From the article posted by Oily Pablo said:
It seems that a number of people are annoyed that the answer I got doesn’t match their preconceived notions and goes against their own readings of the law, and as a result are starting to attack me personally over this article. Here’s the thing: I can only report the truth. This is exactly what the ATF told me. As always, I am not a lawyer and this does not constitute legal advice, so if you are concerned feel free to contact one before taking any actions.
Okay, cool. Well, I
am a lawyer. You
do need to engrave your SBR lower.
As we're all well aware by now, calling the ATF and asking them something will get you a bunch of different answers. We don't have a transcript of what the article's writer asked the ATF, or their answer. Too often, people ask the ATF the wrong question, or word it wrong, and then misunderstand the answer.
For instance:
You: "Hey, do I need to engrave a new serial number on an SBR when I make it from an existing lower?"
ATF: "No."
You: "Sweet. Hey guys! The ATF says you don't need to engrave your SBR lower."
Except that's not true. The law, as written, is exceptionally clear. You are not a "manufacturer" or a "remanufacturer" (as the article says). You're a "maker." And makers do have to mark their NFA firearms. You don't need to add a caliber or serial number if they already exist, but since you're not Smith & Wesson, you do need to add YOUR name (or trust name), city and state.
That's it. That's the answer. Simple.
I have no doubt that the article writer was told something else. Either he was told wrong by an ATF agent who doesn't know the law, or he misunderstood their response, or they misunderstood his question.
If you write to the tech branch and ask the correctly worded question, they will unequivocally tell you that you need to mark your NFA item, even if it's an already-manufactured lower, with your name, city and state as the maker.
I'm a lawyer. And that's my legal opinion based on my knowledge of the law.
Aaron
