Polymer 80 just got raided by the ATF in Nevada.

Frank Ettin said:

That might very well be. And if so, I'd expect a court to reject ATF's claim.

Click to expand...

There are plenty of posts on the different forums and Reddit (if you dare to go there) where people have issues with their builds. And there are plenty fo videos on YouTube too.

Even with my background, I still have had two builds that just would not make it through a single magazine without having to change out of spec parts or fine tune the frame rails or deal with tolerance stacking between parts. And I can tell you that the parts kits that Polymer 80 and other aftermarket companies use are not always up to Glock standards. The only time I have had ZERO issues was when I use 100% OEM Glock parts, barrel, slide, and magazines. And I still had to hand fit the rails to the frame for proper slide to frame fit.

I don’t think it needs to be safe or go through a whole mag. If “a projectile” is expelled it could fall into this definition.

The term “Firearm” means:

1. Any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive;

Click to expand...

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/firear...rearms-ammunition-gun-control-act-definitions

There is also the matter of minutes it takes to build a firearm does an what is a “few” by law.

jmorris said:

I don’t think it needs to be safe or go through a whole mag. If “a projectile” is expelled it could fall into this definition.



https://www.atf.gov/firearms/firear...rearms-ammunition-gun-control-act-definitions

There is also the matter of minutes it takes to build a firearm does an what is a “few” by law.

Click to expand...

I know what the law states. And as the Buy Build Shoot kits ship, they do not meet the definition of a firearm.

I mean wow! Question, can I get a 80% build serialized? Will that make it legal now? Im asking here because this is the only place I have found that consistently provides accurate and good help.

Click to expand...

Back before I built my 50 BMG, I contacted the BATFE and asked if my intended build would be legal, just a regular guy like anyone else. The fellow sent me a book will all the specifics in it but the cliffs note version was that as long as it wasn’t a NFA item (to be built on a form 1) and it wasn’t being built with the intent to sell, it was OK under Federal law. I was on my own to find if it was Ok in my State, etc. It did not have to have a serial number or any other information on it. That was more than 20 years ago now.

While there is consistently good and accurate people aboard here, if it was my freedom on the line, I would seek opinions of those that would be going after me, if I crossed the lines they draw. Then ask for a written verification, if they tell me good news.



That last number in blue is who I would call on this one. Same area code and prefix as the NFA branch but their last 4 are 4500.

Everyone should be reminded that the "80%" frame that P80 submitted to ATF for a determination was a frame only.
Here is the ATF letter that Polymer80 has on their website:https://www.polymer80.com/CMS-Images/ATF-DetLetters.pdf

Yet when P80 started shipping these kits, the kit included the unfinished frame, parts, barrel, slide assembly and maybe most importantly......an assembly jig/template.



When someone submits a chunk of metal or plastic to ATF for a determination, ATF technicians look at how much time, labor and equipment would be needed to make a functional firearm from what was submitted. I have a pretty big hunch thats the issue........completing the frame as submitted vs the ease of completing a firearm with all the tools, jigs, drills and parts in one tidy package.

Could a complete slide be considered a weapon under subsection B, it techincally could fire a projectile?

Blackbeard 44 said:

Could a complete slide be considered a weapon under subsection B, it techincally could fire a projectile?

Click to expand...

Going by the technical definition then yes a complete Glock compatible slide can fire one round. It would basically be an expensive zip gun. You would have to hold the safety plunger pushed in and pull the striker back to release all while holding the slide. Not easy but can be done. I'm sure most if not all striker fired pistols would be the same.

Some of y'all act shocked by this. I have been seeing this coming since the first time I saw a build and shoot kit online. All these guys know they are playing with fire, dancing on the edge of legality. Polymer 80 knew it, the pistol brace guys knew it. When a bureaucracy can make up rules as they go along you have to know that you take a chance every time you try to find a work around for said rules. I hope those guys up at Black Aces Tactical making those shotguns with braces on them are paying attention, I predict they will be one of the next targets.

Frank Ettin said:

That is not a foregone conclusion. As reported in the Wall Street Journal article to which I previously linked, the ATF search warrant affidavit asserted that the kits:

​

.can be “assembled into fully functional firearms in a matter of minutes,” ....

Whether that's true or not would be a core issue to be decided in court if the ATF pursues this.

Click to expand...

How have the courts typically defined time constraints like "matter of minutes"? 4 hours is merely a matter of 240 minutes.

Read all of the threads and must say, describing serving a search warrant as a raid.... is a bit of a stretch...

No doubt it wasn't the high point of their day (the target...). I've participated in warrant service (both as an assisting officer/agency and with search warrants of my own... ) and unless you're met with resistance - or there's contraband on the scene that you will be arresting folks for -they're pretty quiet affairs actually... After service and searching - then will come the paperwork to the parties that got served listing what you've taken - then will come hours of work as you look through and document each little item seized... Not much excitement there either... and every bit of it will be carefully scrutinized if court actions follow.

I've also participated in heavily armed raids on drug type offenders - but that's a completely different proposition entirely (particularly when you might have to require a wrecker to come snatch down bars or doors...) just to get things started...Plenty of excitement there unfortunately... Don't miss that sort of stuff at all...

one of the youtube guys had a guy send him pictures of a forfeiture receipt the atf gave him when they came to his house and asked him about the poly80 kit he had... they said if he did not produce it they werecoming back with a warrant... he gave them the gun/kit I am not sure how if the frame or the parts are a "gun"and building a gun for personaluse is not against federal lawhow the atfcan do this?unless it shows that a felon bought such and ebven then technically not "law"but only opinion!

