Is turning one of these into a functioning, fully constructed

>>32542914
depends on where you live
it would be great if you knew your own gun laws

File: 004.jpg (76KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 600x600px

>>32542914

>turning an 80%into acomplete lowerreceiver
>illegal
It's only illegal if your state hates freedom. Pretty sureit's legaleven in California, despite all those retarded laws they just passed.

>>32542934
Sorry, I'm a us citizen in the state of Georgia. I got in a debate with a bunch if gunsmiths at a range yesterday. I was trying to explain that a manufactured firearm without a contractor for personal use does not require a serial number and they all lost their shit

File: not the atf.jpg (21KB, 518x579px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 518x579px

Don't forget to machine the fire control pocket out to M16 specs, and remember to drill the autosear hole and install an M16 BCG.

Hey pm me your number too I can help you out

Yes. Why do you think they're so popular?

>>32542952
>they have FFLs
>not reading ATF's letters
There's an ATF Letter on their website explaining that personal, non-commercial firearms produced for personal use are not required to be serialized by law, only that 'it's a good idea'. Why are gun people so uninformed on average it's sad

>>32542952
Don't listen to random idiots at the range. Unless they have specific qualifications that make them a SME in that particular field, many people will literally make up shit to avoid sounding like they don't have an answer. It's fucking stupid. Just look up your local or state laws online. There's tons of resources for this shit.

>>32543176
ffls are manufacturers. they are under more restrictions.

>>32542965
Isn't that still kosher unless you also have an M16 BCG? I thought that that had to be there to prove intent.

>>32542944
nope. has to have a serial number engraved starting 2017 here. and starting 2018 i believe, any new lower milled out of an 80% has to be registered with ca doj IIRC

>>32543483
the M16 BCG is 100% legal to have; as must production Ar15s use it.

what's not legal, is having that 3rd hole and M16 trigger group.

>>32543717
Ah, it was the trigger group I was thinking of then.

>>32543483
No such thing as intent. It's either a machinegun or it isn't.
That being said if the ATF wants to screw you they will say your AR is an MG because you can replace the fire control group with that from an M16 which will allow the hammer to follow the bolt down if set to the full auto position which can possibly result in more than one shot per trigger pull if you use ammo made with very soft primers.

In short the ATF considers everything to be a machinegun and they have no problem spending gobs of your tax dollars to prove it in court.