ATF proposed 80% rule and receiver definition is up...

Elkins45 said:

Remember in a proposed rule making that ATF must respond to all comments.

Click to expand...

The comments ought address specific issues within the rule change. Unenforcibility is an excellent one to object to. The unclear nature of what markings need to be made, and where, and by whom is worth commenting upon.
The additional burden on FFL to keep Records forever, and how that affects the FFL who are currently compliant to 20 years as a separate class, is worth pointing out.
The better written the comment is, the less likely it is to be dismissed with a Form Letter (all Federal Rule-Making Agencies are required to Answer questions raised in the public comment period). The need to answer all of the Comments raised in response to the M885 Rule is why that Rule Change was withdrawn. The volume of Comments was higher than they could answer in the allotted time period.

I'm sure Matt at Fuddbusters will have a cogent video out on this soon.

RCB said:

It's exactly what I expect out of this administration.

Click to expand...

Except that this rule change was ginned up last year, the leaked Draft of this was dated in December.
Admittedly, the current Administration is unlikely to ask ATFE to slow down, but this was in motion before November/

I like to follow spirit of the law, but letter of the law is more clear. As such there are discrepancies. It’s exactly the same as when I tell my kids to go to their room. If they lay in the doorway to just barely be in their room then they are following essentially the letter of the law that I just laid down. If they go sit on their bed in their room then they are following the intent of what I told them to do. Assuming I told them to go to their room to not see some crazy news story then one gets the job done but the other they can still see the tv and it did no good.

With bump stocks the whole purpose is to “simulate full auto” that the purpose is to be minimally legal but to toe the line. Clearly that is like the kids being in the doorway which makes all parents more angry than before the kid got sent to their room, and more things are sure to come to make the intended consequence happen. Pistol braces came about for the handicap and disabled but then were used for purposes similar to a rifle stock. Again, that’s the kid just barely in their room.

What I see as the issue is not the laws or the lawmakers, but more an evolving industry without evolution within the laws. The old definitions no longer are applicable. The laws need revision to bring them up to modern definition and to make them applicable. It does not need to be done by internal rule making but by legislation, and it would be more in our interest if it happened under a mixed or more conservative administration.

80% is an entirely different animal. Functional guns can rather easily be made from non-gun parts. Again the laws are outdated because prior to the explosion of 80% receivers manufacture of a firearm from parts other than a gun required much more work and as such was more difficult. Even now with a hot 80% market, that technology is quickly becoming obsolete by additive manufacturing processes becoming increasingly affordable. The question is what purpose is there for restricting 80% receivers? Is it to limit the 2nd amendment? Is it to prevent felons from building a gun? Is it to cash in on the market that the tax man is missing?

No matter what is done you can’t please everybody. These particular issues could have been dealt with by a conservative administration. They weren’t, and now they will be dealt with by a group hostile to our interest. It is our fault for not pushing for this to be handled by friendly folks. We saw it coming and waited for the trainwreck.

Why do I need to go through and FFL at all for any type of firearm? Before 1968 I could buy a firearm with no 4473 or similar paper work and the gun did not even require a serial number.

None of the changes (and did skim the full document but have not read everything yet) above stop the proliferation of home built and 3D printed firearms as used by those determined to do something illegal with them. Commercial kits may go away but it will simply become a list published by third parties with what parts you need to make the kit yourself. This is simply the Federal Government realizing their control is slipping and they need to try to get it back.

The end results will be more bureaucracy for the legal firearms owner to deal with and more expenses to be paid for by all tax payers while having little or no impact on the illegal firearms market. If you want to meaningfully address gun violence you need to address the reasons (and these are many and widely variable) why people are being violent not the tools they choose to use when violent. This is a much harder solution but a solution with a much higher payoff in both reduction in gun violence and improvement to society as a whole.

He didn't say he didn't believe your friend. He simply said that one person seeing a few doesn't make it a national problem. Show statistics that this is actually a problem, then solve it. At least that is the way I read it.

IMHO, the difference is paperwork. I personally don't trust the current system in place. At anytime the gov can require that FFL sends all stored paperwork in. Then there is a record of everything you have for confiscation. Over the last decade I have seen that the gov doesn't care about following law, and the courts are activist, so I see this as a plausible scenario. I like the idea that people can have guns without paperwork.

