ATF's 2021 "Definition of 'Frame or Receiver' and Identification of Firearms" released

1
The ATF appears to have played with the definition of "readily" to include more.
https://www.atf.gov/file/154586/download
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
27 CFR Parts 478 and 479
Docket No. ATF 2021R-05; AG Order No. 5051-2021
RIN 1140-AA54
Definition of “Frame or Receiver” and Identification of Firearms
AGENCY: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, Department of
Justice.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; request for comment.
SUMMARY: The Department of Justice (“Department”) proposes amending Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (“ATF”) regulations to provide new
regulatory definitions of “firearm frame or receiver” and “frame or receiver” because the
current regulations fail to capture the full meaning of those terms. The Department also
proposes amending ATF’s definitions of “firearm” and “gunsmith” to clarify the meaning
of those terms, and to provide definitions of terms such as “complete weapon,” “complete
muffler or silencer device,” “privately made firearm,” and “readily” for purposes of
clarity given advancements in firearms technology. Further, the Department proposes
amendments to ATF’s regulations on marking and recordkeeping that are necessary to
implement these new or amended definitions.
Justice Department Proposes Rule to Curb Spread of ‘Ghost Guns’
More than 23,000 firearms without serial numbers were recovered by law enforcement from potential crime scenes from 2016 through 2020, the Justice Department said.
Note "potential crime scenes" and the lack of distinguishing between home-built firearms and manufactured firearms with defaced serial numbers.
“This proposed rule would help keep guns out of the wrong hands and make it easier for law enforcement to trace guns used to commit violent crimes, while protecting the rights of law-abiding Americans,” Attorney General Merrick B. Garland said in a written statement.
As proposed, the rule also would require retailers to run background checks before selling at-home assembly kits for ghost guns.
90 days to comment.
sbɐɯ ʎʇıɔɐdɐɔ pɹɐpuɐʇs ɟo ןןnɟ ǝɟɐs
ɯɯ6 bdd ɹǝɥʇןɐʍ
13ʞ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ 1ɐ4ɯ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- ɯoɔos0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ ʇuǝɯǝɔɹoɟuǝ ʍɐן sʇןoɔ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- 0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
(béɟ) 59-pɯɐ

Re: ATF's 2021

3
The document is 115 pages.

ATF's "full summary" of the doc:
https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulatio ... er/summary
ATF's proposed rule, Definition of “Frame or Receiver” and Identification of Firearms, would:
  • Provide new definitions of “firearm frame or receiver” and “frame or receiver”
  • Amend the definition of:
    -“firearm” to clarify when a firearm parts kit is considered a “firearm,” and
    -“gunsmith” to clarify the meaning of that term and to explain that gunsmiths may be licensed solely to mark firearms for unlicensed persons.
  • Provide definitions for:
    -“complete weapon,”
    -“complete muffler or silencer device,”
    -“privately made firearm (PMF),” and
    -“readily” for purposes of clarity given advancements in firearms technology.
  • Provide a definition of “importer’s or manufacturer’s serial number”
  • Provide a deadline for marking firearms manufactured.
  • Clarify marking requirements for firearm mufflers and silencers.
  • Amend the format for records of manufacture/acquisition and disposition by manufacturers and importers.
  • Amend the time period records must be retained at the licensed premises.

Re: ATF's 2021

4
I think we need to be honest about what 80's are. They're unserialized guns that are shipped to your home, complete and ready to fire in under 30 minutes from opening the package.

These are not self manufactured firearms at all. Guns should require background checks, and these 80% kits are absolutely guns.

My serialized 1911 took a hundred times more work to get together than a unserialized Glock 80.

Re: ATF's 2021

6
DougB1946 wrote: Sun May 09, 2021 2:39 pm What is a "potential crime scene"? If there has actually been a crime, you have a "crime scene". With no crime, you just have a scene. Nothing illegal about having a scene. Highways advertise and promote scenic views.
I presume it means an apparent crime scene that has not yet been determined to be an actual crime scene by forensics.
""If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." -- LBJ

Re: ATF's 2021

7
OnePivot wrote: Sun May 09, 2021 2:28 pm I think we need to be honest about what 80's are. They're unserialized guns that are shipped to your home, complete and ready to fire in under 30 minutes from opening the package.

