BATFE: New Proposal: Permission to Construct a Weapon?

Federal Register ^ | May 28,2004 | Brenda E. Dyer, Dept. Clearance Officer, USDOJ

[Drammach]

Seems to me, this says that BATF wants to legislate the requirement that all personal or private gun assembly that they do not consider "sporting" purpose, falls under their jurisdiction, and permission must be given by BATF if you wish to build or assemble a private firearm.

[Drammach]

ping to list please..

[dasboot]

Wait till y' see the forms and red tape they have in mind for hand-loaders.

[flashbunny]

bump

[Drammach]

Used to be you could buy and assemble your own black powder pistol..
Sounds like this would outlaw such activities.. and more..

[dasboot]

Unnecessary bureaucrats inventing unnecessary regulations mired in incomprehensible language . Forget paperwork reduction: reduce the B'crats.

These Fed agencies are full of twisted persons. Their approach to regulatin' is comparable to an engraver's exactitude in crosshatching plates for printing currency. We need hard-to-forge currency...we sure don't need this:

5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: There will be an estimated 5 respondents, who will complete a written letter within approximately 30 minutes.

[risk]

History is over, so it's for the children.

[Joe Brower]

[Constitution Day]

FMCDH

[G-Bear]

I take this to mean they are talking about asking permission
to assemble a Class III device, a machinegun or sawed-off
shotgun. I would think this is a step up, as right now, you
can't build a prototype Class III firearm unless it is being
made specifically for the government. This would allow
experimenters to build new types of guns.

This would NOT apply to people building muzzleloaders or
modern guns, as they are already considered as having a
"sporting" purpose.

[ExSoldier]

A few years ago, my neighbor saw an ad in Shotgun News on how to assemble a .50 cal BMG rifle. All that was "required" was an old M2HB barrel and the plans for $400. Well, my very enterprising neighbor did some checking and found the average price for a completed 50 rifle was in the thousands of dollars! "So why don't WE form a company and DO this? Make some nice moolah? Hmmmmm?" I told him to look into those plans in a more indepth manner. That was before I started quoting the ATF regs. Those plans called for the internal parts of the weapon to be individually machined right down to the trigger. I wonder how many folks bought those plans for $400 a pop? Easier to publish the plans than to build the rifle!

[Mulder]

Thanks for the ping.

So where do I get my "permit" to go to church or read a book?

[BCR #226]

This is bad, very bad. We must stop this in it's tracks. The definition of sporting purpose or sporting arm has never been defined in law and the ATF has abused the term greatly.

This is a BS attempt to get an end around on the sunset of the AW ban. All the ATF needs to do is deny any requests to build a gun with a flash suppressor or other "evil" feature.

I suggest the following courses of action...

1. write letters to the head of the BATFE in complaint.
2. write your congressmen and senators.
3. get a congressman or senator to introduce a bill to eliminate the sporting purpose clause from the 1968 GCA and get a bill introduced to bar the ATF from blindly dictating vague policies that have no basis in law.

We have to jump on this right now. Unless you guys really don't mind being told that you can't put a flash hider on your post 94 gun when the ban sunsets...

Mike

[Manic_Episode]

A right does not require permission.

Is this the beginning of the end for spud guns too?

[gieriscm]

So... do we know what this means, exactly? Would we have to get "permission" from the BATFE to "assemble" an AR-10 or AR-15 from a stripped lower and a parts kit? What about to swap around uppers?

[Sender]

We ought to be able to build an NFA firearm right now, especially if we pass all the background checks. If we can legally buy a full auto for $5000 and up, then why can't we legally build one for $500?

[Dead Corpse]

Considering that the BATFE is a FEDERAL agency and the FEDERAL Constitution say quite clearly "shall not be infringed", you'd think the BATFE could just go F*CK OFF!!! And take their unConstitutional '34 NFA, '68 GCA, and the POS Brady Bill with them....

[GingisK]

This is bad, very bad.

Actually, it is "paperwork reduction". They are asking for requiring just a letter from the people who wish to assemble a weapon rather than the currently existing paperwork.

[BCR #226]

Um... one problem with that. There is no paperwork required presently unless the firearm falls under NFA restrictions. Heck, there is no requirement to notify the ATF at all if you want to build a title 1 firearm.

Mike

[BCR #226]

This does not relate to the NFA act (class 3) at all... This is ALL non-sporting purpose firearms as the ATF defines them... which can change at any time. Basically, if you can't import it, you won't be able to assemble one without their permission.

I hope that I'm wrong on this but I somehow doubt it.

Mike