First ATF ruling of 2015

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • johnb007

    Active Member
    Jul 6, 2011
    317
    Desktop CNC machines have dropped in price. Time to order one.
     

    antco

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 28, 2010
    7,045
    Calvert, MD
    Good thing I brought home my very own Bridgeport two months ago

    4CBAAAF9-D878-4EF1-A568-853FC90388AC_zpsbvlxszdm.jpg
     

    EL1227

    R.I.P.
    Patriot Picket
    Nov 14, 2010
    20,274
    Should have been prefaced with INAL ...

    The ruling is pretty clear about "business, society, or association." That said, a group of unaffiliated/unincorporated INDIVIDUALS can still meet-up and have a build party.

    What we need is some smart ass to use his local civic center for a build party. Maybe a National Guard armory?

    This leads me to a legal question. Say a military organization sets up a unit fund per (for the Army) AR 600-29 and AR 215-1 and as part of the MWR activity buys build equipment and sponsors a build party. Or, uses an MWR machine shop for the same purpose. What rules apply? Is a military organization exempt ATF manufacturing rules in this case?

    Even if it were their EXACT intent, what would happen if some agressive DA looking to raise his profile co-opted with an equally agressive ATF agent, who then overlooked the ruling 'intent' and prosecuted the 'build party' attendees. How many of us has the monetary where-with-all to defend ourselves, no matter how innocent we believe ourselves to be ?

    This is why we CAN'T let this ruling stand undefined. Low hanging fruit tenents apply ...
     

    Inigoes

    Head'n for the hills
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 21, 2008
    49,365
    SoMD / West PA
    Furthermore, if I rent a drill press from Home Depot's tool rental department to drill holes in a lower, does that make Home Depot guilty of profiting from firearm manufacturing? This letter is on a very slippery slope.

    Only if you use the drill press on Home Depot property.

    Once you take the drill press home, the BATFE ruling does not apply.
     

    WeaponsCollector

    EXTREME GUN OWNER
    Mar 30, 2009
    12,120
    Southern MD
    "Nothing is more destructive of respect for the government and the law of the land than passing laws[and making rulings] which cannot be enforced."
    - Albert Einstein, My First Impression of the U.S.A., 1921
     

    outrider58

    Eats Bacon Raw
    MDS Supporter
    Jul 29, 2014
    49,818
    Even if it were their EXACT intent, what would happen if some agressive DA looking to raise his profile co-opted with an equally agressive ATF agent, who then overlooked the ruling 'intent' and prosecuted the 'build party' attendees. How many of us has the monetary where-with-all to defend ourselves, no matter how innocent we believe ourselves to be ?

    This is why we CAN'T let this ruling stand undefined. Low hanging fruit tenents apply ...

    So true. There seems to be a lot of ambiguity/wiggle room [intentionally] built into this (edict). It wouldn't take much for a couple like-minded water walkers to conspire and run amok. This thing needs a lot more clarification.:tdown:
     

    EL1227

    R.I.P.
    Patriot Picket
    Nov 14, 2010
    20,274
    But with a twist ...

    "Nothing is more destructive of respect for the government and the law of the land than passing laws[and making rulings] which cannot be enforced."
    - Albert Einstein, My First Impression of the U.S.A., 1921


    I've come to believe that unenforceable laws are often followed up with a plan that finds the path of least resistance. E.g. - go after the unintended; the law-abiding citizen who just so happened to be in the wrong place, at the wrong time, and of the wrong political persuasion. I call it the 'low-hanging fruit' method of enforcement. Eager to point to an early success, those in power push law enforcement results they know their law lacked to start with.

    Feel-good, but do-nothing political pontifications have dire results when good people are caught up in the 'fine print' ... or when the laws were written specifically to cast an entangled web of tyranny.
     

    iH8DemLibz

    When All Else Fails.
    Apr 1, 2013
    25,396
    Libtardistan
    I think this has less to do with keeping folks from building guns than it does with the government collecting money owed to them from the building of guns.

