CNN: AR15 lowers are -not- firearms

[M14 Shooter]

Feds to drop weapons charges to protect gun control efforts, sources say - CNN
The ATF's Definition of an AR-15 Lower as a 'Firearm' Is In Serious Trouble - The Truth About Guns

Long story short:
AR15 lower receivers do not - in fact, NO part of an AR15 - fall under the definition of a firearm under federal law; The Obama's administration decided to people illegally manufacturing firearms go rather than push this issue in court because of the impact the inevitable ruling to this effect would have on its gun control agenda.

One of the people in question is responsible for supplying the AR15 used in the 2013 Santa Monica shooting spree.

The takeaway on this:
- The manufacture and sale of AR15 lowers is NOT subject to any federal law
- Democrats are more concerned with pushing/preserving their gun control agenda than protecting the lives of Americans

Surprise, surprise.

For reference - an AR lower:

 

[Rustic]

Feds to drop weapons charges to protect gun control efforts, sources say - CNN
The ATF's Definition of an AR-15 Lower as a 'Firearm' Is In Serious Trouble - The Truth About Guns

Long story short:
AR15 lower receivers do not - in fact, NO part of an AR15 - fall under the definition of a firearm under federal law; The Obama's administration decided to people illegally manufacturing firearms go rather than push this issue in court because of the impact the inevitable ruling to this effect would have on its gun control agenda.

One of the people in question is responsible for supplying the AR15 used in the 2013 Santa Monica shooting spree.

The takeaway on this:
- The manufacture and sale of AR15 lowers is NOT subject to any federal law
- Democrats are more concerned with pushing/preserving their gun control agenda that protecting the lives of Americans

Surprise, surprise.

For reference - an AR lower:

Progressives are incredibly ignorant on the whole subject to firearm ownership, They get their information from Hollywood/politically correct career politicians… That makes them fucking retarded

 

[M14 Shooter]

Progressives are incredibly ignorant on the whole subject to firearm ownership, They get their information from Hollywood/politically correct career politicians… That makes them fucking retarded

The useful-idiot progressives - like most of those on this board - are, and truly so.
Those that supply said useful idiots with their talking points are fully aware of the foundation of lies upon which their agenda is built.
Its impossible to read the story here and honestly conclude otherwise.

 

[Rustic]

Progressives are incredibly ignorant on the whole subject to firearm ownership, They get their information from Hollywood/politically correct career politicians… That makes them fucking retarded

The useful-idiot progressives - like most of those on this board - are, and truly so.
Those that supply said useful idiots with their talking points are fully aware of the foundation of lies upon which their agenda is built.
Its impossible to read the story here and honestly conclude otherwise.

Yep,
Watching progressives talk about firearms is like watching Saturday morning cartoons.... void of all reality

 

[Flash]

It is interesting that the very same component that the ATF uses to define an AR-15 being a firearm does not meet the legal definition of a firearm. Typical government stupidity.

 

[Ringel05]

Feds to drop weapons charges to protect gun control efforts, sources say - CNN
The ATF's Definition of an AR-15 Lower as a 'Firearm' Is In Serious Trouble - The Truth About Guns

Long story short:
AR15 lower receivers do not - in fact, NO part of an AR15 - fall under the definition of a firearm under federal law; The Obama's administration decided to people illegally manufacturing firearms go rather than push this issue in court because of the impact the inevitable ruling to this effect would have on its gun control agenda.

One of the people in question is responsible for supplying the AR15 used in the 2013 Santa Monica shooting spree.

The takeaway on this:
- The manufacture and sale of AR15 lowers is NOT subject to any federal law
- Democrats are more concerned with pushing/preserving their gun control agenda than protecting the lives of Americans

Surprise, surprise.

For reference - an AR lower:

The way I understand it is (currently) FULLY ASSEMBLED AR lowers are subject to Federal law, 80% lowers are not. That's what they are most afraid of that fully assembled lowers also don't legally fit federal law as the law and regs are currently written.
That said some States ban even 80% lowers so know what your State laws are on this subject.

 

[progressive hunter]

Feds to drop weapons charges to protect gun control efforts, sources say - CNN
The ATF's Definition of an AR-15 Lower as a 'Firearm' Is In Serious Trouble - The Truth About Guns

Long story short:
AR15 lower receivers do not - in fact, NO part of an AR15 - fall under the definition of a firearm under federal law; The Obama's administration decided to people illegally manufacturing firearms go rather than push this issue in court because of the impact the inevitable ruling to this effect would have on its gun control agenda.

