This Ping List is for all things pertaining to infringes upon or victories for the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
Posted on 05/09/2021 6:39:55 PM PDT by Who is John Galt?
On May 7, 2021, the Attorney General signed ATF proposed rule 2021R-05, Definition of “Frame or Receiver” and Identification of Firearms. The goal of the proposed rule is to ensure the proper marking, recordkeeping, and traceability of all firearms manufactured, imported, acquired and disposed by federal firearms licensees.
Please note that this is the text of the proposed rule as signed by the Attorney General, but the official version of the proposed rule will be as it is published in the Federal Register.
Download the proposed rule (PDF, 1.3 MB)
Summary
This proposed rule would:
Provide new definitions of “firearm frame or receiver” and “frame or receiver”
Amend the definition of:
“firearm” to clarify when a firearm parts kit is considered a “firearm,” and
“gunsmith” to clarify the meaning of that term and to explain that gunsmiths may be licensed solely to mark firearms for unlicensed persons.
Provide definitions for:
“complete weapon,”
“complete muffler or silencer device,”
“privately made firearm (PMF),” and
“readily” for purposes of clarity given advancements in firearms technology.
Provide a definition of “importer’s or manufacturer’s serial number”
Provide a deadline for marking firearms manufactured.
Clarify marking requirements for firearm mufflers and silencers.
Amend the format for records of manufacture/acquisition and disposition by manufacturers and importers.
Amend the time period records must be retained at the licensed premises.
(Excerpt) Read more at atf.gov ...
My initial concerns with the proposed regulations include:
-Future firearms designs could have multiple components designated as "receivers" or "frames", each requiring transfer through an FFL. Picture a firearm where the upper receiver has a serial number, the lower receiver has a serial number, the fire control module (hammer/trigger/disconnector/sear assembly) has a serial number, and the bolt carrier assembly has a serial number. Want to upgrade your trigger, change calibers, or just replace worn/broken parts? The new components might have to go through an FFL, with associated transfer fees, background check fees, legal restrictions, etc.
-In addition, buried in the fine print is a provision eliminating the option for some FFLs to destroy records more than 20 years old - just another step towards a defacto national firearms registry.
-And obviously, say 'goodbye' to the entire 80% receiver/frame industry, and 'hello' to selective prosecution for possessing anything that Joe Biden's AFT claims can be "readily" converted into a firearms receiver, or any group of parts the AFT thinks is too close to a "complete weapon"...
I’ve fixed a lot of things based on help from people on online video. This includes my clothes dryer, air conditioner, car, shower tile, and myriad other items. I wish i could find a decent gunsmither on online videos to learn from.
They know that the retired atf agent who said currently over 60% of firearms do not fall under atf jurisdiction/firearm rules because of the definitions, is 100% correct.
This is their panicked attempt to stop that.
Weren’t these definitions given by the laws passed by congress? Why after more than half a century do they suddenly discover something new in the law? Firearms have not changed their basic design since the 1940’s, with many of the major inventions dating to the early 20th century.
I have not seen an analysis yet of the impact of on existing parts. If someone has one can you let us know.
It seems like if you have more than one part of a gun that has a serial number then what happens if you swap parts between guns?
Congress gives away the authority to actually make rulers to unelected bureaucrats.
Never mind 3D printing.
Chunk of aluminum = “ghost gun”
Ummm, no? Show me where polymer was used in a firearm as a major structural element in the 1940s?
Also, the upper/lower receiver concept wasn’t really around much prior to the 1950s, among other concepts.
The “official” serial number is the one on the receiver. The ones on parts are just for keeping gun parts together.
Swap parts?
That makes it a Trans Gun.
Perfectly fine now.
That's basically true, in terms of operating systems (blow back, recoil, gas, etc.), magazine design (single, multi column, helical, etc.), and general functionality. I've never seen it in print, but I always assumed the "split" (upper/lower) receiver design was intended to make military weapons easier to clean - it doesn't necessarily affect how they function. Materials have obviously changed (titanium, polymer, etc.) - and may continue to change in less obvious ways, at least for folks who build their own firearms at home. (Frankly, you could probably build a functional AR-type lower out of wood! ;>)
The final tyranny is fast underway for Amerika.
Soroznazi’s election theft operation in our White House is following his original German Nazi mentors (and communist dictatorships). Be prepared to defend yourself, family, friends, neighbors, community
That's the current situation - Biden's AFT is wanting to open the door to a single firearm having more than just one legal, officially-desgnated "receiver". And that might potentially bring legal restrictions, requiring any 'multiple receiver firearms' to have matching numbers on the receivers....
They actually mention some of that in the linked material at the web site. Worth reading...
The FN FAL was an upper/lower design that started development in the 1940s and the introduced in 1952. The Nazi StG 44 was introduced in 1943, an upper/lower design also.
The various gas designs are also old. The Automatgevär m/42 from Sweden was introduced in 1942 and has the same gas system as does the M16. So the way firearms operate is quite old technology.
Glock introduced polymer in the 1980’s, but an 80% receiver can be made of metal (probably the case for most).
So my question is the firearms law on the books is dated from 1968. So how are they finding anything new in the law that wasn’t there at the time the law was written? If there was completely new technology after 1968 another law would have to be passed by congress to address the issue.
All of this is moot. 2A shall never be infringed. They can regurgitate talking points and regulate to the moon and it means nothing. That’s simplistic but 2A is simple logic and the righteous fight.
This Ping List is for all things pertaining to infringes upon or victories for the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
The Righteous Fight!
.
Agreed.
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.