Why are FAL uppers serial numbered, but not the lower?

Why is the lower considered just another part, and the upper is serial numbered and considered a firearm by ATF?

This is the exact opposite of the AR.

Why is this different?

The upper accepts the magazines on a FAL. The lower reciever accepts magazines on an AR. I think that is the reason.

Mike

PS In truth, they have to pick one major part, and not the other, so one can probably make equally valid arguments for going one way or the other.

Manufacturer differences in where they placed the serial number.

Coronach is close , In the fal the upper is what needs to be modified to set it as a semi auto or full auto not the lower or fire control group . I would say that is why it is the regulated part .

Edited to add : The lower , bcg ect.. are also serial no'd but BATFE regulates the upper so the serials on them do not matter in the usa , other than its nice to have them all match up .

Manufacturer differences in where they placed the serial number.

Well, I know that ain't right. I am pretty sure manufacturers are going to serial number the part that the ATF considers to be a firearm.

"...manufacturers are going to serial number the part that the ATF considers..." Real FAL's are European made. FN doesn't care what the ATF wants.

"...manufacturers are going to serial number the part that the ATF considers..." Real FAL's are European made. FN doesn't care what the ATF wants.
FN sure cares when they want to sell anything in the USA.

I'm not 100% sure how the ATF determines what part is "the gun", but once they do, that part must be serialized and controlled as it were a complete gun.

I always thought that the "whichever part contains the full auto stuff" was a good go-by, and it probably is, but it doesn't explain why a HK's trigger box, which contains all of the full auto parts, is not "the gun."

Questions: Isn't the receiver usually the federally regulated part? And isn't the receiver the part to which the barrel is attached and which contains the bolt? Yes, the AR seems to be an exception, and a happy one, because you can get buy AK receivers and barrels ("uppers") without going through an FFL.

Drakejake

"...manufacturers are going to serial number the part that the ATF considers..." Real FAL's are European made. FN doesn't care what the ATF wants.While this might be valid on an actual, unimported, FN FAL, the question is about FALs in general, and the mention of the ATF implies that he is asking about American made or imported FALs. And if they're made in, sold in, or imported to the USA, there will be a serial number where the ATF says there should be a serial number.

Mike

Questions: Isn't the receiver usually the federally regulated part? And isn't the receiver the part to which the barrel is attached and which contains the bolt? Yes, the AR seems to be an exception, and a happy one, because you can get buy AK receivers and barrels ("uppers") without going through an FFL.I was under the impression that the "receiver" was the part that "received" the ammunition. I dunno if that was gunshop talk, or if I'm misremembering, or if I have it right. However, note that this interpretation WOULD explain why the AR registers the lower and the FAL registers the upper.

Mike

Then there's the Keltec P32. The Serial Numbered part(the 'frame') is the part in yellow below. It has neither a magwell, nor barrel.

Nothing is logical when it comes to the ATF. They make a lot of arbitrary decisions.

http://www.kel-tec-cnc.com/images/big/p32_04.gif

Fun fact: the BATFE has decided that the lower on an FNC is the controlled part, but apparently they changed their mind at some point, because some FNCs were imported with serial numbers on the uppers only. The rest have the serial number on the lower. I always wondered what the legal status of an FNC would be if you placed a serial-less upper on a serial-less lower. No serial number would be obliterated or modified, but you'd end up with a firearm that didn't have a serial number.

This whole thread is giving me a headache,,,,,,,,,,,:(

You're not alone. :) Most threads that involve explaining or understanding BATFE rulings and practices give me a headache. You have to remember not to apply logic. BATFE rulings and practices are the legal equivalent of the old parental standby, "Because I said so." You're not going to be able to win that argument with logic.