Posted on 11/12/2010 6:31:08 AM PST by marktwain
Just in time for Christmas: ATF Deputy Director Kenneth Melson as the Grinch. "Idle bureaucrats are the devil's playthings."
So, the ATF doubles down on stupidity with this ruling from the Grinch. I can't wait to see the PR consequences of this one, and, better, what the GOP oversight committees dig out about the hows and whys of the agency covering for the oversteps of a moronic field supervisor. I love it. What I'd love even more is to watch while Melson takes his life in his own hands and actually SHOOTS one of these ATF-modified Airsofts while holding it. Odds of Melson becoming an ex-Grinch? Substantial, I should think.
Mike III
U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
Office of the Director Washington, DC 20226
18 U.S.C. 921(a)(3): DEFINITIONS (FIREARM) 27 CFR 478.11: DEFINITIONS (FIREARM FRAME OR RECEIVER)
Air gun (i.e., a gun that expels a projectile using compressed air, carbon dioxide, propane, or similar gas) replicas of AR/M-16 variant firearms that provide housing for a hammer and firing mechanism with substantially the same design as AR/M-16 variant firearm receivers, and mounting points for attaching an upper assembly containing a barrel and bolt, are "firearm frames or receivers," and are, therefore, "firearms," as that term is defined by 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(3)(B), and its implementing regulation, 27 CFR 478.11.
ATF Rul. 2010-4
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has received requests for evaluation and classification of air gun replicas of AR/M-16 variant firearms. Specifically, ATF was asked whether these air guns are considered "firearms" under Federal law.
The M-16 is a military style combat machinegun. The AR style firearm is a semi-automatic version of the M-16, and both are produced using a variety of model designations. ATF evaluated two air gun replicas of AR/M-16 variant firearms. These particular air guns are manufactured with non-ferrous metal and duplicate the appearance of various types of AR and M-16 rifles. They are designed to expel projectiles using compressed air, carbon dioxide, propane, or similar gas.
The first sample ATF examined was an air gun replica of an M-16 rifle that has the physical features of an M-16 firearm. It has all M-16 fire-control assembly pin holes formed or indexed for fire-control components (i.e., hammer, trigger, disconnector, selector lever, and machinegun sear). It utilizes fire-control components that differ only slightly in design from M-16 fire-control components. The receiver of this air gun is identical to an M-16 receiver, except for two features. The slot for the bolt-stop has been altered to make room for a proprietary bolt-stop by reducing the height of the wall separating the fire control cavity from the magazine well. Also, the ledge has been removed from the fire-control cavity upon which an M-16 machinegun sear would normally sit.
In conducting the evaluation of sample #1, the upper assembly was removed, the existing bolt-stop was removed to allow movement of the hammer, and an M-16 upper assembly was installed. A test fire was then performed with the original automatic fire sear, and the test demonstrated that the sample was capable of firing a conventional .223 caliber cartridge semi-automatically, expelling a projectile by the action of an explosive. The original automatic fire sear was then replaced with an M-16 machinegun sear. A second test firing was performed, and the test demonstrated that the sample was capable of firing semi-automatically, expelling a projectile by the action of an explosive. Sample #1 did not expel more than one projectile by a single function of the trigger and is not a "machinegun" as defined in 26 U.S.C. 5845(b).
The second sample ATF examined was an air gun replica of an M-16 rifle that has the physical features of an M-16 firearm. It has all M-16 fire-control assembly pin holes formed or indexed, and utilizes a proprietary drop-in fire-control mechanism that did not include an automatic-fire sear. The receiver of this air gun is identical to an M-16 receiver, except for two dimensions. The length between the takedown pins is approximately 1/8 longer than on an M-16 receiver, and the width of the fire-control cavity is approximately 0.31 greater than an M-16 receiver.
ATF conducted a test of this air gun. In conducting the evaluation of this sample, the upper assembly was removed, the proprietary drop-in fire-control mechanism was removed, the proprietary bolt-stop was removed, the indexed pin holes were drilled to allow installation of M-16 fire-control components, and an M-16 upper assembly was installed. A test fire was then performed, and the test demonstrated that the sample was capable of firing semi-automatically, expelling a projectile by the action of an explosive.
