A receiver is technically not a firearm as it can not fire a round as configured. Hence the "other" box that is checked on the 4473.

Technically would stripped lowers not be subject to the law based on this?


(Not saying it would be a good idea to do these transactions as being the test case would suck the big one)

[Colorado_Outback]

I was wondering if stripped lowers were subject to good old hb1229 so I read it.

The state uses the word firearm in the text.

A receiver is technically not a firearm as it can not fire a round as configured. Hence the "other" box that is checked on the 4473.

Technically would stripped lowers not be subject to the law based on this?


(Not saying it would be a good idea to do these transactions as being the test case would suck the big one)

The lower is classified as a firearm as its the serialized part of the assembly.

[eneranch]

Really ??

[Bailey Guns]

I was wondering if stripped lowers were subject to good old hb1229 so I read it.

The state uses the word firearm in the text.

A receiver is technically not a firearm as it can not fire a round as configured. Hence the "other" box that is checked on the 4473.

Technically would stripped lowers not be subject to the law based on this?


(Not saying it would be a good idea to do these transactions as being the test case would suck the big one)

If it wasn't considered a firearm you wouldn't be completing a 4473 and manufacturers could mail receivers right to your home. Yes...they are subject to background checks.

[Great-Kazoo]

Really ??

Yes, really. Of course some will support op's right to ask this unanswered (this week) question. After all who else is not aware an AR lower is the firearm.
If it could answer one question, wouldn't it be worth it.

[KS63]

I was wondering if stripped lowers were subject to good old hb1229 so I read it.

The state uses the word firearm in the text.

A receiver is technically not a firearm as it can not fire a round as configured. Hence the "other" box that is checked on the 4473.

Technically would stripped lowers not be subject to the law based on this?


(Not saying it would be a good idea to do these transactions as being the test case would suck the big one)

Ohhhh Boy.......

[eneranch]

I should have clarified my response

(Not saying it would be a good idea to do these transactions as being the test case would suck the big one)

Really??

[sportbikeco]

I guess this has been covered.

OK just read some more and the 1968 GCA lists a receiver as a firearm.

So my answer is obvious. I just was not sure if the atf had classified a receiver as something other then "firearm" yet still subject to ATF control.

[ChunkyMonkey]

I guess this has been covered.

OK just read some more and the 1968 GCA lists a receiver as a firearm.

So my answer is obvious. I just was not sure if the atf had classified a receiver as something other then "firearm" yet still subject to ATF control.

Welcome to the firearms world.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[spqrzilla]

Hey, he asked in good faith as far as I can tell.

Lets be honest. AR receivers are unlike any other firearm in practice. No one but gunsmiths trade in Remington 700 receivers or Winchester M70 receivers etc.