One of the people in question is responsible for supplying the AR15 used in the 2013 Santa Monica shooting spree.

The takeaway on this:
- The manufacture and sale of AR15 lowers is NOT subject to any federal law
- Democrats are more concerned with pushing/preserving their gun control agenda than protecting the lives of Americans

Surprise, surprise.

For reference - an AR lower:

The way I understand it is (currently) FULLY ASSEMBLED AR lowers are subject to Federal law, 80% lowers are not. That's what they are most afraid of that fully assembled lowers also don't legally fit federal law as the law and regs are currently written.
That said some States ban even 80% lowers so know what your State laws are on this subject.

the 2nd amendment over rides all state laws as the supreme law of the land,,,

 

[Ringel05]

Feds to drop weapons charges to protect gun control efforts, sources say - CNN
The ATF's Definition of an AR-15 Lower as a 'Firearm' Is In Serious Trouble - The Truth About Guns

Long story short:
AR15 lower receivers do not - in fact, NO part of an AR15 - fall under the definition of a firearm under federal law; The Obama's administration decided to people illegally manufacturing firearms go rather than push this issue in court because of the impact the inevitable ruling to this effect would have on its gun control agenda.

One of the people in question is responsible for supplying the AR15 used in the 2013 Santa Monica shooting spree.

The takeaway on this:
- The manufacture and sale of AR15 lowers is NOT subject to any federal law
- Democrats are more concerned with pushing/preserving their gun control agenda than protecting the lives of Americans

Surprise, surprise.

For reference - an AR lower:

The way I understand it is (currently) FULLY ASSEMBLED AR lowers are subject to Federal law, 80% lowers are not. That's what they are most afraid of that fully assembled lowers also don't legally fit federal law as the law and regs are currently written.
That said some States ban even 80% lowers so know what your State laws are on this subject.

the 2nd amendment over rides all state laws as the supreme law of the land,,,

Tell that to the States that have the laws, I'm not arguing for or against their laws simply stating a fact that the laws exist in some States and that those States aggressively prosecute. Your fight over this is with them not with me.

 

[progressive hunter]

Feds to drop weapons charges to protect gun control efforts, sources say - CNN
The ATF's Definition of an AR-15 Lower as a 'Firearm' Is In Serious Trouble - The Truth About Guns

Long story short:
AR15 lower receivers do not - in fact, NO part of an AR15 - fall under the definition of a firearm under federal law; The Obama's administration decided to people illegally manufacturing firearms go rather than push this issue in court because of the impact the inevitable ruling to this effect would have on its gun control agenda.

One of the people in question is responsible for supplying the AR15 used in the 2013 Santa Monica shooting spree.

The takeaway on this:
- The manufacture and sale of AR15 lowers is NOT subject to any federal law
- Democrats are more concerned with pushing/preserving their gun control agenda than protecting the lives of Americans

Surprise, surprise.

For reference - an AR lower:

The way I understand it is (currently) FULLY ASSEMBLED AR lowers are subject to Federal law, 80% lowers are not. That's what they are most afraid of that fully assembled lowers also don't legally fit federal law as the law and regs are currently written.
That said some States ban even 80% lowers so know what your State laws are on this subject.

the 2nd amendment over rides all state laws as the supreme law of the land,,,

Tell that to the States that have the laws, I'm not arguing for or against their laws simply stating a fact that the laws exist in some States and that those States aggressively prosecute. Your fight over this is with them not with me.

maybe I'm not trying to fight with you but just clearing the air so some people know they have an ally in fighting these unconstitutional laws,,,

we have allowed this to happen for far to long,,,
its time to stand and fight,,,

 

[Ringel05]

Feds to drop weapons charges to protect gun control efforts, sources say - CNN
The ATF's Definition of an AR-15 Lower as a 'Firearm' Is In Serious Trouble - The Truth About Guns

Long story short:
AR15 lower receivers do not - in fact, NO part of an AR15 - fall under the definition of a firearm under federal law; The Obama's administration decided to people illegally manufacturing firearms go rather than push this issue in court because of the impact the inevitable ruling to this effect would have on its gun control agenda.

One of the people in question is responsible for supplying the AR15 used in the 2013 Santa Monica shooting spree.

The takeaway on this:
- The manufacture and sale of AR15 lowers is NOT subject to any federal law
- Democrats are more concerned with pushing/preserving their gun control agenda than protecting the lives of Americans

Surprise, surprise.