    If I'm not mistaken, a licensed FFL/Gunsmith has to pay a fee/tax to the ATF/Government after a certain amount of guns have been worked on/manufactured based on a set dollar figure.

    In the eyes of the ATF, almost anything done to a gun by a licensed FFL/Gunsmith is considered gunsmithing/manufacturing. Outright repair is not taxable. Customizing, in almost any form, is taxable.

    Also, the way the law is written means something. They say (including frames and receivers). In my opinion, it means any type of gun work. Could be trigger installation, barrel installation, stock installation, etc...

    The ATF doesn't want non-FFL businesses doing this because there is no trace of the work being done. Hence the ATF/Government can't get their piece of the pie.

    I also think dropping a bunch of parts off to your buddy so he can build a gun from parts would be considered manufacturing. Not sure I'd want to be the test case.

    Seems like an individual can still do what he wants on the kitchen table in his own home. Including 80 percent receivers. Maybe on the DL this time. All the open talk about 80s and sticking it to the Man was bound to catch up with folks sooner or later.


    I invite correction to this post by those in the know.
     

    Armati

    Banned
    BANNED!!!
    Apr 6, 2013
    1,902
    Baltimore
    Even if it were their EXACT intent, what would happen if some agressive DA looking to raise his profile co-opted with an equally agressive ATF agent, who then overlooked the ruling 'intent' and prosecuted the 'build party' attendees. How many of us has the monetary where-with-all to defend ourselves, no matter how innocent we believe ourselves to be ?

    Agreed. This has been Fed MO for some time. Most people cannot afford to fight the Feds nearly unlimited resources. People give in simply because they don't have the time, money, or energy to put up a fight.

    Imagine my shock and horror when I found out my land in WV had an EPA declared "wetland" on it?
     

    kalister1

    R.I.P.
    May 16, 2008
    4,814
    Pasadena Maryland
    Quoted from the linked article in the OP

    The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has received inquiries from the public asking whether Federal Firearms Licensees (FFL), or unlicensed machine shops, may engage in the business of completing, or assisting in the completion of, the manufacture of firearm frames or receivers for unlicensed individuals without being licensed as a manufacturer of firearms.

    Bolded part is mine. People keep asking for answers, now they have them. Don't ask questions if you already know the answer.

    The law is clear:

    Also quoted from the article:

    Any person (including any corporation or other legal entity) engaged in the business of performing machining, molding, casting, forging, printing (additive manufacturing) or other manufacturing process to create a firearm frame or receiver, or to make a frame or receiver suitable for use as part of a “weapon … which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive,” i.e., a “firearm,” must be licensed as a manufacturer under the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA);

    When enough people ask about 80% lowers, we will get another answer nobody wants to hear. IE: Dear ATF Please define READILY.
     

    Lou45

    R.I.P.
    Jun 29, 2010
    12,048
    Carroll County
    No more borrowing Billy Bob's lathe and mill.

    The way it's written, it could mean lending someone your AR15 tool box so they can complete their rifle from parts.

    Now what does "Machinery or Equipment" mean? Exactly! Floor mounted? Electrically powered? Hand tools?

    THIS ^^^^.

    There go the 'build parties'

    After reading the entire letter, it seems this is directed to a Bussiness, not an individual. I see nothing in the letter that says an individual cannot lend another individual tools, or, assist that individual.

    Also stated the word "person".

    Furthermore, if I rent a drill press from Home Depot's tool rental department to drill holes in a lower, does that make Home Depot guilty of profiting from firearm manufacturing? This letter is on a very slippery slope.

    I'd say as long as they don't have any knowledge of it, they're not responsible.

    Only if you use the drill press on Home Depot property.

    Once you take the drill press home, the BATFE ruling does not apply.

    Interesting ^^^.

    I also think dropping a bunch of parts off to your buddy so he can build a gun from parts would be considered manufacturing. Not sure I'd want to be the test case.

    THIS^^^^^.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,928
    Messages
    7,259,419
    Members
    33,350
    Latest member
    Rotorboater

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom