Question My FFL said this is illegal

[DuckDawg22]

I have a legit semi drosed lower so
I’m good but it’s just crazy to think he basically wanted to deny my upper transfer and even offered to cancel my Dros from another FFL since I still have to pickup my lower(I’m good to pickup) just lazy to drive to it lol

maybe one of the FFLs can chime in here but I've been told that one FFL cannot see a DROS that another FFL processed, so if that's true I don't see how one could cancel a DROS in progress from another.

 

[grandpapeepap]

I an not arguing.
I listed the specific CA law which makes his assumed behavior illegal in CA.
So for him to be sitting in San Diego (I am assuming he is in the San Diego that is in CA and maybe he is in fact in the San Diego that is in Texas) and saying that having only a stripped lower that DROSed as a long gun and an AR pistol upper to not be problematic where he speaks from, PC 17170 says otherwise.

Right, the san diego part makes it california not federal like his message says, since other states/federally the stripped lower isnt a long gun. So it could be built into a pistol. But since its california the cali rules apply also like his message said.

 

[grandpapeepap]

maybe one of the FFLs can chime in here but I've been told that one FFL cannot see a DROS that another FFL processed, so if that's true I don't see how one could cancel a DROS in progress from another.

when i bought a "pistol" the guy had the previous dros that showed it was a pistol not a rifle. and that satisfied the FFL to transfer it to me as a pistol too.

 

[AR15barrels]

maybe one of the FFLs can chime in here but I've been told that one FFL cannot see a DROS that another FFL processed, so if that's true I don't see how one could cancel a DROS in progress from another.

That is correct.
If a gun is in DROS at FFL "A", the DROS has to be completed at FFL "A".
FFL "A" can not mail the gun to FFL "B" for the buyer to pickup.
No other FFL will be able to login to FFL "A"'s dros entry system to log the gun out at a different FFL.

 

[grandpapeepap]

They can bring the paperwork showing it was a pistol though, but that assumes a face to face PPT

 

[AR15barrels]

Right, the san diego part makes it california not federal like his message says, since other states/federally the stripped lower isnt a long gun. So it could be built into a pistol. But since its california the cali rules apply also like his message said.

Which then makes us question why such an assertation would even be made by a person inside CA?
The fact that something can be done outside of CA has absolutely no bearing inside CA.
This is a CA specific firearms discussion forum so it should be assumed that people here are in CA unless they specifically state that they are not.

 

[grandpapeepap]

Which then makes us question why such an assertation would even be made by a person inside CA?
The fact that something can be done outside of CA has absolutely no bearing inside CA.
This is a CA specific firearms discussion forum so it should be assumed that people here are in CA unless they specifically state that they are not.

Probably because the person doesnt like california laws and wanted to bring up how federally it wouldnt be a problem? But hey, i dont want to assume and put words in his mouth

 

[Gawernator]

Are you saying that federal laws do not apply in your kitchen?

Wait, you actually think the ATF goes out to arrest everyone that buys a barrel like that? lol okay

 

[Gawernator]

For your assertions to be correct, the person, long gun lower and pistol barrel must not be located within california.
Since this is a California specific firearms forum, you need to be very clear when making these assertions that the activity not be condoned when done in California.

Has anyone ever been convicted under this because they had a short barrel by itself?

 

[grandpapeepap]

Wait, you actually think the ATF goes out to arrest everyone that buys a barrel like that? lol okay

 

[Plenty_Pack_556]

There are some here that would raise their own hand in their own home to receive permission to use the restroom.

 

[Batman]

One of the challenges of AB1263 is that the FFL now faces heightened civil and criminal exposure for selling or transferring barrels. They may have been erring on the side of caution out of self preservation.

"Effective January 1, 2026, AB 1263 also creates a new Civil Code section 3273.625 that parallels Penal Code section 29186. This Civil Code section makes it unlawful to “knowingly, willfully, or recklessly cause another person to engage in the unlawful manufacture of firearms,” or “to knowingly, willfully, or recklessly aid, abet, promote, or facilitate the unlawful manufacture of firearms.” This new Civil Code statute provides a private right of action for persons who have suffered harm in California as a result of a violation of this section to seek compensatory damages and injunctive relief, and authorizes the Attorney General, county counsels, and city attorneys to seek civil penalties and injunctive relief. For these purposes, the “unlawful manufacture of firearms” has the same definition provided in Penal Code section 29186 (as described above)."

The way the law is written, the FFL could be sued if the barrel was used in a manner that wasn't legal, as well as being charged criminally in the event that the OP used the barrel in a manner that wasn't legal, even though the FFL did the transfer legally!! That's how messed up our system is right now!

 

[Gawernator]

There are some here that would raise their own hand in their own home to receive permission to use the restroom.

100%

 

[AR15barrels]

Has anyone ever been convicted under this because they had a short barrel by itself?

A short barrel by itself is not a problem.
It's only a problem to have a short barrel and a rifle receiver without also having an SBR or pistol receiver.
If you own a rifle receiver and do NOT own an SBR or pistol receiver, simply don't have a pistol barrel that could fit your rifle.

The way I explain this is "always have a path to legality" with the parts you have.
The "path to legality" for pistol barrels is a pistol receiver or SBR receiver.
If you own parts that could only be assembled illegally, that's where you have a problem.

 

[Gawernator]

A short barrel by itself is not a problem.
It's only a problem to have a short barrel and a rifle receiver without also having an SBR or pistol receiver.
If you own a rifle receiver and do NOT own an SBR or pistol receiver, simply don't have a pistol barrel that could fit your rifle.

The way I explain this is "always have a path to legality" with the parts you have.
The "path to legality" for pistol barrels is a pistol receiver or SBR receiver.
If you own parts that could only be assembled illegally, that's where you have a problem.

Throw your rifle receiver in the ocean

 

[AR15barrels]

Throw your rifle receiver in the ocean

This is the most reasonable answer you have?
Seeing as how I may have 20 rifle receivers, it is easier to simply get a pistol receiver.
Even better is to then AOW that pistol receiver so that gun is exempt of the CA SBR law.

 

[Gawernator]

This is the most reasonable answer you have?
Seeing as how I may have 20 rifle receivers, it is easier to simply get a pistol receiver.
Even better is to then AOW that pistol receiver so that gun is exempt of the CA SBR law.

Or don’t get a SBR at all here due to the law you said

 

[KingRansom]

Your FFL must have assumed that you were going to pin it to a lower receiver that was dros'd as a rifle and not a pistol lower. Until someone does so, it's absolutely 100% legal to own a complete upper of any length as long as you don't violate the law using it in a manner that would create an SBR

 

[weaverftw]

Your FFL must have assumed that you were going to pin it to a lower receiver that was dros'd as a rifle and not a pistol lower. Until someone does so, it's absolutely 100% legal to own a complete upper of any length as long as you don't violate the law using it in a manner that would create an SBR

That’s what I would’ve thought, but apparently this is not 100% correct based on some of the replies here. If he has no pistol lower and only owns rifle lowers it could be an issue to possess the short barrel upper.

 

[grandpapeepap]

That’s what I would’ve thought, but apparently this is not 100% correct based on some of the replies here. If he has no pistol lower and only owns rifle lowers it could be an issue to possess the short barrel upper.

I think the state would look into what is under your control and domain. Like if all the parts were in a safe you own ect. Kind of like if you had a bunch of stuff in a safe but only you knew the combo, other housemates/roommates wouldnt have control or in their domain those items. But thats how i, a non lawyer read the stuff so i could be wrong