For reference - an AR lower:

The way I understand it is (currently) FULLY ASSEMBLED AR lowers are subject to Federal law, 80% lowers are not. That's what they are most afraid of that fully assembled lowers also don't legally fit federal law as the law and regs are currently written.
That said some States ban even 80% lowers so know what your State laws are on this subject.

the 2nd amendment over rides all state laws as the supreme law of the land,,,

Tell that to the States that have the laws, I'm not arguing for or against their laws simply stating a fact that the laws exist in some States and that those States aggressively prosecute. Your fight over this is with them not with me.

maybe I'm not trying to fight with you but just clearing the air so some people know they have an ally in fighting these unconstitutional laws,,,

we have allowed this to happen for far to long,,,
its time to stand and fight,,,

I wish you the best of luck, you're gonna need it.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The way I understand it is (currently) FULLY ASSEMBLED AR lowers are subject to Federal law, 80% lowers are not. That's what they are most afraid of that fully assembled lowers also don't legally fit federal law as the law and regs are currently written.
That said some States ban even 80% lowers so know what your State laws are on this subject.

The issue at hand is federal regulation
The federal definition of a receiver:
“That part of a firearm which provides housing for the hammer, bolt or breechblock, and firing mechanism, and which is usually threaded at its forward portion to receive the barrel.”

100% AR lowers do not house a bolt or a breechblock, and do not provide a mounting of any kind for the barrel - thus, under the law they are not receivers.
AR uppers do not house the firing mechanism.

 

[progressive hunter]

Feds to drop weapons charges to protect gun control efforts, sources say - CNN
The ATF's Definition of an AR-15 Lower as a 'Firearm' Is In Serious Trouble - The Truth About Guns

Long story short:
AR15 lower receivers do not - in fact, NO part of an AR15 - fall under the definition of a firearm under federal law; The Obama's administration decided to people illegally manufacturing firearms go rather than push this issue in court because of the impact the inevitable ruling to this effect would have on its gun control agenda.

One of the people in question is responsible for supplying the AR15 used in the 2013 Santa Monica shooting spree.

The takeaway on this:
- The manufacture and sale of AR15 lowers is NOT subject to any federal law
- Democrats are more concerned with pushing/preserving their gun control agenda than protecting the lives of Americans

Surprise, surprise.

For reference - an AR lower:

The way I understand it is (currently) FULLY ASSEMBLED AR lowers are subject to Federal law, 80% lowers are not. That's what they are most afraid of that fully assembled lowers also don't legally fit federal law as the law and regs are currently written.
That said some States ban even 80% lowers so know what your State laws are on this subject.

the 2nd amendment over rides all state laws as the supreme law of the land,,,

Tell that to the States that have the laws, I'm not arguing for or against their laws simply stating a fact that the laws exist in some States and that those States aggressively prosecute. Your fight over this is with them not with me.

maybe I'm not trying to fight with you but just clearing the air so some people know they have an ally in fighting these unconstitutional laws,,,

we have allowed this to happen for far to long,,,
its time to stand and fight,,,

I wish you the best of luck, you're gonna need it.

guess I cant count on you to fight for freedom,,,

 

[M14 Shooter]

The way I understand it is (currently) FULLY ASSEMBLED AR lowers are subject to Federal law, 80% lowers are not. That's what they are most afraid of that fully assembled lowers also don't legally fit federal law as the law and regs are currently written.
That said some States ban even 80% lowers so know what your State laws are on this subject.

the 2nd amendment over rides all state laws as the supreme law of the land,,,

Tell that to the States that have the laws, I'm not arguing for or against their laws simply stating a fact that the laws exist in some States and that those States aggressively prosecute. Your fight over this is with them not with me.

maybe I'm not trying to fight with you but just clearing the air so some people know they have an ally in fighting these unconstitutional laws,,,

we have allowed this to happen for far to long,,,
its time to stand and fight,,,

I wish you the best of luck, you're gonna need it.

guess I cant count on you to fight for freedom,,,

Easy boys, - we're all on the same side.

 

[Ringel05]

The way I understand it is (currently) FULLY ASSEMBLED AR lowers are subject to Federal law, 80% lowers are not. That's what they are most afraid of that fully assembled lowers also don't legally fit federal law as the law and regs are currently written.
That said some States ban even 80% lowers so know what your State laws are on this subject.

