National ATF Aims to Reclassify AR-15 Lowers

[2Wheels4Ever]

Has anyone seen this yet? What punch in the nuggets. If they reclassify the Ar receiver to be the upper (or both) then, potentially, all your uppers would have to be serialized. Switching calibers would become much more difficult, and Ar pistols would be a lot easier to regulate. One of my thoughts is that they are also trying to get rid of the possibility of 3d printing. The lower is a relatively low stress component compared to the upper, and plastic technology has a ways to go before getting to those strength levels.

https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/judge-disconnect-atf-classification-lower-receivers-firearms/

Read More

 

[GrayGoose]

If so, this will result on a run on buying up stripped uppers.

 

[AMT]

I am wondering if this logic would spill over onto pistols.

IE: 1911's currently have the serial number on the frame. I'm wondering if the ATF would start to require the "upper" (slide) to be serial numbered. Not just 1911's, but every other pistol too.

Just the opposite of that, Ruger MKI/II/III serial number the "upper" and not the frame. Go figure.

I guess the ATF will need to make an absolute final decision on what is considered "the firearm". The "upper" or the "lower" (frame).

This will be interesting to monitor.

 

[User 1234]

That is an October 2019 article. At the time many people expected the ATF to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking under the Administraitve Procedures Act to deem AR uppers the frame or receiver of a firearm. This was also likely because the ATF told
Safety Harbor that their 50 BMG upper receiver for AR's was a firearm and must be transferred as such. But I am not aware that the ATF ever went any further than that. The judge's tentative ruling in that article does appear correct.

 

[GrayGoose]

I guess the ATF will need to make an absolute final decision on what is considered "the firearm". The "upper" or the "lower" (frame).

Perhaps they will decide to require both upper and lower to be serialized, like Glock does.
(What would Obiden do?...)

 

[Kruel J]

Ah, the ATF. They would reclassify my dishwasher as a firearm if they had their way.

 

[Mecanik]

Since the ATF doesn't actually 'write law" I suspect this will have to go through congress in some fashion.

 

[trevi]

I am wondering if this logic would spill over onto pistols.

IE: 1911's currently have the serial number on the frame. I'm wondering if the ATF would start to require the "upper" (slide) to be serial numbered. Not just 1911's, but ever other pistol too.

Just the opposite of that, Ruger MKI/II/III serial number the "upper" and not the frame. Go figure.

I guess the ATF will need to make an absolute final decision on what is considered "the firearm". The "upper" or the "lower" (frame).

This will be interesting to monitor.

Keep in mind that European made handguns and some rifles (bolt and semi's) are serialised in three places: frame, slide, and barrel

Now I am going to have to fast-track that 1911 build!

 

[03A3Sporter]

Since the ATF doesn't actually 'write law" I suspect this will have to go through congress in some fashion.

It didn't when lowers were original classified as the "firearm" by the request of Colt in the 1960's . The reason this was done was because Colt made the case it was too difficult to serialize the upper.

The ATF has been allowed to interpret and regulate firearms as they see fit for decades with no interference from Congress.

It is not an accident.

 

[Camtender]

The ATF's Definition of an AR-15 Lower as a 'Firearm' Is In Serious Trouble - The Truth About Guns

&#9664Previous Post Next Post▶ First, credit where it’s due. CNN’s Scott Glover has managed to turn out an excellent article about a fairly arcane aspect of guns and firearms law while getting the details right. That’s a notable feat for legacy media these days. Read the whole thing here. With...

www.thetruthaboutguns.com

 

[03A3Sporter]

All I am going to say about this folks is careful what you wish for, this really isn't a win for gun owners .

 

[Basedgreaser]

They could play their recent hit of taking a "wholistic" approach. That neither components individually are receivers but when paired together become a firearm

 

[No_Regerts]

They could play their recent hit of taking a "wholistic" approach. That neither components individually are receivers but when paired together become a firearm

So, if I were a machinist in California and was given multiple letters from the ATF to please stop letting people use my tools to manufacture their own lowers, though its legal, and wasn't charged to avoid a court ruling that actually would establish that no individual parts are firearms....I'd probably support the wholistic approach, right? That would mean all parts could just be sent to my house, right?

 

[MfnLeadFarmer]

 

[Basedgreaser]

So, if I were a machinist in California and was given multiple letters from the ATF to please stop letting people use my tools to manufacture their own lowers, though its legal, and wasn't charged to avoid a court ruling that actually would establish that no individual parts are firearms....I'd probably support the wholistic approach, right? That would mean all parts could just be sent to my house, right?

Who knows what the hell they will come up with at this point im sure theyd change their mind with criteria that "isnt publicly available"

 

[Mecanik]

It's sad to see our country come to this. I remember when it was respectable to build or own firearms........

 

[wired]

Perhaps they will decide to require both upper and lower to be serialized, like Glock does.
(What would Obiden do?...)

Only one is the registered part. Glock does that because in some countries every part needs to be serialized. Not the case in the US. The lower is the registered "firearm" part. The numbers on the upper are meaningless in the US

 

[joshp3]

That is an October 2019 article. At the time many people expected the ATF to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking under the Administraitve Procedures Act to deem AR uppers the frame or receiver of a firearm. This was also likely because the ATF told
Safety Harbor that their 50 BMG upper receiver for AR's was a firearm and must be transferred as such. But I am not aware that the ATF ever went any further than that. The judge's tentative ruling in that article does appear correct.

I do remember that issue coming up back then...(think about how long ago 2019 FEELS!) But i know recently there was another court ruling that made an impact of some kind. I have yet to dig into it to form an opinion other than my current stance on any given ATF related thing which is, "NO, piss off."

 

[Greenbug]

Always thought it peculiar that the lower is the serialized part on an AR, but the upper on a Ruger Mark series pistol is the serialized part. Never made any sense to me. When you think about it the design/function of both guns is pretty identical. Both the uppers support the barrel and bolt, and both the lowers house the fire control groups and magazines..... But on one of the guns the upper is the serialized part (Ruger) and the other one has the lower as the serialized part (AR).

Makes no sense to me.

 

[wired]

Always thought it peculiar that the lower is the serialized part on an AR, but the upper on a Ruger Mark series pistol is the serialized part. Never made any sense to me. When you think about it the design/function of both guns is pretty identical. Both the uppers support the barrel and bolt, and both the lowers house the fire control groups and magazines..... But on one of the guns the upper is the serialized part (Ruger) and the other one has the lower as the serialized part (AR).

Makes no sense to me.

Most guns have the part that retain the barrel being the serialized part. There are very few exceptions. If the ATF had to do it all over again they wouldnt have done it that way. Even guns that are extremely similar have the upper being the serialized part.