Hi-Point Firearms Forums banner
1 - 20 of 131 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
29,131 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
ATF’s new unfinished gun receiver rule is on hold as ATF seeks answers

by John Crump

WASHINGTON, D.C. –-(Ammoland.com)- The industry and the public have been anxiously awaiting the new Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) rule on unfinished frames and receivers. We now have an idea where the ATF might be in the process, thanks to emails from the ATF’s Office of Regulatory Affairs obtained by Gun Owners of America (GOA).

The wait probably will not be days or weeks, and it might even be months.

The new rules seem to have hit a snag because no one at the Bureau considered the number of unfinished frames and receivers sitting in stores’ inventory. Now the ATF will be reaching out to licensed firearms dealers (FFLs) to see how many kits are currently for sale. The ATF is asking the dealers how long it would take to serialize those kits and what the FFL’s plan to do with the kits if a rule went into effect that would require serialization.

Full article at (off site) link here:

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
29,131 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
ATF is trying to create rules which would be retroactive on unserialed builds.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
25,802 Posts
And? I'll throw you a softball since it seems you whiffed on the point.

Buy now before they're pre-serialized and require the BGC or require mandatory serialization, which should be read as registered, and technically they won't exist unless the ATF gets a court order or SCOTUS ruling authorizing them to demand/subpoena sales records to try and find them all.

Then it's up to the individual whether or not they choose to abide by yet another illegal government overreach that we've allowed to become normalized by accepting "common sense" bullshit.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
29,131 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
And? I'll throw you a softball since it seems you whiffed on the point.
I didn't miss the point. I'm saying that if the ATF gets it's way, just because they don't know about the gun doesn't mean it legal.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
25,802 Posts
I didn't miss the point. I'm saying that if the ATF gets it's way, just because they don't know about the gun doesn't mean it legal.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
You absolutely missed the point, otherwise you would have included that little gem in your synopsis instead of after I replied. Almost as if you assumed I didn't even read the article even though the actual proposal has WAY more scope than just marking 80% and unfinished receivers. They're trying to reclassify what constitutes a receiver so uppers will need to be serialized and require a BGC, 80% manufacturer's will be required obtain a Type 7 FFL and all manufacturers will be required to stamp a serial number, their name, and the city and state where they maintain their business OR their name and a partial of their FFL on anything the ATF deems a receiver whether it's the upper, lower, and finished or un. The proposal also bans gunsmith from working on firearms on behalf of the manufacturer without the dealer or Smith having their own type 7 license. So the proposal also does away with "factory authorized" repair/install shops because it's written by morons.

It also states that PMF's must only be marked and registered with licensees and a dealer/Smith will be able to apply for a license to specifically engage in the serialization of PMF's only. They also want to make it so that any discarded suppressor parts get marked with the info of the suppressor they came out of if they're being discarded separately from the complete unit.

They also want to change the 20-year record keeping rule to a forever rule and that ALL activity: disposition, manufacturing, importing, and marking must all be done from a single book instead of having a book for each.

So please, let's just talk about how the only problem with this proposal is how didn't take in to account how many PMF's and blanks are out there.

2021R-05
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
29,131 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
You absolutely missed the point,
Maybe.

otherwise you would have included that little gem in your synopsis instead of after I replied.
Not really. I figured most people likely to read this thread were already familiar with the proposal. The synopsis wasn't mine. I cut and paste it from where I saw it first:
Off site link here:

Almost as if you assumed I didn't even read the article
No. I assumed that you were giving "wink wink" advice that amounted to "if the ATF doesn't know about it, they can't do anything." Isn't that what your statement "Buy now, build later..." was supposed to convey?

even though the actual proposal has WAY more scope than just marking 80% and unfinished receivers. They're trying to reclassify what constitutes a receiver so uppers will need to be serialized and require a BGC, 80% manufacturer's will be required obtain a Type 7 FFL and all manufacturers will be required to stamp a serial number, their name, and the city and state where they maintain their business OR their name and a partial of their FFL on anything the ATF deems a receiver whether it's the upper, lower, and finished or un. The proposal also bans gunsmith from working on firearms on behalf of the manufacturer without the dealer or Smith having their own type 7 license. So the proposal also does away with "factory authorized" repair/install shops because it's written by morons.

It also states that PMF's must only be marked and registered with licensees and a dealer/Smith will be able to apply for a license to specifically engage in the serialization of PMF's only. They also want to make it so that any discarded suppressor parts get marked with the info of the suppressor they came out of if they're being discarded separately from the complete unit.