Everyone should be reminded that the "80%" frame that P80 submitted to ATF for a determination was a frame only.
Here is the ATF letter that Polymer80 has on their website:https://www.polymer80.com/CMS-Images/ATF-DetLetters.pdf

Yet when P80 started shipping these kits, the kit included the unfinished frame, parts, barrel, slide assembly and maybe most importantly......an assembly jig/template.

Click to expand...

If the frame in both instances was the same, what’s the problem? It’s not like they say materials must be sourced from different locations or vendors. Seems more like they are wanting to change interpretation and make what they once approved verboten, they have been known to do that too.

The word “readily” does not really have a time constraint of minutes, rather without much difficulty : easily. A multi axis CNC machine tooling and offsets already setup a receiver can be machined from billet or forging with the push of a button in a matter of minutes. If they took hours to complete Palmetto couldn’t sell them for <$30 and still make a profit.

jmorris said:

If the frame in both instances was the same, what’s the problem?

Click to expand...

Again, the ATF determination was on the frame only, not the complete kit. Thats a huge problem. Part of the process to determine if the item being submitted for determination is an "80%" is the time and difficulty to complete into a functional firearm. BTW "80%"........is not mentioned in federal law or ATF regulations. There is no fine line, it is purely ATF FATD technicians determining that the item is/is not a firearm.

It’s not like they say materials must be sourced from different locations or vendors. Seems more like they are wanting to change interpretation and make what they once approved verboten, they have been known to do that too.

Click to expand...

Try reading the determination letter and you'll get a feel for the narrowness of the determination.

The word “readily” does not really have a time constraint of minutes, rather without much difficulty : easily. A multi axis CNC machine tooling and offsets already setup a receiver can be machined from billet or forging with the push of a button in a matter of minutes. If they took hours to complete Palmetto couldn’t sell them for <$30 and still make a profit.

Click to expand...

Well, "readily" is/has been determined by the courts in cases involving NFA firearms:
Eight hours in a well equipped machine shop in US vs Smith https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7816160032134580662&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr
Two minutes in US vs Woodlan https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/527/608/309723/

There are other NFA court cases that refer to "readily" in regards to making a dewat/demilled firearm into a new firearm.


With NFA firearms, courts have identified several elements of restoration:
(1) time, how long it takes to restore the weapon
(2) ease, how difficult it is to restore the weapon
(3) expertise, what knowledge and skills are required to restore the weapon
(4) necessary equipment, what tools are required to restore the weapon
(5) availability, where additional parts are required, how easily they can be obtained
(6) expense, how much it costs to restore the weapon
(7) scope, the extent to which the weapon has been changed
(8) feasibility, whether the restoration would damage or destroy the weapon or cause it to malfunction

It's not that far of a leap from a deactivated/demilled NFA firearm being restored vs an "80%".

The US vs Smith case in interesting.

The barrel of the gun was welded closed at the breech and was also welded to the receiver on the outside under the handguard. Scroggie testified that there are two possible ways by which the firearm could be made to function as such. The most feasible method would be to cut the barrel off..

Click to expand...

Makes you wonder how they got to a welded or blind pinned attachment to a barrel, to make it 16” was OK, or any length barrel for that matter as all could be cut readily to make an illegal SBR.

FYI - https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/n...efore-selling-polymer80-buy-build-shoot-kits/

Retailers should consult with their attorney and/or contact ATF for guidance as to whether it may sell “Buy, Built and Shoot” kits and under what conditions. NSSF will continue to monitor this situation and report further as we learn more facts.

Click to expand...

GEM said:

FYI - https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/n...efore-selling-polymer80-buy-build-shoot-kits/

Click to expand...

Most companies that were putting together their own complete kits have stopped doing so. And those same companies are no longer sending the jig, rails, and drill bits with the frame even if you are only purchasing the frame instead of a kit. I know that MDX Arms and few others that were selling their kits now have statements on their websites now that the jig must be purchased separately from the frame and the frame separately from any "build kit"

I get the impression that it might be now or never on these 80% projects. Perhaps it is already never. The ATF has proven they can get lists of purchasers and go to people's homes to get them. At this point, why would anyone spend the money to buy the lower and the jig and the tooling knowing that, sooner or later, (and probably sooner) they're going to either have to serialize and register them or give them up? Why not just buy a stripped lower from an FFL at this point?

D.B. Cooper said:

At this point, why would anyone spend the money to buy the lower and the jig and the tooling knowing that, sooner or later, (and probably sooner) they're going to either have to serialize and register them or give them up? Why not just buy a stripped lower from an FFL at this point?

Click to expand...

Same reason they've ever bothered with them. To get a firearm without a paper trail. Now, obviously, if a person bought it online, with a credit card, they just defeated the whole purpose.....

I find it interesting that in the warrant that the “tested” competed kits were fired with a cartridge that had the bullet pulled and powder removed
By definition, it has to be able to shoot a projectile powered by gunpowder.
I am betting they were concerned the guns they built would not function.

bearcreek said:

Same reason they've ever bothered with them. To get a firearm without a paper trail. Now, obviously, if a person bought it online, with a credit card, they just defeated the whole purpose.....

Click to expand...

Burner cards can be used. Paid for cash locally and bought stuff online.

Where are the frames made and what level of machinery/injection molding equipment was needed to produce these items? If made offshore, or if they can be made in a garage somewhere, any hope of control seems futile. If anything was learned by previous "banned" stuff, I'll bet thousands (if not tens of thousands) have already been produced and are already in US.