These are not self manufactured firearms at all. Guns should require background checks, and these 80% kits are absolutely guns.

My serialized 1911 took a hundred times more work to get together than a unserialized Glock 80.
Nope. They're not firearms because they're not receivers or frames. If something is not a receiver, it's not a firearm. Once the door is open to declaring things that are not firearms firearms, authorities, at the behest of firearm prohibitionists, never will stop moving that definition toward solid blocks of aluminum and/or plastic.

Re: ATF's 2021

9
I’m going on a limb and assuming that OnePivot has some experience smithing on his 1911 but never actually seen or played with an 80% Glock-pattern pistol kit before posting his opinion.

Such 80% kits may look like a Glock firearm frame at first glance but do not have the internal-shape or “holes” necessary to install requisite parts to make a functioning firearm. No holes, no possible way to put in all the little intricate parts that make up a firearm. So what you have is closer to a nonfunctioning Glock-replica than a firearm, closer to maybe an Airsoft-pistol than an actual Glock.

While it is entirely possible for a beginner gunsmith like OnePivot to cut the holes necessary with a drill press or (heaven forbid) Dremel tool, it is just as likely that he makes a mistake in his handiwork to guarantee the results remain a non-functioning firearm replica. It still takes personal skill with a cutting tool to transform even an 80% kit from a curiously shaped hunk plastic into a functional firearm receiver, not merely assembling parts together as (I assume) he described in his post.

That said, I found it amusing one of the AR builder’s website advertised a bar of billet aluminum for sale calling it an “0% AR kit”:
Image
"It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of non-violence to cover impotence. There is hope for a violent man to become non-violent. There is no such hope for the impotent." -Gandhi

Re: ATF's 2021

10
No, I posted that with hands on experience of making glock 80's. From a UPS box, to a fully functioning firearm is about 30 minutes. Have you done a glock 80? They very specifically state *not* to use a drill press for the pins, and a dremel is by far the best way to cut the rest. That's kind of my whole point... the dremel is such a hilariously hack tool that every gunsmith knows you don't use one for actual gun work. Unless you're making glock 80's. I have a small home mill and slide table, its not even worth firing it up for this. It originally was recommended to use a small router, but the dremel works better.

The intention of background checks is to regulate things that go bang. Its not intended to make sure no one gets their hands on serialized parts. Its the fully functioning firearm part that matters. Now that glock 80's are being sold as complete kits, including the whole frame part/fire control group, complete slide, jigs, bits, literally everything, its about 30 minutes for any goober with a dremel to have a fully functioning firearm. These are glocks in a box, ready to go, specifically designed to not require skill or practice to finish. Its an unserialized gun in a box.

If anything, I'm understating just how easy it is to finish glock 80's. Its indefensible. This is not a curiously shaped piece of plastic.
Image

Re: ATF's 2021

12
OnePivot wrote:No, I posted that with hands on experience of making glock 80's. From a UPS box, to a fully functioning firearm is about 30 minutes. Have you done a glock 80? They very specifically state *not* to use a drill press for the pins, and a dremel is by far the best way to cut the rest. That's kind of my whole point... the dremel is such a hilariously hack tool that every gunsmith knows you don't use one for actual gun work. Unless you're making glock 80's. I have a small home mill and slide table, its not even worth firing it up for this. It originally was recommended to use a small router, but the dremel works better.

The intention of background checks is to regulate things that go bang. Its not intended to make sure no one gets their hands on serialized parts. Its the fully functioning firearm part that matters. Now that glock 80's are being sold as complete kits, including the whole frame part/fire control group, complete slide, jigs, bits, literally everything, its about 30 minutes for any goober with a dremel to have a fully functioning firearm. These are glocks in a box, ready to go, specifically designed to not require skill or practice to finish. Its an unserialized gun in a box.

