giggitygiggity
Member
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2009
- Messages
- 2,251
I recently had my trust, city, and state engraved on my AP5 in anticipation of SBRing it, pending form 1 approval. The shop engraved the rear section of the stock rail channel on the left side. The engraving ends approximately 1/4"-1/2" from the end cap.
My concern is whether I will need to be selective about what stock I choose. Has the placement of the engraving limited my options only to those stocks that do not cover the engraving?
-27 CFR 479.102 states that makers must identify firearms "By engraving, casting, stamping (impressing), or otherwise conspicuously placing or causing to be engraved, cast, stamped (impressed), or placed on the frame, receiver, or barrel thereof certain additional information. This information must be placed in a manner not susceptible of being readily obliterated, altered or removed. For firearms manufactured, imported, or made on and after January 30, 2002, the engraving, casting, or stamping (impressing) of this information must be to a minimum depth of .003 inch. The additional information includes [among other items, the maker's name, city, and state]."
-Furthermore, chapter 7 of the ATF NFA Handbook states that "Certain additional information must also be conspicuously placed on the frame, receiver, or barrel of the firearm by engraving, casting, stamping (impressing), that is, they must be placed in such a manner that they are wholly unobstructed from plain view."
In its current pistol configuration, nothing obstructs the engraving from plain view. However, it appears that certain stocks, including the soon-to-be-released Magpul MP5 stock would partially cover or obscure my engraving, even when the stock is fully extended.
This raises a few questions:
1. In 27 CFR 479.102, is "conspicuously" describing the engraving itself (basically, instructing to ensure that the engraving is readable) or is the term describing the placement of the engraving (instructing not to place somewhere that one would need to search for or disassemble the gun to find the engraving)?
2. What weight does the ATF NFA Handbook hold as even the preface admits "this publication is not a law book"?
3. Seeing how the stock rail channel is a popular engraving location on MP5-type firearms and collapsible stocks riding in the rail channel are popular, would users be in violation of 27 CFR 479.102 unless they ensured that the stock remained extended so as to ensure that the engraving within the channel is "wholly unobstructed from plain view"?
4. Because the 27 CFR 279.102 applies the same verbiage ("conspicuously") to serial numbers and other identifying information, does this mean that an owner of an NFA firearm must refrain from installing or using any accessory that prevents visibility of the model, caliber/gauge, serial number and other marking information? For instance, if one has a Rem870 SBS, is that user prevented from installing a side-saddle if it covers the serial number?
I would appreciate any input from our members who are attorneys to weigh in here. This topic seems to be discussed on other forums, but in an uncivilized manner that usually results in members haphazardly making assertions absent references to the law, ATF letters, or case law.
My concern is whether I will need to be selective about what stock I choose. Has the placement of the engraving limited my options only to those stocks that do not cover the engraving?
-27 CFR 479.102 states that makers must identify firearms "By engraving, casting, stamping (impressing), or otherwise conspicuously placing or causing to be engraved, cast, stamped (impressed), or placed on the frame, receiver, or barrel thereof certain additional information. This information must be placed in a manner not susceptible of being readily obliterated, altered or removed. For firearms manufactured, imported, or made on and after January 30, 2002, the engraving, casting, or stamping (impressing) of this information must be to a minimum depth of .003 inch. The additional information includes [among other items, the maker's name, city, and state]."
-Furthermore, chapter 7 of the ATF NFA Handbook states that "Certain additional information must also be conspicuously placed on the frame, receiver, or barrel of the firearm by engraving, casting, stamping (impressing), that is, they must be placed in such a manner that they are wholly unobstructed from plain view."
In its current pistol configuration, nothing obstructs the engraving from plain view. However, it appears that certain stocks, including the soon-to-be-released Magpul MP5 stock would partially cover or obscure my engraving, even when the stock is fully extended.
This raises a few questions:
1. In 27 CFR 479.102, is "conspicuously" describing the engraving itself (basically, instructing to ensure that the engraving is readable) or is the term describing the placement of the engraving (instructing not to place somewhere that one would need to search for or disassemble the gun to find the engraving)?
2. What weight does the ATF NFA Handbook hold as even the preface admits "this publication is not a law book"?
3. Seeing how the stock rail channel is a popular engraving location on MP5-type firearms and collapsible stocks riding in the rail channel are popular, would users be in violation of 27 CFR 479.102 unless they ensured that the stock remained extended so as to ensure that the engraving within the channel is "wholly unobstructed from plain view"?
4. Because the 27 CFR 279.102 applies the same verbiage ("conspicuously") to serial numbers and other identifying information, does this mean that an owner of an NFA firearm must refrain from installing or using any accessory that prevents visibility of the model, caliber/gauge, serial number and other marking information? For instance, if one has a Rem870 SBS, is that user prevented from installing a side-saddle if it covers the serial number?
I would appreciate any input from our members who are attorneys to weigh in here. This topic seems to be discussed on other forums, but in an uncivilized manner that usually results in members haphazardly making assertions absent references to the law, ATF letters, or case law.
Last edited:
