Posted on 12/10/2018 1:34:31 PM PST by old-ager
Discontinuance of Accessory Classifications Effective Immediately: The Firearms Technology Industry Services Branch (FTISB) classifies firearms as defined by the Gun Control Act (GCA) and National Firearms Act (NFA) based on the configuration and the design features of the firearm as submitted by members of the industry.
Effective immediately, any requests for a determination on how an accessory affects the classification of a firearm under the GCA or NFA must include a firearm with the accessory already installed. Except in cases of conditional import determinations, FTISB will not issue a determination on an accessory unless it is attached to the submitted firearm.
If you have previously submitted a sample accessory for classification, FTISB will be returning your sample without classification. FTISB will contact you in the near future with further instructions to facilitate the return of your sample.
I’m not sure it’s so far-fetched. From everything I’ve seen, the ATF has generally been pretty reasonable and practical in its legal interpretations in recent years, even during the Obama years. Do you think an activist ATF would ever have allowed 80% receivers and AR pistols in the first place?
They proposed the rule classifying bump stocks as “machine guns,” but only after the White House and the AG insisted they do so. We have Trump and Sessions to blame for that more than the ATF itself. They previously repeatedly told the Obama Administration that bump stocks were not machineguns and could not be regulated under the NFA.
Don’t get me wrong. I don’t think the ATF should exist at all, but I haven’t seen a lot of evidence that it is staffed with committed gun-grabbers in recent years.
Absolutely, NRA, Sessions and the president are to blame for this mess.
Couple of thoughts.
1. Strong case can be made that ATF never had any business evaluating accessories, because they are not firearms.
2. But now what will happen? There would seem to be two forces in play:
— without approval letters, vendors and purchasers could be afraid to buy something new
— but without disapproval letters on new designs, a lot more accessories might get purchased. If enough are purchased, there won’t be any option to ban.
So now, what if a NEW bumpstock design enters the market by some other name?
Yeah, that's the ticket...
“Effective immediately, any requests for a determination on how an accessory affects the classification of a firearm under the GCA or NFA must include a firearm with the accessory already installed.”
Oh, the unintended consequences.
Create new accessory of unknown classification.
Assemble for use.
Submit for classification.
BATFE classifies as NFA item.
BATFE presses charges for illegal manufacture of prohibited/illegal item.
Case appealed.
SCOTUS overturns NFA or 922(o).
Remember, NFA and 922(o) have no exemptions for “evaluation”. A non-FFL building interesting new things and wanting them categorized are subject to serious prosecution if not ruled “ok”. They decide you made a machinegun, you’re in jail for 10 years.
Bookmarking
How is any redneck supposed to interpret what that even says to do?
Why would we need all that crap on our muzzle loaders anyway?
Weve overwhelmed them.
Yep.
We need to keep it up.
L
Ruger,,,
Trend setters!
> not “designed” to be fired from the shoulder
according to their latest non-reversal reversal.
what a mess.
It means they will not tell you if something is legal or not on a general basis.
This falls right into the court case on regulatory discretion now before he Supreme Court.
That case may be one reason for this letter.
Sarah Sanders just announced at a White House press brieving that all bump stocks will have to be turned into the ATF.
https://6abc.com/trump-administration-issues-final-rule-banning-bump-stocks/4922904/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.