Here is the paragraph talking about requiring slides will need to be serialized.
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-10058/p-21
That's NOT what that paragraph is discussing.
Here is the full proposed rule change:
https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...me-or-receiver-and-identification-of-firearms
The ATF must have taken out the part about barrels needing to be serialized, or I over looked it myself. I do know in one draft, they did call for barrels to be serialized also.
They didn't take it out because it was never part of the proposed regulation.
ATF doesn't want to serialize every part......that will be a nightmare and they know it. Imagine a firearm trace that has a different serial# for the AR lower, the upper and barrel.
The impetus of this proposed regulation was another federal judge's opinion that an AR lower is not a firearm as defined in federal law and ATF regulations. This proposed regulation is to be more precise in defining what part of a firearm is required to have the serial number. The current definition is outdated.
The unenlightened cheered when this article appeared:
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/t...-15-lower-as-a-firearm-is-in-serious-trouble/ thinking "Ooooo...the ATF made a boo boo ha ha ha". Not realizing ATF was doing us a favor by only regulating the AR lower (or 1911 frame, a Glock frame or a Sig FCG).
Well, for the purposes of defining a firearm receiver, which would you rather have:
1. Only the AR lower receiver be considered the firearm receiver?
or
2. Both the AR lower AND upper receiver being considered the firearm receiver?
Me? I'll take #1.
Why didn't ATF's definition of "firearm receiver" keep up with technology? Who knows. It wasn't an issue until the last five years when an eagled eyed attorney bothered reading the definitions in federal law and ATF regulations.....that have been around since 1968. ATF could easily have decided in 1968 that both an AR upper and lower were regulated, but they didn't. Same with handgun slides and frames.
With several recent criminal cases hinging on whether an AR lower or Glock frame BY ITSELF constitutes a "firearm", it should have been expected that ATF would reexamine their definitions. And thats what this proposed regulation is intended to do.........define more precisely what part of a specific firearm is going to be considered the "firearm" and be the part that must bear certain required information.
It DOES NOT mean that every firearm barrel, slide, upper, lower, etc will be considered a "firearm" by itself. It means that ATF gets to determine exactly what part of an AR is the one part that must bear the manufacturer or makers name, serial#, etc.........just as they've been doing since 1968. Same for what part of a 1911 or Glock or Sig FCG,
Further, this proposed regulation DOES NOT requires "privately made" (homemade or ghost guns) to be marked. It's literally in the proposed definition of "Privately Made Firearm".
Only when such a firearm is transferred to an FFL would it be required to be marked......by the FFL.