• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

ATF To Rewrite The Definition Of A Lower Receiver: Lower Receivers Are Not Firearms

Sounds like a win since rather than codifying the definition through the legislative process, they can choose whatever arbitrary definition suits their fancy. So, a block of aluminum, say about 1 cubic foot in dimension is not a firearm, but a block of aluminum cut to the rough dimensions of an AR-15 is a firearm?

If someone sells a 3D printer, along with media, control software, and a definition file for an AR-15 then they would be a firearms manufacturer?
 
when everyone's an FFL, no one is?

hell, if your friendly, neighborhood hardware store has to get an FFL for plumbing supplies, they might as well start carrying ammo, etc. again. Especially in MA and NYC, where they have to be licensed to sell pepper spray...
 
I'm surprised they didn't just go Barrel == serial number. I hope they never do, but to me, that's the only thing in common on any modern firearms platform. The barrel is the beans.

Everything else is window dressing or implementation detail.
 
jpk said:
No, they can do this through proposed rule change

There are a number of issues.....couple of big ones below that are arbitrary and non specific





According to whats in the proposed rule change, a P80, lower casting and even a block of aluminum could arguably be required to be serialized

This doesnt solve issues.....it creates huge numbers of new problems and situations where failure to provide quantifiable info/guidance will lead to criminalization of millions of citizens
Click to expand...
Yup. I see it as them finding another way to get their foot in our door in anywhere they already have not. Charges can be created prima facie.
 
I saw this over on GunBoards and thought I would share it here. It’s 107 pages so I just posted the summary and the link.

Bob


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
27 CFR Parts 478 and 479
Docket No. ATF 2021R-05; AG Order No. -
RIN 1140-AA54

Definition of “Frame or Receiver” and Identification of Firearms
AGENCY: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, Department of Justice.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; request for comment.

SUMMARY: The Department of Justice (“Department”) proposes amending Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (“ATF”) regulations to provide new regulatory definitions of “firearm frame or receiver” and “frame or receiver” because the prior regulations failed to capture the full meaning of those terms. The Department also proposes amending ATF’s definitions of “firearm” and “gunsmith” to clarify the meaning of those terms, and to provide definitions of terms such as “complete weapon,” “complete muffler or silencer device,” “privately made firearm,” and “readily” for purposes of clarity given advancements in firearms technology. Further, the Department proposes amendments to ATF’s regulations on marking and recordkeeping that are necessary to implement these new or amended definitions.
DATES: Written comments must be postmarked and electronic comments must be submitted on or before [INSERT DATE 90 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION

Definition of Firearm “Frame or Receiver” and Identification of Firearms - NPRM Draft Predecisional/Deliberative- For Internal Review Only and Not for Public Distribution
IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. Commenters should be aware that the electronic Federal Docket Management System will not accept comments after Midnight Eastern Time on the last day of the comment period.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number ATF 2021R- 05, by any of the following methods—
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Andrew Lange, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, 99 New York Ave. NE, Mail Stop 6N-518, Washington DC 20226; ATTN: ATF 2021R-05.
• Fax: (202) 648-9741.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number (ATF 2021R-05) for this notice of proposed rulemaking. All properly completed comments received will be posted without change to the Federal eRulemaking portal, www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the “Public Participation” heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INOFRMATION section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Lange, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice, 99 New York Ave. NE, Mail Stop 6N-518, Washington DC 20226; telephone: (202) 648-7070 (this is not a toll-free number).

https://thereload.com/app/uploads/2...ame-or-Receiver.NPRM_.Clean-Draft-OGC-HQS.pdf
 
There wouldn’t be any confusion or different interpretations if the ATF only operated under lawful constitutional directives. And since there is not only no constitutional authority for the federal government to regulate firearms but in fact constitutional prohibitions against doing so, that would be them having the ability to do nothing whatsoever. Problem solved.

If they have any claim to authority regarding the regulation of firearms it would be exclusively related to commerce. The manufacturer and commercial sale. Actual possession and carry is beyond that scope.

But I digress. Nothing I said matters. They have illegal but unfettered power and will continue to do whatever they want at the expense of the law (Constitution) and our liberties.
 
My quick read was that they are clarifying the definition of frame, and as part of that clarification explicitly stating for an AR type the the lower is the frame:

(v) AR-15-type, and Beretta AR-70-type firearms: the lower part of the weapon that provides housing for the trigger mechanism and hammer.
Click to expand...

So it looks like they are leaving uppers alone.

They are also defining what “readily" means in the statement “may readily be completed, assembled, converted, or restored to a functional state” in regards to 80% lowers. The new definition really doesn’t make it any clearer, just leaves most of the decisions to the Director:

Readily. A process that is fairly or reasonably efficient, quick, and easy, but not necessarily the most efficient, speedy, or easy process. Factors relevant in making this determination, with no single one controlling, include the following:
(a) Time, i.e., how long it takes to finish the process;
(b) Ease, i.e., how difficult it is to do so;
(c) Expertise, i.e., what knowledge and skills are required;
(d) Equipment, i.e., what tools are required;
(e) Availability, i.e., whether additional parts are required, and how easily they can be obtained;
(f) Expense, i.e., how much it costs;
(g) Scope, i.e., the extent to which the subject of the process must be changed to finish it; and
(h) Feasibility, i.e., whether the process would damage or destroy the subject of the process, or cause it to malfunction.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
cathouse01 said:
They are also defining what “readily" means in the statement “may readily be completed, assembled, converted, or restored to a functional state” in regards to 80% lowers. The new definition really doesn’t make it any clearer, just leaves most of the decisions to the Director:
Click to expand...

That’s like being asked the following “question”.

True or False. This can or cannot be readily completed.
 
cathouse01 said:
My quick read was that they are clarifying the definition of frame, and as part of that clarification explicitly stating for an AR type the the lower is the frame:



So it looks like they are leaving uppers alone.

They are also defining what “readily" means in the statement “may readily be completed, assembled, converted, or restored to a functional state” in regards to 80% lowers. The new definition really doesn’t make it any clearer, just leaves most of the decisions to the Director:
Click to expand...

Who appoints the director?
 
New and updated document
www.federalregister.gov

Definition of “Frame or Receiver” and Identification of Firearms

The Department of Justice (``Department'') proposes amending Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (``ATF'') regulations to provide new regulatory definitions of ``firearm frame or receiver'' and ``frame or receiver'' because the current regulations fail to capture the full meaning...
www.federalregister.gov www.federalregister.gov
 

Similar threads

ATF new report shows FFLs are not the problem
2
Replies
47
Views
1K
SkilledSovereignty
S
ATF Receiver Rule - FPC Granted Cert
Replies
9
Views
481
pastera
pastera
Are lower 80% prohibited in MA...yet?
2
Replies
34
Views
1K
EJFudd
EJFudd
Interesting Article on the "Notching" of Firearms to Keep Track of "Kills"
Replies
8
Views
363
clampett
clampett
Antique lower?
Replies
15
Views
510
MisterHappy
MisterHappy
Back
Top Bottom