The few criminals that use "ghost guns" will be caught for the criminal act they are committing with the gun, not for having it. Requiring paperwork for 80% isn't going to make it any harder for criminals to get weapons, which isn't the rules real goal anyway.

I read it. its ridiculous and won't do squat on reducing violence or gun crimes at all.

Except that this rule change was ginned up last year, the leaked Draft of this was dated in December.
Admittedly, the current Administration is unlikely to ask ATFE to slow down, but this was in motion before November/

Click to expand...

True, but I think we all know they were reading the tea leaves. And then Biden's EA on this. The ATF is an agency whose whole purpose is an infringement on the 2nd amendment by design. When humans have a purpose they tend to work diligently towards that end, ignoring all other guidance in pursuit of their purpose. Watching Virginia and other places we have seen just how they conspire and execute their plans. Just like with the FAA, their main goal isn't to help pilots, but to hinder them. There are exceptions, but much like the ATF they have almost no accountability and make laws that suit their tastes with nigh impunity.

The kits aren't for hobbiets, nor for those that can't pass a NICS to purchase from a dealer. 80% lowers and accompanying build kits are for those that are preparing to resist gun confiscation and tyranny. Regardless of what is said, most folks believe that they keep records on NICS checks. 80% lowers circumvent that, the same as purchases from individuals do.

I know a guy that's totally legal. But he won't purchase a gun except private sale so there is no record. He don't trust the government.

Even if gangs are building 80%ers into guns, it is still a violation of existing laws. They need to enforce these gun laws instead of pleading down every case just to make the DAs numbers look good for reelection. They are only going to make lawful gun owners into criminals and criminals will get off with the usual slap on the wrist.

CraigC said:

Legalizing drugs does not do anything to alleviate the drug problem or address the underlying causes. Just allows the government to make money off it.

Click to expand...

and since drugs really can't be serialized, it only makes illegal drugs appear to be legal drugs and the government still loses. But they can say they "did something"

CraigC said:

CAFE is a regulation and SUV's existed LOOOOONG before it did.

People aren't overdosing, dying or ruining the lives of themselves or others over coffee.

Oxycontin is legal, how's that going?

Click to expand...

If I remember correctly, SUVs are considered light duty trucks and those and pickups do not have the same smog and other regulations as do regular cars.

At what point do we start to regulate staple guns and oil filters?

And according to that paper, This should be serialized:


That puts a unrealistic demand of the forger.

As to the whole bump-stock debate. For those that stated the revised rules are correct, when do we start paying the $200 tax stamp and serializing our Levis?

GEM said:

I've said before that my very conservative, progun, federal officer friends say that they are seeing quite a few P80 kit guns in use in certain states like CA. I've seen the pictures of the guns from the scenes.

You will have a hard time arguing that a kit that assembles into a gun shouldn't go through a FFL because a hobbyist is having fun. You can have fun with a kit that went through NICS.

If the argument is to avoid NICS, then you have to argue against that entire process.

Click to expand...

I guess I'd ask if curtailing 80% parts will stop criminal behavior? Wouldn't enforcement of existing statue (such as using a gun when in commission of a felony rather than plea bargain it away) actually punish those breaking the law rather than those who don't?

BreechFace said:

It’s been proven one can outrun a bumpstock with a “target trigger,”

Click to expand...

It has? I’m not disagreeing, I’m intrigued. Do you have a video of such a feat?

So let's play devil's advocate, since we already have laws against crime - why not simply abolish the NICS system and have Handguns on sale like any commodity in the supermarket, next to the organic vegetables. Or in the convenience stores in the central city? Most buyers will be law abiding but a small percent won't be. That is the situation also with the kits.

Folks are not thinking this through. There is a meta principle here above and beyond the 80% kits. Would you buy a kit if you have to go through an FFL?

If you don't want any checks on anyone buying a gun, say so. The kits are a minor nuance.

Why don't folks see that? Who buys the kits for a simple hobby or to have one to make a gun that hasn't gone through NICS for a potential trace?

I would not buy one if I had to go through FFL

The fact that something is used in a crime should have no bearing. Lots of things are used in crimes, and they don’t cry and whine about banning them or whatever. The letter of the law for bump stocks is clear, and they (ATF) violated it. Should we ban Jerry Miculek? That dude is faster than a real machine gun for crying out loud. This whole thing is ridiculous and needs a paradigm shift. They come up with this nonsense, and we, as the “gun community” blather on about the definition of “is” and whatnot, choosing the type of trimming for the gilded cage they built for us, and thinking we come out ahead because of it. The whole thing is a farce and needs to be changed. More politicians like some that have come out lately in a “no compromise” fashion need to make a stand, along with us.

CraigC said:

That's the definition of "technicality". Banning bump stocks only takes away a freedom you shouldn't have had in the first place, under the NFA.

Click to expand...

That's true under the intent of the law's framers: a bump stock allows a gun to rapidly fire as if it were a machine gun. But I don't think that matters in a court of law, when the original legislation clearly did not ban such a device.

I don't think they get to say "we made a mistake, this other thing should also have been included... but we're not going to update the law to reflect that, we'll just say this other thing is illegal too, even though it wasn't included in the original legislation".

As far as I can see there was no legal justification to ban bump stocks as they don't fit the definition of a machine gun, which involved firing multiple bullets with one function of the trigger. The bump stock doesn't make any gun do that. Which is why we had the recent Sixth Circuit decision.

"The court disagreed with ATF’s interpretation of the law. “Single function of the trigger” refers to the mechanical process of the trigger, i.e. its depression, release, and resetting, the court said. A bump stock can’t be classified as a machine gun because it doesn’t enable a semiautomatic firearm to fire more than one shot each time the trigger goes through this cycle, the court added."

Well, as others have stated above, since it makes no sense and it's unenforceable then I'm relieved.

We can trust Biden's appointments at BATF to be fair and sensible ...

/s

CraigC said:

If it is proven that criminals are using 80% receivers in any appreciable amount, then that is probably what has to happen.

Click to expand...

This is an incredibly troubling statement and viewpoint.

You are basically arguing that if criminals start using a certain firearm to commit crimes with, then the government needs to step in and regulate them or remove them from use by non-criminal citizens.

Do you see the problem with that philosophy?

wrong quote, sorry

CraigC said:

I disagree entirely. The bumpstock was specifically made to circumvent the NFA on machineguns. I'm not saying I don't care because I didn't want one or that I agree with it. I'm saying it is legally indefensible. Same with pistol braces, we were always on borrowed time with either one. I'd rather see the effort put into repealing the NFA in its entirety.

Click to expand...

100% of 16,20, and 12 gauge shotguns are illegal, and your a felon for owning them. The only reason your not is because the ATF decided not to worry about it. Is that okay? Bumpstocks were far more legal than the millions of pump shotguns out there.

GEM said:

I've said before that my very conservative, progun, federal officer friends say that they are seeing quite a few P80 kit guns in use in certain states like CA. I've seen the pictures of the guns from the scenes.

You will have a hard time arguing that a kit that assembles into a gun shouldn't go through a FFL because a hobbyist is having fun. You can have fun with a kit that went through NICS.

If the argument is to avoid NICS, then you have to argue against that entire process.

Click to expand...

By this logic, aftermarket performance car parts should be banned.

More attempts at injuries to LOEs, and probably injuries and fatalities to them and bystanders, are caused by people it modified cars using them as weapons in ramming police during chases.

GEM said:

Let's ask a simple question. If the kits are for hobbyists, and you would consider buying one for a hobby, would you not because it went through an FFL?

I currently have bought guns for SD and competition (a hobby and SD practice), they have gone through an FFL.

What is the difference?

As far as not believing my friend, tough.

Click to expand...

And, define a "kit". Is it all the parts including an 80% receiver? All the parts minus the receiver? All the parts except the barrel and receiver? A lower parts kit? The firing pin and the firing pin retaining pin?

In short, what's the difference between clicking on one item on a web page, or clicking on 47 items on a web page and having them all arrive in the same box? Or do you think it should be illegal to order most of the parts for any firearm at one time?

I agree with those saying that bump stocks, arm braces, and 80% kits are intended to circumvent existing laws. As well as AOW shotguns and AR pistols.

To those who think making a firearm from scratch is anything close to assembling an 80% kit: I challenge you to find someone who has little mechanical ability and ask them to do the first, then ask them to do the second. Let's see which AR is better.

Seriously, does no one think there aren't gang members out there assembling 80% kits for the rest of the gang? Some of them have elaborate shooting at anges in their basements.

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2019/02/09/underground-range/

Ghost guns: https://www.cbs58.com/news/feds-rai...cts-they-say-are-linked-to-hundreds-of-crimes