ATF Proposes 2021R-05 Must Read

[The Resister]

On May 7th, 2021, the BATFE released a set of new proposed rules regarding Privately Made Firearms, or 'PMFs'. This came after weeks of positioning by leaders in the executive and legislative branches, and the resulting policy includes a myriad of new regulations and definitions that impact American gun rights.

Because these rules are regulatory expansion by the executive branch, there won't be a Senate or House vote. This is a decision made by the leadership of the ATF and Department of Justice to change their enforcement of existing laws, and an expansive overreach of regulatory authority by the ATF.

The Department of Justice has invited Americans to provide their feedback on the proposed rule changes, and we're eager to provide it. Below, we've provided a high-level summary of some changes made under 2021R-05. At the bottom of this post, you'll find additional information on how to send your feedback to the ATF—and why it's important that every gun-owner make their voice heard. In the meantime, consider joining with me in abolishing the ATF.

https://www.primaryarms.com/atf-proposal-2021r05?trk_msg=6EBMJSRDV3G4TERL4Q66UCPRPC&trk_contact=OFSAOBIDQ42299UHH54C12AOHG&trk_sid=8CANU4PVDB7AUHIH3OV9SH0UG4&utm_source=listrak&utm_medium=email&utm_term=BUTTON_1&utm_campaign=21_06_AD22b_ATF-Ruling

Read More

 

[bentoncity]

I filed my comments online. Thank you for posting this!
It would certainly be nice if all 58,000 members here & whatever from the SW Forum has for member to write a letter.
I read some of the comments sent and they were absolutely asinine and without ANY clarity.
I would HOPE that letter writers would provide some context to the BATFE vs something like, "I support the 2nd Amendment".

Dan

 

[The Heretic]

With 2021R-05, the new definition of a receiver has changed:

A part of a firearm that, when the complete weapon is assembled, is visible from the exterior and provides housing or a structure designed to hold or integrate one or more fire control components.... Any such part identified with a serial number shall be presumed, absent an official determination by the Director or other reliable evidence to the contrary, to be a frame or receiver. For purposes of this definition, the term "fire control component" means a component necessary for the firearm to initiate, complete, or continue the firing sequence, including any of the following: hammer, bolt, bolt carrier, breechblock, cylinder, trigger mechanism, firing pin, striker, or slide rails.

So, my take on that is that AR-15 upper receivers will need to be serialized too.

I do not necessarily agree with PA's conclusion that:

This new definition will completely change the face of the gun market. With this definition, absent the "determination by the Director", AR15 upper receivers, drop-in trigger packs, pistol slides, and a wide variety of other categories might be regulated as receivers. If that occurs, every item will need to be serialized, and you will have to complete an FFL transfer whenever you purchase one of these components.

Slides? Yes, maybe. Trigger pack? I don't see that.

That said, what about the hundreds of millions of guns in the USA that currently do not have serial numbers on these parts? Grandfathered? How would the gov be able to determine which ones are grandfathered when it comes to "assembled" firearms? Are we going to have to scribe the serial number of the lower on the upper of existing firearms that do have serial numbers but not on every part? The slides of handguns?

 

[The Resister]

So, my take on that is that AR-15 upper receivers will need to be serialized too.

I do not necessarily agree with PA's conclusion that:



Slides? Yes, maybe. Trigger pack? I don't see that.

That said, what about the hundreds of millions of guns in the USA that currently do not have serial numbers on these parts? Grandfathered? How would the gov be able to determine which ones are grandfathered when it comes to "assembled" firearms? Are we going to have to scribe the serial number of the lower on the upper of existing firearms that do have serial numbers but not on every part? The slides of handguns?

Nothing will be grandfathered (bump stock, brace, etc., etc.) You simply put on a serial number and register it or it is illegal. I guess you may have to have your eyes checked when you aren't seeing things that are obvious. America runs on precedent.

 

[wired]

I think part of this is they are doing a ham fisted attempt at correcting old stupid mistakes at the tech branch. They never should have authorized the lower as the serialized part of the AR. How they think theyre just going to command an edict and get any sort of compliance I dont know. Totally unworkable. Theyre just setting themselves up for a major legal challenge that will make them look even more incompetent. The same goes for pistol braces. Dumb plan.

