And that would still be legal under the proposed rule change. They made an exception for firearms made prior to 1968. The rule concerns PMF's such as 80% AR's and P80 frames.
FYSA-SCOTUS hears oral arguments on ATF rule change on "ghost guns"
- Thread starter hso
- Start date
WestKentucky
Member
I have questions where I feel certain that answers don’t yet exist. If I as an individual now have to document and register homemade firearms then who gets to pick the SN? Can I just engrave my initials and start counting? Is my right to bear being notably infringed because I can’t build my modern rolling block until some defunded government entity approves it months or years later? Where are we headed? What’s the skinny on what the new normal is gonna be?
Also…
It seems dumb, arbitrary, and idiotic to change the rules so late in the game. Maybe enforcing the existing laws would make sense here…unlicensed dealer, felon in possession, unlicensed gunsmith, destruction of serial number, unlicensed manufacturer, unauthorized creation of NFA items… seems like those pretty well cover the majority of this unless it’s more about control and disarmament than it is about fighting crime.
But then again a quick look at how criminals are treated tells a lot. A friend of mine had some stuff stolen. It popped up for sale 20 miles away 2 days later. Cops got the guy and all the evidence they needed for multiple felonies, but he was ROR after giving his rehearsed lie of a statement that will never be questioned. 15 grand motorcycle totaled in damage done in 2 days… his insurance has to eat it and then he gets cancelled or rates quadrupled. Doesn’t seem like our elected officials care about punishing criminals so maybe it is about control and disarmament of the populace. Truly sad situation.
WestKentucky
Member
Also… this seems like it’s intentionally hard to follow.
Per the proposed rule change, individuals are not required to put serial numbers on their personally built firearms. The serial number requirement is only for manufacturers of 80% kits and FFL holders. There are requirements for serial numbers that manufacturers and FFL's must follow.
Now if you want to put a serial number on a PMF yourself, then you can just make one up. But it is not required that individuals put a serial number on their PMF's
all the information about serial numbers is in the proposed rule change.
Phaedrus/69
Member
The funny thing is that the older members of this forum grew up in a time when guns usually didn't even have serial numbers!
I would not say usually. A lot of guns had serial numbers long before they were required by law.
Phaedrus/69
Member
Yeah, a lot of them did but not all of them. I don't think it was a real big deal to folks back then but I guess it is now.
What is even the point of SN’s? I know what the anti’s SAY the point is, but if criminals get their guns illegally anyway, all it does is get the police to scrutinize the original purchaser. It’s just a way for the .gov to be able to keep track of who owns guns.
Almost everything these days has a serial number.
armoredman
Member
What is an unlicensed gunsmith? I have a buddy who works on firearms as a hobby, one of the best old school gunsmiths I've ever seen. Why does he need government permission to continue his hobby? Unlicensed dealer is a backdoor the government is already pursuing, trying to do the Universal Background Checks, AKA universal registration, so private sales are illegal. I have done private sales my entire life - heck, I've GIVEN guns away in the past. As long as I meet state law, (which states if the buyer is a prohibited possessor, it is on ME), then I should be left alone.
Unlicensed manufacturer - goes right back to the argument the government is using, "nobody should make guns without our permission". If you are making guns to supply gangbangers, then you go down for selling to prohibited persons and don't let the damn attorney's plead it away! Most gun charges are pled away WAY before they get to sentencing. Refer to Project Exile to see how it works when properly used. But, I digress - if you are making guns for yourself, no permission slip needed. I honestly believe if you are making guns for family and friends, NO LICENSE SHOULD BE NEEDED. That IS how this country started, and would the requirement to be licensed as a manufacturer stand up to the Bruen test? Probably not, I don't know - was Colt "licensed" by the government when they were making 1860s for the Civil War? I honestly don't know.
Unauthorized creation of NFA - OK, pie in the sky time, I think that should be at the same level of any other firearm or firearm device. That's how innovation was done over the centuries, maybe there is a kid out there who has a mechanical knack and a great design in his head for the next machinegun or better suppressor...but he doesn't want to go to prison for experimenting, so off to Deisel Mechanic school he goes. OK, extreme example, but NFA was the first gun control law in direct violation of the 2A and should be struck down in it's entirety, but reality says THAT ain't likely to happen while I am still alive. Other than those points I largely agree with your position.
armoredman
Member
Required after the 1968 Gun Control Act. Prior to that it was not required, but a very common practice.
WestKentucky
Member
Professional gunsmiths are required to have a license. If some gang banger is working on guns as his role in the gang, and getting his cut of whatever they bring in then that is a business in its own way. He would be compensated for his work involving firearms so, license required. Would likely coincide with the no-stamp NFA items so there would be at least 2 charges for the same action. But back to the point of that, it gets pled away for absolutely nothing so quickly that it’s a joke.
AlexanderA
Member
The key word here is "kit." As I understand it (I could be wrong), the requirement is for "80%" receivers that are sold with jigs and/or the other parts that are required to complete the gun. So, a bare "80%" receiver flies under the radar. If this interpretation is correct, this is entirely toothless. What's the purpose, then? It's to establish a precedent.
General Geoff
Member
The idealist answer is that they are useful for establishing trends in criminal gun acquisition, i.e. where they are coming from statistically, in an effort to better cut off the more common supply vectors.
The cynical answer is of course back door registration.
And there's not a whole lot of space between those answers from a practical perspective
I would have to reread the rule on that. I do know that Polymer 80 came out with what they called their 76% frame that required more material to be removed to get around the rule change. Right before P80 came out with their 76% frame, they did stop shipping jigs with their frames. I never bought a 76% frame so can't say if they came with the jig or not. It is a moot point at this time at least with Polymer 80 pistol and AR frames as they are not in business anymore.
