FFL question on 80% lower transfer

[bbbass]

When does a receiver need to have markings and/or serial numbers?
Receivers that meet the definition of a "firearm" must have markings, including a serial number. See 27 CFR § 478.92 (Firearm manufacturers marking requirements).

I try to be nice, but did you read the ATF letter I posted above? At the very least, your info is misleading omission in a discussion of transferring completed 80% lowers. Again, if one builds a receiver or finishes a 80% receiver, per ATFs own rules IF the receiver remains in the possession of the builder it is NOT required to be serialized (as documented above!). Only the sale or transfer of the receiver trips the requirement to put a serial # on it.

The ATF need not be contacted to issue the # as the CFR, that I finally found, is clear on how it is to be done and what the requirements are: name of builder (initials are adequate), a number, location of origin, and caliber (multi will do for a rcvr). My thanx to the members that were correct about this!

 

[fredball]

just posting the facts did you read any (Highlighted in Red links clearly not)of it or just belly ache about It, this is what is available , so your answering your own question have a nice day .

 

[bbbass]

just posting the facts did you read any (Highlighted in Red links clearly not)of it or just belly ache about It, this is what is available , so your answering your own question have a nice day .

I read it ALL. Just duplications of info already posted in this thread. In the lower portion, you even duplicated yourself.

What does the "clearly not" mean? You take issue with the ATF itself?

Thanx for nothin... In fact, your post was worse than nothing because as I mentioned, it was misleading for the purposes of this discussion.

Out.

 

[bbbass]

Well, my lack of tact and diplomacy when I get peeved amazes even myself.

Truth is, I appreciate contributions to the thread I started. People try to help in good faith. Sometimes I get frustrated with repetition of stated facts, and especially with people coming in that haven't read the previous posts in the thread.

Some info posted is just detrimental to the welfare and practices of other shooters. But I should be more tactful in my responses.

 

[v0lcom13sn0w]

I try to be nice, but did you read the ATF letter I posted above? At the very least, your info is misleading omission in a discussion of transferring completed 80% lowers. Again, if one builds a receiver or finishes a 80% receiver, per ATFs own rules IF the receiver remains in the possession of the builder it is NOT required to be serialized (as documented above!). Only the sale or transfer of the receiver trips the requirement to put a serial # on it.

The ATF need not be contacted to issue the # as the CFR, that I finally found, is clear on how it is to be done and what the requirements are: name of builder (initials are adequate), a number, location of origin, and caliber (multi will do for a rcvr). My thanx to the members that were correct about this!

like i said, didnt you buy this 80% and immediately gift it to your daughter as a hu k of plastic??and, at that point she borrowed your tools and time to help her finish it before moving away? she didnt have a gunsafe yet so as a dad, the responsible thing to do was to hold on to your daughters completed 80% lower, correct? its expensive to travel. cant u just mail your daugeters lower to her? i mean, its her's so u shouldnt have to serialize it.

 

[Boboclown]

like i said, didnt you buy this 80% and immediately gift it to your daughter as a hu k of plastic??and, at that point she borrowed your tools and time to help her finish it before moving away? she didnt have a gunsafe yet so as a dad, the responsible thing to do was to hold on to your daughters completed 80% lower, correct? its expensive to travel. cant u just mail your daugeters lower to her? i mean, its her's so u shouldnt have to serialize it.

He did the machining and he is wanting to give it to his daughter. Serial number would be necessary.

 

[v0lcom13sn0w]

i think you are missing my point.

 

[Boboclown]

I got the point, but he stated that he milled it. To the ATF, he made it.

 

[v0lcom13sn0w]

yeah if i was the OP i never would have said that on a public forum or on the internet in general. just because i buy a piece of damascus steel, rivets and fancy wood does not mean i have decided to make a knife. might look like that but prove it.

 

[bbbass]

yeah if i was the OP i never would have said that on a public forum or on the internet in general.

Hey, I'm still here guys.

LOL. Agreed wholeheartedly. A point I often make myself. Only valid in this case if I had decided to break the law. But I had already made the decision to send the completed lower et al to a FFL because I don't want to risk trying to evade the rules. nor having my daughter have to prove how she came to be in possession of it. And although I could have just sent it to her with the kit (I thought about it), there is just too much risk of a federal felony. The wife cannot support herself and I'm too old to end my life that way. Man, there are so many potential outlaws on this forum.