 

[The Resister]

I think part of this is they are doing a ham fisted attempt at correcting old stupid mistakes at the tech branch. They never should have authorized the lower as the serialized part of the AR. How they think theyre just going to command an edict and get any sort of compliance I dont know. Totally unworkable. Theyre just setting themselves up for a major legal challenge that will make them look even more incompetent. The same goes for pistol braces. Dumb plan.

I don't think the courts understand the mechanical issues involved.

 

[bentoncity]

It would certainly be nice if all 58,000 members here & whatever from the SW Forum has for member to write a letter.

 

[Char77]

Still one day left if there's anyone who hasn't posted a comment.

 

[arakboss]

Here is link to comment info. https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/definition-frame-or-receiver/submit-comment

The fact that suppliers are taking a strong interest in these rule changes makes me think they are going to be very impactful on their bottom line.

 

[arakboss]

So, my take on that is that AR-15 upper receivers will need to be serialized too.

I do not necessarily agree with PA's conclusion that:



Slides? Yes, maybe. Trigger pack? I don't see that.

That said, what about the hundreds of millions of guns in the USA that currently do not have serial numbers on these parts? Grandfathered? How would the gov be able to determine which ones are grandfathered when it comes to "assembled" firearms? Are we going to have to scribe the serial number of the lower on the upper of existing firearms that do have serial numbers but not on every part? The slides of handguns?

"Trigger pack" of some Sig models are already considered the firearm.

 

[arakboss]

I think part of this is they are doing a ham fisted attempt at correcting old stupid mistakes at the tech branch. They never should have authorized the lower as the serialized part of the AR. How they think theyre just going to command an edict and get any sort of compliance I dont know. Totally unworkable. Theyre just setting themselves up for a major legal challenge that will make them look even more incompetent. The same goes for pistol braces. Dumb plan.

The big question I have is, can they require a firearm to have more than one serialized part? For example on the AR15 could they require the lower and upper to be separate items for form 4473 purposes, if they are transferred together?

 

[Char77]

The big question I have is, can they require a firearm to have more than one serialized part? For example on the AR15 could they require the lower and upper to be separate items for form 4473 purposes, if they are transferred together?

ATF Decides a .50 BMG AR-15 Upper is a… Firearm? - International Sportsman

Diving into the ATF's ruling that .50 BMG AR-15 uppers are themselves firearms. A closer look at how it came about and what other guns may be affected.

www.internationalsportsman.com

They already decided to require it for things like the .50 BMG AR-15 uppers. I don't think any of the .50 BMG upper manufacturers sell them bundled with a lower, so I'm not sure how it would work if they were sold together. Maybe if they had the same serial number there would only be one transfer but I'm guessing it would still be two.

Also anyone have bets on how long it will take them to respond to comments and enact what, if anything, they're going to change?

 

[arakboss]

ATF Decides a .50 BMG AR-15 Upper is a… Firearm? - International Sportsman

Diving into the ATF's ruling that .50 BMG AR-15 uppers are themselves firearms. A closer look at how it came about and what other guns may be affected.

www.internationalsportsman.com

They already decided to require it for things like the .50 BMG AR-15 uppers. I don't think any of the .50 BMG upper manufacturers sell them bundled with a lower, so I'm not sure how it would work if they were sold together. Maybe if they had the same serial number there would only be one transfer but I'm guessing it would still be two.

Also anyone have bets on how long it will take them to respond to comments and enact what, if anything, they're going to change?

That ruling was rediculous for many reasons but for one is they seemed to only apply it to 50cal uppers. There are still uppers that operate in pretty much the same fashion and are not subject to the FFL requirements that the SHTF50 is.