AR lowers are a bit different since about the only thing already machined out is the magwell since that has to be broached or wire cut. Everything else has to be finished by the end user.
AlexanderA
Member
I believe that, originally, ATF gave manufacturers the choice of which one of three areas not to complete and still come under the "incomplete"classification: the mag well, the firing control cavity, or the buffer tube hole and threading. The industry universally picked the firing control cavity because it was thought that would be the easiest to complete in the home workshop.
The ATF regs don't actually spell out a percentage (which would be meaningless anyway). "80%" is just a marketing yardstick by the industry. Changing "80%" to "76%", "50%", etc. is just silly.
This is true that the percentage is only used by manufacturers. What it boiled down to was how much material needs to be removed, holes drilled, steps taken to complete, etc. Going from 80% complete to 76% complete did work to keep the ATF off of Polymer 80's backs. Polymer 80 did go back to selling 80% frames once the injunction were in place. The main reason Polymer 80 closed is due to all of the lawsuits against them.
Yes that is why the fire control cavity was chosen. Most people won't have the capabilities to broach even a gear keyway, let alone broach a magazine well at home. Heck most machine shops now days don't even have broaching machines anymore. Broaching machines are a thing of the past outside of specialty shops.
lysanderxiii
Member
According to the law, a "gunsmith" that requires a license is anyone that is in the business of repairing firearms. "In the business" is generally considered to be defined as a deriving substantial portion of their income from that activity.
Incidentally, a gunsmith requires the same license as a dealer.
armoredman
Member
Seems fair - I just refer to a few fellows I know who do gunsmithing as a hobby, usually only on black powder firearms so no need to maintain a bound book, IIRC.
That is not correct. "Engaged in the business" is defined in the law, and the what you said is "generally considered," to be the definition is incorrect.
From 18USC921(a)(21):
". . . a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to engaging in such activity as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit . . ."
Also, from 18USC921(a)(23):
"The term “with the principal objective of livelihood and profit” means that the intent underlying the sale or disposition of firearms is predominantly one of obtaining livelihood and pecuniary gain, as opposed to other intents, such as improving or liquidating a personal firearms collection . . ."
The law does not require that dealer derive a "substantial portion of their income from that activity," or even to actually derive any profit. The law only states that the intent of the activity must be "predominantly one of obtaining livelihood and pecuniary gain."
Just because someone has just started a business, and has not yet turned a profit, or is just bad at business, and is unable to turn a profit, they can still be engaged in the business if that is their intent. That can be true even if they have other income sources.
Incidentally, according to the law, a gunsmith is a "dealer," as defined in 18USC921(a)(11):
"The term “dealer” means (A) any person engaged in the business of selling firearms at wholesale or retail, (B) any person engaged in the business of repairing firearms or of making or fitting special barrels, stocks, or trigger mechanisms to firearms, or (C) any person who is a pawnbroker. The term “licensed dealer” means any dealer who is licensed under the provisions of this chapter." (emphasis added)
Last edited:
AlexanderA
Member
Paranoia. Some people would go to great lengths to avoid having anything on the record.
(And that's the generally law-abiding ones. Others would want untraceable guns with the actual intent of using them in crime.)
(And that's the generally law-abiding ones. Others would want untraceable guns with the actual intent of using them in crime.)
Elkins45
Member
I built one for two reasons. One was boredom during the lockdowns and the other was because Polymer80 was at the time closing out their compact longslide frames. This was the equivalent of chopping a Glock 17/22 to take 19/23 magazines but without the chopping. I think the frame kit was $80, then I paid another $50 for a genuine Glock lower parts kit and I bought a used complete slide and barrel assembly on eBay for somewhere around $200 IIRC. So let’s call it about $350 by the time you include shipping and taxes.
I took my time and made sure the holes were drilled straight and the removable bits were removed correctly. The end result is a gun in a configuration I wanted that is 100% functional. An added factor that could be considered as a plus or minus depending on circumstances is that I have a pseudo-Glock with no serial number. It’s a plus in that there’s no official government record that connects me to this gun in case of forced confiscations and a minus in that it would be hard for me to prove it were my gun should it be stolen and then recovered.
For this particular gun I used a real Glock slide/barrel so they have actual serial numbers that are tied to a 4473 somewhere, but I have no idea where the eBay seller acquired it and if it could be connected to me through him. The frame seller is out of business now and even if their sales record of our transaction could be recovered and obtained through subpoena it would be questionable if this particular otherwise unidentifiable frame could be definitively connected to me in a way that would pass judicial muster.
I took my time and made sure the holes were drilled straight and the removable bits were removed correctly. The end result is a gun in a configuration I wanted that is 100% functional. An added factor that could be considered as a plus or minus depending on circumstances is that I have a pseudo-Glock with no serial number. It’s a plus in that there’s no official government record that connects me to this gun in case of forced confiscations and a minus in that it would be hard for me to prove it were my gun should it be stolen and then recovered.
For this particular gun I used a real Glock slide/barrel so they have actual serial numbers that are tied to a 4473 somewhere, but I have no idea where the eBay seller acquired it and if it could be connected to me through him. The frame seller is out of business now and even if their sales record of our transaction could be recovered and obtained through subpoena it would be questionable if this particular otherwise unidentifiable frame could be definitively connected to me in a way that would pass judicial muster.
ColoradoMinuteMan
Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2015
- Messages
- 725
This is not a financial discussion or even a discussion about how good they are compared to other guns. This is a question of whether or not the government should be regulating a partially complete object that can be completed to make a finished firearm.
Similar threads
