Form 1 silencer tutorial

[wired]

As I understand it, and and as of yesterday (because things change . . . ) that is correct. You submit the Form 1, you wait, they send an email asking for more info and photos of things you have on hand, you reply and than you wait again to see if your reply fit the largely arbitrary requirements.

No, they've incorporated it into the form one. Again, just tell them what they want to hear they'll approve it and go away

 

[gryghin]

At this rate, I will lose my hearing due to old age and using firearms with poor excuse for hearing protection.

 

[Member 5605]

As I understand it, and and as of yesterday (because things change . . . ) that is correct. You submit the Form 1, you wait, they send an email asking for more info and photos of things you have on hand, you reply and than you wait again to see if your reply fit the largely arbitrary requirements.

I'm about to drop two F1's on Friday doing the above...
Here's a photo for anyone needing bar and tube stock.. that's not tube SOCK for the SOCKFAWKERS who live alone in their parents basement.



I'll be submitting this with both of the F1's. Identical F1's just an A and a B at end of serial.

 

[wired]

I'm about to drop two F1's on Friday doing the above...
Here's a photo for anyone needing bar and tube stock.. that's not tube SOCK for the SOCKFAWKERS who live alone in their parents basement.

View attachment 1343962

I'll be submitting this with both of the F1's. Identical F1's just an A and a B at end of serial.

Lathe...Just sayin'

 

[Member 5605]

Lathe...Just sayin'

View attachment 1343975

I want to put a dildo in the lathe chuck if they press me further.

 

[elitejake]

In light of the new rule for sbrs. I'll be filing a couple this weekend. Hopefully the $200 stamp fee is waved on the file applications already.

 

[wired]

ive already done one. it is

 

[elitejake]

To the computer with a cup of coffee and my three lowers.
Now I really wish I had my 5" stribog already

 

[Member 5605]

ive already done one. it is

According to their website, they also state they want your Schedule A showing possession prior to Jan 13th. Seems suspicious sending your Schedule A... unless it's empty.

Accordingly, any trust that seeks to register a "stabilizing brace" equipped firearm pursuant to Final Rule 2021R-08F must include with the eForm 1 application evidence that establishes the trust is the current possessor of the "stabilizing brace" equipped firearm, and possessed it before January 13, 2023. This evidence will generally include the signed, dated, and notarized terms of the trust or trust schedules that list or provide a description of the property held in trust. Accordingly, for trust applicants, ATF will perform a thorough review of the trust documents provided with the eForm 1 application to ensure the firearm sought to be registered to the trust was property possessed by the trust before January 13, 2023. Therefore, an eForm 1 application to register a "stabilizing brace" equipped firearm to a trust will be disapproved if the applicant fails to demonstrate the trust possessed the firearm before January 13, 2023.

 

[elitejake]

That sucks. I guess it will have to be personal form 1. My trust only has my suppressors in it. I don't put my other firearms in there

 

[wired]

I don't know if your lawyer told you that you had to have a notary stamp on additions to your schedule . In most states you don't and that includes Oregon and Washington. Just put a date on there.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Why does everything in the final rule refer to the date published in federal register as the date firearms must be owned by the trust but that unknown source quoted in post #129 (which has no link to the original source) say Jan. 13?. Everything I saw in final rule says date published in register. But I didn't read it all. Where does that Jan 13 come from, and which one applies IF the dates conflict?

 

[wired]

Why does everything in the final rule refer to the date published in federal register as the date firearms must be owned by the trust but that unknown source quoted in post #129 (which has no link to the original source) say Jan. 13?. Everything I saw in final rule says date published in register. But I didn't read it all. Where does that Jan 13 come from, and which one applies IF the dates conflict?

They just screwed up. Dont read too much into it.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

They just screwed up. Dont read too much into it.

I assume the 13th is the screwed up date cuz everything else says date published in register?

 

[wired]

I assume the 13th is the screwed up date cuz everything else says date published in register?

Yes

 

[elitejake]

So knowing they screwed it up. No big surprise there. If I picked up a new bog now I could get it under the new rule and not pay for the sbr stamp? Or I jus got lucky with the three I am working on now.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

So knowing they screwed it up. No big surprise there. If I picked up a new bog now I could get it under the new rule and not pay for the sbr stamp? Or I jus got lucky with the three I am working on now.

From atf FAQs. Says must be in possession by effective date. I think that means date of publication in federal register but who knows.

I guess technically if your sbr was not assembled before that date, it's not eligible according to this. But then you can't legally assemble it until you have form 1 approval I think.

Also isn't the effective date 120 days after publications date? Edit: after 120 days is the compliance date, not effective date.

 

[Member 5605]

Why does everything in the final rule refer to the date published in federal register as the date firearms must be owned by the trust but that unknown source quoted in post #129 (which has no link to the original source) say Jan. 13?. Everything I saw in final rule says date published in register. But I didn't read it all. Where does that Jan 13 come from, and which one applies IF the dates conflict?

Original source:

eForms

eforms-form1.atf.gov

https://eforms-form1.atf.gov/home/form/FORM53201/applicant-type

I'm not making the 'rules' or making legal assumptions, just passing along what's been spotted. I'll gladly let others break stuff down as needed.

Sadly this doesn't apply to Silencer manufacturing as the thread was intended. I apologize.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Original source:

eForms

eforms-form1.atf.gov

https://eforms-form1.atf.gov/home/form/FORM53201/applicant-type

View attachment 1346671


View attachment 1346670


I'm not making the 'rules' or making legal assumptions, just passing along what's been spotted. I'll gladly let others break stuff down as needed.

Sadly this doesn't apply to Silencer manufacturing as the thread was intended. I apologize.

Helpful info thx. That date directly conflicts the other dates in the rule. I hope whoever sues atf uses these conflicting dates against them. Seems like there are so many conflicts that they could disallow any of them if they really wanted to.

 

[Flymph]

are there any options for those who don't have tools to lathe out bar stock?
Would I be better filing a form 4?
I'd really like a 9mm can that will handle 300 BO supersonic.