Example:

UPR-15 UPPER – Bolt Action AR Uppers | AR-10 & AR-15 | Uintah Precision

The Uintah Precision UPR15 is a true bolt action upper for your mil-spec AR15 lower. The UPR15 brings the accuracy of a bolt action rifle to the most popular platform in the United States. Squeeze the most accuracy out of your AR, with a Uintah Precision UPR15 and our MOA guarantee. We...

uintahprecision.com

 

[arakboss]

I have to wonder if this new proposed definition is limited to the components listed or not limited to the components listed. If the definition is not limited then it could apply to nearly every part of a firearm.
It really seems like they are trying to cover all the bases with this new definition. I would love to see how the gun part manufactures would get around this. I am guesing they won't be able to.

For purposes of this definition, the term "fire control component" means a component necessary for the firearm to initiate, complete, or continue the firing sequence, including any of the following: hammer, bolt, bolt carrier, breechblock, cylinder, trigger mechanism, firing pin, striker, or slide rails.

 

[arakboss]

I honestly don't think most americans (including firearm owners) will give a rip about these rule changes. They have been conditioned to believe that the ATF/DOJ and their rules are there to keep us safe.

You might be considered abbynormal if you believe otherwise.

 

[American123]

So, my take on that is that AR-15 upper receivers will need to be serialized too.

I do not necessarily agree with PA's conclusion that:



Slides? Yes, maybe. Trigger pack? I don't see that.

That said, what about the hundreds of millions of guns in the USA that currently do not have serial numbers on these parts? Grandfathered? How would the gov be able to determine which ones are grandfathered when it comes to "assembled" firearms? Are we going to have to scribe the serial number of the lower on the upper of existing firearms that do have serial numbers but not on every part? The slides of handguns?

I'm sure the founding fathers "didn't see that," "shall not be infringed," would be so difficult to bubblegum up.

 

[wired]

I'm sure the founding fathers "didn't see that," "shall not be infringed," would be so difficult to bubblegum up.

They bubblegummed it up with the first clause of that amendment. You know, the one no one ever mentions.

 

[arakboss]

I just sent my comment. The reason this and all gun control will pass is because we don't care, we have given up, or maybe we want gun control? There is a whopping 270,000 comments that have been received so far. Deadline is today. That is less then .001 percent of the population. The deadline snuck up on me and this after hanging out on Northwest Firearms nearly everyday. How many others have no idea this is going on. I haven't seen one mention of it in MSM.

We are a nation of people who crave to be ruled
At least we can feel safe and taken care of.

 

[American123]

They bubblegummed it up with the first clause of that amendment. You know, the one no one ever mentions.

Explain what you mean.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Because if a person understands the historical context of the word "regulated," it would mean "uniform, in proper working order, efficient and capable of performing its duties."

What they were saying was to the effect in laymen's terms, "How can we have a proper working militia if the right of the people to keep and bear arms can be infringed upon by the government, therefore, the government can't do that."

A person would either have to be agenda driven and bias, or not thoroughly adept in English, or history to make the argument that the founding fathers who literally just fought a war for independence from a tyrannical government, would say in the bill of rights that a government has the right to dictate how Americans can keep and bear arms.

 

[wired]

Explain what you mean.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Because if a person understands the historical context of the word "regulated," it would mean "uniform, in proper working order, efficient and capable of performing its duties."

What they were saying was to the effect in laymen's terms, "How can we have a proper working militia if the right of the people to keep and bear arms can be infringed upon by the government, therefore, the government can't do that."

A person would either have to be agenda driven and bias, or not thoroughly adept in English, or history to make the argument that the founding fathers who literally just fought a war for independence from a tyrannical government, would say in the bill of rights that a government has the right to dictate how Americans can keep and bear arms.

The verbiage of the 2nd amendment was developed by the anti federalists and was interpreted by the supreme courts until relatively recently to the extent that it guarantees the right of "the people" to raise and equip and deploy militias based upon the first clause both to protect themselves from outside invasion and as a means of protection from their own government. The founding fathers were very sensitive to standing armies and felt citizen militias were more inline with their philosophy of how the citizenry would protect their own lands and themselves from a central government. The "individual right" to self defense concept didnt come about until much later some would argue it didnt really get ensconced into law until this century. I feel they ( the government) would MUCH rather have the concentration upon an individual right than on the right of the citizens to regulate their own militia.