The Gun Control Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(3), and its implementing regulation, 27 CFR 478.11, define the term "firearm," in part, as "any weapon...including a starter gun...which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; (B) the frame or receiver of any such weapon..." Under 27 CFR 478.11, the term "firearm frame or receiver" is defined as "[t]hat part of a firearm which provides housing for the hammer, bolt or breechblock, and firing mechanism, and which is usually threaded at its forward portion to receive the barrel."
The air gun replicas of AR/M-16 variant firearms examined have the appearance, dimensions, and substantially the same design as AR/M-16 variant firearm receivers and completed weapons. The air gun replicas provide housing for a hammer and firing mechanism, and mounting points for attaching an upper assembly containing a barrel and bolt. Because the air gun replicas provide housing with substantially the same design as AR/M-16 variant firearm receivers, they incorporate firearm receivers. Moreover, though not necessary for classification, once the upper assemblies (and, in the second sample, fire-control components) were installed and test fired, they both expelled projectiles by the action of an explosive. Because the air gun replicas of the AR/M-16 variant firearms incorporate firearm receivers, they are "firearms," as defined by the Gun Control Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(3), and its implementing regulation, 27 CFR 478.11.
Held, air gun (i.e., a gun that expels a projectile using compressed air, carbon dioxide, propane, or similar gas) replicas of AR/M-16 variant firearms that provide housing for a hammer and firing mechanism with substantially the same design as AR/M-16 variant firearm receivers, and mounting points for attaching an upper assembly containing a barrel and bolt, are "firearm frames or receivers," and are, therefore, "firearms," as that term is defined by 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(3)(B), and its implementing regulation, 27 CFR 478.11.
To the extent this ruling is inconsistent with any prior classifications, they are hereby superseded.
Date approved: November 5, 2010
Kenneth E. Melson Deputy Director
Over at TheHighRoad, "Spec ops Grunt" from Broken Arrow, Oklahoma comments: "Idle bureaucrats are the devil's playthings."
Exactly.
Exactly and DHS and DEA and ...
Held, pelletgun, blowgun, spitball/straw (i.e., a gun that expels a projectile using compressed air, carbon dioxide, lung gases, propane, cow flatulence, or similar gas) replicas of Brazilian dart blowngun or NYC zipguns variant firearms that provide housing for lips and tongue firing mechanism with substantially the same design as Brazilian lethal dart blowgun receivers, and mounting points for attaching an upper assembly containing a long barrel and lip mounting, are “firearm frames or receivers,” and are, therefore, “firearms,” as that term is defined by 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(3)(B), and its implementing regulation, 27 CFR 478.11., unless excepted by authors of this ruling who are blowing hot air, which is in vast supply and thus need not be subject to the above regulations and penalties, unless accompanied by young topless Brazilian tribal jungle virgins bearing said firearms in search of tree monkeys.
Here’s the real deal:
The left has finally realized that MANY young men are getting “combat” experience with replica weapons that function nearly identically to the real firearm and excessories.
This scares them spitless. Imagine these young men with real weapons under the command of a retired officer, resisting domestic tyranny.
What exactly is the argument that leads to the conclusion they should be abolished?
Are you saying that the airguns cannot be easily converted into real handguns? Or that it shouldn’t matter if they can or not?
Because the 2nd argument seems to be one about the law, which is a congressional function. The 1st argument may be true — it is clear they were able to modify the guns to fire real bullets, but I can’t tell from the description if either gun conversions were trivial enough to fall under the applicable law.
If I had to judge from the description, I would say the 1st sounds like it could be easy, since it seemed to just involve a replacement part. The 2nd included drilling holes, and replacing multiple parts, and it seems that at some point you could convert anything into a gun, if you just kept replacing parts until it worked.
I had to ban a neighbor’s kid from bringing his airsoft gun into my house, because my he and my son used it for a parody suicide video (these are where one kid tries to kill themselves, but is so inept they end up killing their friend who is helping them).
We don’t have guns in our house, but I still thought my son was smart enough not to point a gun at his own head and pull the trigger, even though it was only an airsoft gun. But it sure looked like a real gun.
I would only disagree on the point that no federal LE should exist. Once a function goes to DC theres no longer any substantive control or oversight available to the electorate. At the state level the people can rein things in. THis means they’re mostly used as punishment/control tools of the pols furthering their agendas.
As for the airgun thing you must remember this is the ATF, home and champion of contorted rulings. Really the ATF is nothing more than a political tool to be used to control the people by making nasty work of them in a very public and painful way. See Waco for how they treat any attempt at pushing back. They have their idea of ‘justice’ and how it should be applied. A simple thing like the Constitution or the courts rarely stand in their way.