The scenario you pointed out IMO will not work. I've worked with LEOs quite a bit and it's just too easy to get caught out in what can easily be disproved. Like her living here for awhile. Nope we haven't lived together since she was ten. Nor does she visit here. I dare to put that on the internet because I plan to obey the rules.

 

[Koda]

lets all remember this thread and what it takes to be an honest law abiding citizen gun owner next election when anti gun politicians promise to pass more of these kind of laws that have zero impact on crime.

 

[bbbass]

Oh Lord it's not easy.

And then Federal Bureaucracies make up rules whether they are in accordance with existing law or not. Banning green tip ammo? Then Federal agencies do as they damn well please, intimidating law abiding citizens and crooked judges let them get away with all of it!

 

[v0lcom13sn0w]

hey hey hey i never said id break the law. just thinkin out loud.


just sayin.

 

[ocarolan]

Remember a firearm lacking a serial number could put you in jeopardy of ORS 166.450. At minimum, burden of proof will be on you to show evidence of manufacturing it.

166.450¹
Obliteration or change of identification number on firearms
Any person who intentionally alters, removes or obliterates the identification number of any firearm for an unlawful purpose, shall be punished upon conviction by imprisonment in the custody of the Department of Corrections for not more than five years. Possession of any such firearm is presumptive evidence that the possessor has altered, removed or obliterated the identification number. [Amended by 1987 c.320 §90; 1989 c.839 §24]

 

[bbbass]

Remember a firearm lacking a serial number could put you in jeopardy of ORS 166.450. At minimum, burden of proof will be on you to show evidence of manufacturing it.

Thanx for the warning. However, I'll bet there are lots of ghost firearms in Oregon. I have to think that the LEOs and prosecutors are aware of them. Seems to me that a quick check of the bill of sale and a look at the smooth unblemished surface would be enough to establish what it is. Now if they want to be jerks, they could haul a person in. But I don't think the prosecutor would go for it.

 

[ocarolan]

I have to think that the LEOs and prosecutors are aware of them. Seems to me that a quick check of the bill of sale and a look at the smooth unblemished surface would be enough to establish what it is. Now if they want to be jerks, they could haul a person in. But I don't think the prosecutor would go for it.

After reviewing case law, I would give Oregon prosecutors and courts the widest possible latitude with respect to firearm opinions. Remember they have a quota of cases to meet, weapons law looks good in public opinion, and the reasonable expectation of a firearm owner is by no means universal.

A few example rulings which might be surprising:

- Concealed carry in his own backyard - Clemente 2015
- Unlawful possession for holding a rifle barrel - Gortmaker 1982
- Concealed carry of inoperable pistol - Briney 2008 circuit

No need to add ORS 166.450 to that list...

 

[bbbass]

I know what you are saying. But IMO there is a fine balance between prudence and living in fear.

I've often thought about it tho. I'm lucky in that where I live I shoot with most of the LEOs. They aren't likely to give me a hard time. However, I sure wouldn't want to leave here in my RV with my Ghost rifle on board.

 

[wired]

You do not need to engrave it to do an in state private party transfer EXCEPT you absolutely will not find a FFL to do the transfer if they have nothing to enter into their books. States like Oregon and Washington that need you to go to a dealer for the transfer will need serial numbers and makers marks to enter into their forms. To out of state forget about it. No FFL will touch that. It has to have SOMETHING there for the FFL to enter into his books.

 

[bbbass]

You do not need to engrave it to do an in state private party transfer EXCEPT you absolutely will not find a FFL to do the transfer if they have nothing to enter into their books. States like Oregon and Washington that need you to go to a dealer for the transfer will need serial numbers and makers marks to enter into their forms. To out of state forget about it. No FFL will touch that. It has to have SOMETHING there for the FFL to enter into his books.

Well, that's inconsistent with the ATFs published policy on 80% lowers. As well, the makers of 80% kits that I researched for this thread. But, some folks are gonna do it anyway. At that point why bother with an FFL either?

 

[wired]

Whats at odds? Intestate transfers must go through an FFL. A dealer cannot process guns built on home made receivers without serial numbers and makers info. In state transfers are different in most states but in WA/OR you have to go through a dealer so your back to the serial number problem. Technically according to the ATF you are right but that doesnt factor in our states laws. The state laws then bump up against federal laws so you are back to needing serial numbers when the ATf says you dont initially. Its sort of like where I can gift a pistol to an 18 year old but since I have to go through an FFL now to do the transfer in Washington I can't do it on a 4473 because dealers cannot transfer to a under 21 "minor".