They also want to change the 20-year record keeping rule to a forever rule and that ALL activity: disposition, manufacturing, importing, and marking must all be done from a single book instead of having a book for each.

So please, let's just talk about how the only problem with this proposal is how didn't take in to account how many PMF's and blanks are out there.

2021R-05
Sure, it's got a lot more in it. Why wouldn't the Democrats and the ATF want to try to get as big a bite as possible? If you want to point out all the other stuff, by all means, please do. It deserves to have the light of day shone on it as well.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
25,802 Posts
That's why I posted a link to the entire proposal...;)

The problem with articles like that is they hit a hotbutton topic and dumb down or ignore the rest of it because they have zero confidence in the intelligence of their audience. We now live in a society where information is disbursed by headline, not content, and articles are only written to assassinate the opposition, not give solid and credible facts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ajole and FlashBang

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
22,017 Posts
Things are moving in a "fast and furious" motion. (Not a reference to O'Berry selling guns that eventually went to the cartels.) One little "oops" and your local FFL will get their liscence jerked. Time to start pumping money into GOA, and FPC. If you catch Guns and Gadgets he is on top of most of this stuff. The AFT is doing all kinds of things just just like Gatling gun on a tripod. Hard to keep up with it all.

https://www.youtube.com/c/ArmedScholar is one to subscribe to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1024Megabytes

·
Administrator
Joined
·
29,131 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
The problem with articles like that is they hit a hotbutton topic and dumb down or ignore the rest of it because they have zero confidence in the intelligence of their audience. We now live in a society where information is disbursed by headline, not content, and articles are only written to assassinate the opposition, not give solid and credible facts.
That's a fair point.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
36,643 Posts
I didn't miss the point. I'm saying that if the ATF gets it's way, just because they don't know about the gun doesn't mean it legal.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
Just because they say it's against the rules doesn't make it illegal either...unconstitutional rulings and laws aren't legal, after all.

And no....the ATF doesn't really get their way, ever. All they do is make rulings and then find out that free people will always find a way to nullify or work around those rules, while criminals just ignore them.

One little "oops" and your local FFL will get their license jerked...

Except...there's ZERO reason for an FFL to be involved in selling chunks of partially machined aluminum or polymer. There's no "oops" involved here.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
29,131 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Just because they say it's against the rules doesn't make it illegal either...unconstitutional rulings and laws aren't legal, after all.
That's true. And is cold comfort if you're the one arrested and waiting in prison for years to prove that the rule is illegal or unconstitutional.

Look, I'm not saying that it's "right," but I am saying that I don't see a whole lot of people lining up to be the test case. Not you, not I, not anyone here so far. I'm sure someone eventually will, but it's still not you. That's not because you're dumb or uncommitted. You're smart and know that it's a big risk and a big commitment; years of your life, unknown number of dollars (even if subsidized by SAF or someone), and a non-zero chance of losing and being stuck in prison for who knows how long and having your firearms rights stripped away forever.

And no....the ATF doesn't really get their way, ever.
Sure they do. Chevron Deference. Still one of the worst rulings and I eagerly wait for it to be reined in.

Except...there's ZERO reason for an FFL to be involved in selling chunks of partially machined aluminum or polymer. There's no "oops" involved here.
Just like there's no reason for an FFL to sell holsters, sights, speed loaders? Nah, they'll sell it. Should it require an FFL? Of course not. That's part of the argument going on here.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
36,643 Posts
That's true. And is cold comfort if you're the one arrested and waiting in prison for years to prove that the rule is illegal or unconstitutional.

Look, I'm not saying that it's "right," but I am saying that I don't see a whole lot of people lining up to be the test case. Not you, not I, not anyone here so far. I'm sure someone eventually will, but it's still not you. That's not because you're dumb or uncommitted. You're smart and know that it's a big risk and a big commitment; years of your life, unknown number of dollars (even if subsidized by SAF or someone), and a non-zero chance of losing and being stuck in prison for who knows how long and having your firearms rights stripped away forever.
Are you sure that I don't have a few 80% units squirreled away? I'm kind of independent, and almost old enough not to care anymore. Not to mention, I have friends that machine things, including uppers, for a living; if we decided to become real criminals, we could easily crank out 30 or 40 finished 'ghost guns' a day.

