July 01, 2019.... Is it the end of the world?

[Massivedesign]

Someone on a gun-related Facebook page just pointed..

Yup, this was brought up earlier in this thread. viewtopic.php?f=47&t=101351&start=30#p1006527

[shaggy]

Someone on a gun-related Facebook page just pointed something out that I think is interesting (not saying it's correct, just thought-provoking). He was talking about how transfers of frames/receivers (like AR lowers) will not be able to be processed come July 1 (when FBI discontinues the courtesy instant NICS checks for everything but long guns). The reason is because frames/receivers fall into the "other" category, and the state will have to do the BGCs themselves. But the new state transfer forms (see below) do not have a way to mark the firearm as an "other"; it only provides options for either semi-automatic rifle or pistol. So, with lowers being neither of those, but unable to be processed by NICS after July 1, there will be no way to complete the state transfer application. Thoughts?

The feds need to to more transfers than just long guns, shotguns should be included, does anyone know if they have to do "others" and that is why it is ommited?

[quantsuff]

Someone on a gun-related Facebook page just pointed something out that I think is interesting (not saying it's correct, just thought-provoking). He was talking about how transfers of frames/receivers (like AR lowers) will not be able to be processed come July 1 (when FBI discontinues the courtesy instant NICS checks for everything but long guns). The reason is because frames/receivers fall into the "other" category, and the state will have to do the BGCs themselves. But the new state transfer forms (see below) do not have a way to mark the firearm as an "other"; it only provides options for either semi-automatic rifle or pistol. So, with lowers being neither of those, but unable to be processed by NICS after July 1, there will be no way to complete the state transfer application. Thoughts?

The feds need to to more transfers than just long guns, shotguns should be included, does anyone know if they have to do "others" and that is why it is ommited?

Why isn't the inference that "others/shotguns (including semi-auto SGs?) do not require bgc - they are not on the form, therefore the form does not apply to them?

[AR15L]

Why isn't the inference that "others/shotguns (including semi-auto SGs?) do not require bgc - they are not on the form, therefore the form does not apply to them?

BINGO!!!
There is our loophole.
Buy an AR shotgun and put on a regular .223/5.56 upper.
You're welcome.

[AR15L]

For reference:

Most AR-pattern shotguns only superficially resemble the modern sporting rifle and use a typical shotgun gas system to operate, but the Omni Hybrid AR-15 .410 shotgun, introduced by American Tactical Inc. (ATI) in 2017, is a true .410 AR upper and magazine combo that can be fitted to any standard AR-15 lower.

The gun is laid out just like a typical AR, but there are some key differences, according to this story from firearmsnews.com](http://www.firearmsnews.com/editorial/r ... 10/316579#), which says there are some screws in the lower receiver where ARs normally have pins, and the upper has a roll pin where there typically is none. The Omni Hybrid runs on a gas operated, short stroke balanced piston system.

[usrifle]

Where did it say you could put a 5.56 upper on that Lower? I didn't see that from the article you posted.

[Guns4Liberty]

Someone on a gun-related Facebook page just pointed..

Yup, this was brought up earlier in this thread. viewtopic.php?f=47&t=101351&start=30#p1006527

Oops! Somehow I missed that nugget the first go-around.

[MadPick]

This is probably a good time to recall that a lower is not a "firearm" per WA state's definition, and if you're doing a private sale, an FFL transfer is not required.

[Guns4Liberty]

This is probably a good time to recall that a lower is not a "firearm" per WA state's definition, and if you're doing a private sale, an FFL transfer is not required.

Preach it, Steve!

I explain this to people all the time, but no one seems to want to listen. It's sad when we voluntarily give up rights unnecessarily because we feel like we have to "play it safe".

[AK_Goes_Bang_Bang]

This is probably a good time to recall that a lower is not a "firearm" per WA state's definition, and if you're doing a private sale, an FFL transfer is not required.

What if I wanted to buy a pistol frame/lower does that still count as not a firearm?

[DGM33]

When I-594 went into effect, gun owners grumbled and complained but complied for the most part because it was merely an inconvenience. Some owners have continued to buy/sell/trade privately without complying because they saw it as a BS law with no real teeth that would almost never be prosecuted.
With the implementation of I-1639, I personally foresee all of that going out the window and a LOT more gun owners saying “f*ck it” and going back to the old way of private transfers.
Not that I *condone* it, because I never would on a public forum. Especially as a mod.
But I’m happy to get together and just talk about guns offline any time.

[usrifle]

When I-594 went into effect, gun owners grumbled and complained but complied for the most part because it was merely an inconvenience. Some owners have continued to buy/sell/trade privately without complying because they saw it as a BS law with no real teeth that would almost never be prosecuted.
With the implementation of I-1639, I personally foresee all of that going out the window and a LOT more gun owners saying “f*ck it” and going back to the old way of private transfers.
Not that I *condone* it, because I never would on a public forum. Especially as a mod.
But I’m happy to get together and just talk about guns offline any time.

I am in total agreement Jacy. I would never condone breaking any Stupid feel good that does nothing Law, but we can certainly discuss our feelings about that in a more private setting.

[zombie66]

When I-594 went into effect, gun owners grumbled and complained but complied for the most part because it was merely an inconvenience. Some owners have continued to buy/sell/trade privately without complying because they saw it as a BS law with no real teeth that would almost never be prosecuted.
With the implementation of I-1639, I personally foresee all of that going out the window and a LOT more gun owners saying “f*ck it” and going back to the old way of private transfers.
Not that I *condone* it, because I never would on a public forum. Especially as a mod.
But I’m happy to get together and just talk about guns offline any time.

+1 Billion

[Pvanderzee]

This is probably a good time to recall that a lower is not a "firearm" per WA state's definition, and if you're doing a private sale, an FFL transfer is not required.

What if I wanted to buy a pistol frame/lower does that still count as not a firearm?

There is no such thing as a "pistol lower," legally speaking. A lower is an "other" according to the feds, and a nothing according to the state. Doesn't matter what furniture it has. If there is no barrel, it does not meet any federal definition except "other" because all the specific definitions (pistol, rifle, and shotgun) have barrel specifics in the definition.

Ex: The term “Rifle” means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed metallic cartridge to fire only a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of the trigger.

The part in bold is what I'm referring to. If there is no bore at all, it cannot be a rifle. You will find similar mentions of a "bore" and "chamber" in the GCA definition of a pistol.

[AK_Goes_Bang_Bang]

This is probably a good time to recall that a lower is not a "firearm" per WA state's definition, and if you're doing a private sale, an FFL transfer is not required.

What if I wanted to buy a pistol frame/lower does that still count as not a firearm?

There is no such thing as a "pistol lower," legally speaking. A lower is an "other" according to the feds, and a nothing according to the state. Doesn't matter what furniture it has. If there is no barrel, it does not meet any federal definition except "other" because all the specific definitions (pistol, rifle, and shotgun) have barrel specifics in the definition.

Ex: The term “Rifle” means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed metallic cartridge to fire only a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of the trigger.

The part in bold is what I'm referring to. If there is no bore at all, it cannot be a rifle. You will find similar mentions of a "bore" and "chamber" in the GCA definition of a pistol.

Interesting...
Thank you for further clarifying!