I had bought an airsoft gun (a Colt 1911 replica) a few years ago on a whim, and never really used it. It's just entirely too plastic for me to even enjoy.
The other night, a little bird flew in the front door. We had a great deal of frustrating fun trying to catch it, with various box and net contraptions, kids tripping all over each other, but no success. The sparrow was bouncing off of everything, and eventually ended up in a clerestory area about 25 feet high, well out of reach.
Well something had to be done. I whacked at it with a long stick but to no avail. One of my sons remembered the airsoft gun. Figuring that was more-or-less safe to fire in the house, out it came.
A couple of rounds from the airsoft and the bird was on the floor. I don't think it injured the bird, just knocked it down, and the cats took control of the situation at that point. I can't be sure of the pellet's damage.
That's the entirety of my airsoft experience. So far as any federal control of the things, that's ridiculous but not surprising. And I fear that it will take more than foam pellets to stop the monsters in DC.
Due to the outright false data in the ruling... well, it’s been officially recinded.
http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2010/11/oops-airsoft-diktat-officially.html
WACO should have provided all the evidence necessary to do just as you suggest, except the FBI was just as, if not more complicit in the deadly results. Oversight, oversight, oversight. Und Aufwiedersehen, NOT, to the BATFE. Any more additions to the letters and yew might as well add the whole alphabet, as that is where they are headed.
Jobless is where they should be rather than daily dreaming up new work for their anti constitutional agenda.
PS, Auf Wiedersehen may not sound right, but it isn’t just goodby, more literally it is till we meet again. that is why the NOT.
WACO should have provided all the evidence necessary to do just as you suggest, except the FBI was just as, if not more complicit in the deadly results. Oversight, oversight, oversight. Und Aufwiedersehen, NOT, to the BATFE. Any more additions to the letters and yew might as well add the whole alphabet, as that is where they are headed.
Jobless is where they should be rather than daily dreaming up new work for their anti constitutional agenda.
PS, Auf Wiedersehen may not sound right, but it isn’t just goodby, more literally it is till we meet again. that is why the NOT.
Bastards A-holes Tyrants and Fornicators (BATF)
My cat was a definite plus in a couple of bats-in-the-house situations. Cats are a much better force than the ATF.
Man, I have his intel is correct on that one. The crap some folks in the FedGov will do to push another idiotic control needs to be severely slapped down.
Funny how they rolled “compressed air” into that one, when the internals of a compressed air airsoft gun aren’t one bit related to the internals of a gas or CO2 airsoft gun. Mine is an all-electric M4A1 that shoots at a mere fraction of the joules and FPS of a real gun, and would fore sure blow to smithereens if it was modified to fire a real explosive bullet.
It’s more about what a previous poster said, kids getting tactical experience. I don’t see them going after paintball guns like this. Perhaps it’s because paintball is more “motocross flashy” and airsoft is more tactical mil-sim.
Are you saying that the airguns cannot be easily converted into real handguns? Or that it shouldn’t matter if they can or not?
The author of the article states: "What I'd love even more is to watch while Melson takes his life in his own hands and actually SHOOTS one of these ATF-modified Airsofts while holding it. Odds of Melson becoming an ex-Grinch? Substantial, I should think." (emphasis mine)
To put it more bluntly, assuming one could actually make these modifications (dubious at best), the actual firing of said modified airsoft gun would instantly send the shooter into Eternity. For an agency with oversight over firearms, they display a shocking lack of firearm knowledge. Anyone buying that such modifications are possible are equally ignorant of firearms, although their ignorance is not likely to lead to my incarceration.
Some truth to this
My son, a former 0311 (Grunt, one each) ‘plays’ on an airsoft team - 2 0311s, several 11Bs and a couple of NG guys whith UNK MOS.
They seem to ‘win’ a lot.
BTW, all are Iraq combat vets with multiple tours. Son tells me he enjoys the exercise and friendship with the team.
I understand this is not uncomon in other areas of the US.
A good half of our team has combat experience. We’ve competed with Phx SWAT and USAF groups out of Luke and Davis-Monthan. Airsoft has a large veteran gathering nationwide and is tactical in nature... which is why I’m really not that surprised to see it treated like militia.
According to the article, the ATF actually MADE the modifications and SHOT the weapons. Are we saying they are lying about doing that? Or am I missing something here?
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.