I mean...at some point, someone has to take a stand, and at some point EVERYONE will have to make a choice.

Some people have already made that choice.

Sure they do. Chevron Deference. Still one of the worst rulings and I eagerly wait for it to be reined in.
That requires answering "the question for the court is whether the agency’s action was based on a permissible construction of the statute."
These aren't, nor are they constitutional. And that is true no matter what some court says.
Just like when the Founders told the Crown that the laws and taxes were unjust and void.
The only REAL question is...how much will people put up with before they say enough?

Just like there's no reason for an FFL to sell holsters, sights, speed loaders? Nah, they'll sell it. Should it require an FFL? Of course not. That's part of the argument going on here.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
If it costs them their license? No they won't. There are too many other avenues, from E-bay to Gunbroker, none of which have to be attached to the FFL's business license.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
29,131 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Are you sure that I don't have a few 80% units squirreled away?
I've almost "pulled the trigger" on one several times, but for me it's really more about cost savings than it is about hobbying the platform or "keeping it off the books." There ends up being no real cost savings as a DIY so, well, I didn't.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
 
  • Like
Reactions: ajole

·
AK = Automatic Killer!?!
Joined
·
3,169 Posts
So the question is, before June, which was their initial timeline for the rules to be "released", will the vendors and suppliers try to gouge everyone or try to unload as many as possible without incurring additional cost serializing what they have.

I have not read EVERY part of their proposed rule changes on receivers and I have read online they plan on Lowers, uppers and maybe even barrels as serialized parts.

That will make it quite a pain... I can see them adding uppers to the list of having serial numbers.

So like Rach said "buy now build later" may be prudent. Lowers/uppers/barrels oh my!! I believe small parts and bcgs/firing pins will still be available though... not sure on triggers - could you imagine that... anyway I digress.

Either way this is all bullcrap. All this hurts is the law abiding citizen. I still can't believe the public out there thinks that the bad guys are building these in their basements... its so much easier to steal one or buy a "name brand" with the serial numbers missing or just a black market one than it is to build one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bumthum

·
AK = Automatic Killer!?!
Joined
·
3,169 Posts
I've almost "pulled the trigger" on one several times, but for me it's really more about cost savings than it is about hobbying the platform or "keeping it off the books." There ends up being no real cost savings as a DIY so, well, I didn't.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
It's not about cost savings, at least to me, it is fun. I really do love to tinker. Also, if I build it I know the thing inside and out. Does that help with firing it or having fun at the range, nope, but it does give me a little added pride when I am shooting it at the range and see how beautifully it works.

If it was about cost savings... then I am doing it totally wrong lol.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: adam01364 and ajole

·
AK = Automatic Killer!?!
Joined
·
3,169 Posts
Are you sure that I don't have a few 80% units squirreled away? I'm kind of independent, and almost old enough not to care anymore. Not to mention, I have friends that machine things, including uppers, for a living; if we decided to become real criminals, we could easily crank out 30 or 40 finished 'ghost guns' a day.

I mean...at some point, someone has to take a stand, and at some point EVERYONE will have to make a choice.

Some people have already made that choice.
Ajole, very well said.

Yes, we all eventually have to make a choice. The bigger thing is I don't think we "want to" but think we are being "forced to".
 
  • Like
Reactions: ajole

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
36,643 Posts
It's not about cost savings, at least to me, it is fun. I really do love to tinker. Also, if I build it I know the thing inside and out. Does that help with firing it or having fun at the range, nope, but it does give me a little added pride when I am shooting it at the range and see how beautifully it works.

If it was about cost savings... then I am doing it totally wrong lol.
Cost savings isn't the object for sure. I forget who was selling, but Anderson lowers were $39 this weekend at some online outlet. That's cheaper than any lower shaped block of aluminum or polymer I've ever seen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: undeRGRound

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
25,802 Posts
Did I ever mention that tyrannowhoreass ex had a catastrophic failure on my polymer 80 build? 4th stringer ran it dry during several mag dumps then tried to mortar a stuck BCG...

I'm not saying she traded down, I'm just sayin'...
 

·
ROLL wif Da MOLE!
Joined
·
27,665 Posts
Cost savings isn't the object for sure. I forget who was selling, but Anderson lowers were $39 this weekend at some online outlet. That's cheaper than any lower shaped block of aluminum or polymer I've ever seen.
Same ones have been $29 in the past... with integral winter trigger guard
 
1 - 20 of 131 Posts
Top