The issue at hand is federal regulation
The federal definition of a receiver:
“That part of a firearm which provides housing for the hammer, bolt or breechblock, and firing mechanism, and which is usually threaded at its forward portion to receive the barrel.”

100% AR lowers do not house a bolt or a breechblock, and do not provide a mounting of any kind for the barrel - thus, under the law they are not receivers.
AR uppers do not house the firing mechanism.

Yeah, I know, what I was addressing was what is currently regulated, not whether it's right or wrong.......

 

[Ringel05]

The way I understand it is (currently) FULLY ASSEMBLED AR lowers are subject to Federal law, 80% lowers are not. That's what they are most afraid of that fully assembled lowers also don't legally fit federal law as the law and regs are currently written.
That said some States ban even 80% lowers so know what your State laws are on this subject.

the 2nd amendment over rides all state laws as the supreme law of the land,,,

Tell that to the States that have the laws, I'm not arguing for or against their laws simply stating a fact that the laws exist in some States and that those States aggressively prosecute. Your fight over this is with them not with me.

maybe I'm not trying to fight with you but just clearing the air so some people know they have an ally in fighting these unconstitutional laws,,,

we have allowed this to happen for far to long,,,
its time to stand and fight,,,

I wish you the best of luck, you're gonna need it.

guess I cant count on you to fight for freedom,,,

That fight's already lost.

 

[Ringel05]

the 2nd amendment over rides all state laws as the supreme law of the land,,,

Tell that to the States that have the laws, I'm not arguing for or against their laws simply stating a fact that the laws exist in some States and that those States aggressively prosecute. Your fight over this is with them not with me.

maybe I'm not trying to fight with you but just clearing the air so some people know they have an ally in fighting these unconstitutional laws,,,

we have allowed this to happen for far to long,,,
its time to stand and fight,,,

I wish you the best of luck, you're gonna need it.

guess I cant count on you to fight for freedom,,,

Easy boys, - we're all on the same side.

We're good.

 

[progressive hunter]

the 2nd amendment over rides all state laws as the supreme law of the land,,,

Tell that to the States that have the laws, I'm not arguing for or against their laws simply stating a fact that the laws exist in some States and that those States aggressively prosecute. Your fight over this is with them not with me.

maybe I'm not trying to fight with you but just clearing the air so some people know they have an ally in fighting these unconstitutional laws,,,

we have allowed this to happen for far to long,,,
its time to stand and fight,,,

I wish you the best of luck, you're gonna need it.

guess I cant count on you to fight for freedom,,,

Easy boys, - we're all on the same side.

as you can see from comments , thats not exactly true,,,

 

[progressive hunter]

the 2nd amendment over rides all state laws as the supreme law of the land,,,

Tell that to the States that have the laws, I'm not arguing for or against their laws simply stating a fact that the laws exist in some States and that those States aggressively prosecute. Your fight over this is with them not with me.

maybe I'm not trying to fight with you but just clearing the air so some people know they have an ally in fighting these unconstitutional laws,,,

we have allowed this to happen for far to long,,,
its time to stand and fight,,,

I wish you the best of luck, you're gonna need it.

guess I cant count on you to fight for freedom,,,

That fight's already lost.

those are the words of a quitter or an enemy,,,

 

[Ringel05]

Tell that to the States that have the laws, I'm not arguing for or against their laws simply stating a fact that the laws exist in some States and that those States aggressively prosecute. Your fight over this is with them not with me.

maybe I'm not trying to fight with you but just clearing the air so some people know they have an ally in fighting these unconstitutional laws,,,

we have allowed this to happen for far to long,,,
its time to stand and fight,,,

I wish you the best of luck, you're gonna need it.

guess I cant count on you to fight for freedom,,,

That fight's already lost.

those are the words of a quitter or an enemy,,,

No, a realist. You might want to read Sir John Glubb's Fate of Empires.......... It's inevitable. Doesn't mean it will happen tomorrow but it will happen.

 

[progressive hunter]

maybe I'm not trying to fight with you but just clearing the air so some people know they have an ally in fighting these unconstitutional laws,,,

we have allowed this to happen for far to long,,,
its time to stand and fight,,,

I wish you the best of luck, you're gonna need it.

guess I cant count on you to fight for freedom,,,

That fight's already lost.

those are the words of a quitter or an enemy,,,

No, a realist. You might want to read Sir John Glubb's Fate of Empires.......... It's inevitable. Doesn't mean it will happen tomorrow but it will happen.

so youre a quitter,,,