If anything, I'm understating just how easy it is to finish glock 80's. Its indefensible. This is not a curiously shaped piece of plastic.
Image
Why would it be "indefensible" for it not to be difficult to make a firearm?
sbɐɯ ʎʇıɔɐdɐɔ pɹɐpuɐʇs ɟo ןןnɟ ǝɟɐs
ɯɯ6 bdd ɹǝɥʇןɐʍ
13ʞ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ 1ɐ4ɯ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- ɯoɔos0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ ʇuǝɯǝɔɹoɟuǝ ʍɐן sʇןoɔ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- 0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
(béɟ) 59-pɯɐ

Re: ATF's 2021

13
I would assume it's even easier to build a Sig P320--the grip and slide units are sold separately or as caliber conversion kits--they aren't serialized. And most of the pieces of the serialized FCU can be purchased as well.

I don't advocate doing this, just as I don't advocate making ANY weapons the law disallows. In NJ, even the slingshot I had as a kid is now considered a "firearm". Any kind of propellant mechanism, whether mechanical, pneumatic, or chemical, is so considered.
""If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." -- LBJ

Re: ATF's 2021

14
OnePivot wrote: Sun May 09, 2021 2:28 pm I think we need to be honest about what 80's are. They're unserialized guns that are shipped to your home, complete and ready to fire in under 30 minutes from opening the package.
OnePivot, this is a refreshing post. Thank you.
OnePivot wrote: Sun May 09, 2021 2:28 pm These are not self manufactured firearms at all. Guns should require background checks, and these 80% kits are absolutely guns.
This is where the debate should lie. I'm with OnePivot, but I certainly believe the debate about background checks is a legitimate place for reasonable people to disagree. But I don't understand the debate about what an 80 is. The argument that if you treat an 80 like a gun, then cans of sardines are next, or whatever. Only on a gun forum! Cracks me up.

Re: ATF's 2021

15
cooper wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 9:22 am But I don't understand the debate about what an 80 is.
somewhere between that rectangular block of metal (or polymer) and a gun-shaped piece of metal with a router template or the drill points machined on it and one with the holes all drilled is 80%. even "80%" itself is arbitrary: is it 80% done, or 80% to-be done? how do we determine 80%, anyway? person-hours? cost of the machinery? in a world full of lawyers, rules, rule-breakers and rule-skirters, you need definitions.

hanging on the wall in my shop is an 80% AR15 lower. i have a drill press, but i don't currently intend to ever finish it. i bought it just to have it, in case i need it.
never submit! (click "submit" button now.)

Re: ATF's 2021

16
Why would it be "indefensible" for it not to be difficult to make a firearm?
My argument is that nothing is actually being "made" at all, and it's a significant distinction. It's almost entirely a factory glock with no parts being made by the end user at all. They're just assembled. No one can honestly say they self manufactured a unique to them p80.

Not having a few pin holes and a block of plastic in the middle is closer to a casting flaw than it is anything else. It's like putting together Ikea furniture and claiming it's your own creation because you had to fix one stripped out particleboard hole.

This is about circumventing background checks. If you disagree with background checks that's fine, but either p80's need background checks too, or no guns need them. This makes no more sense than claiming all guns need background checks... Except Beretta 92's if you disassemble the trigger. Makes no sense.

Re: ATF's 2021

17
lurker wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 9:36 am
cooper wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 9:22 am But I don't understand the debate about what an 80 is.
somewhere between that rectangular block of metal (or polymer) and a gun-shaped piece of metal with a router template or the drill points machined on it and one with the holes all drilled is 80%. even "80%" itself is arbitrary: is it 80% done, or 80% to-be done? how do we determine 80%, anyway? person-hours? cost of the machinery? in a world full of lawyers, rules, rule-breakers and rule-skirters, you need definitions.

hanging on the wall in my shop is an 80% AR15 lower. i have a drill press, but i don't currently intend to ever finish it. i bought it just to have it, in case i need it.
I get your point. I guess I was thinking more about a couple of reasonable people agreeing on obvious stuff. Emphasis on "a couple of reasonable people." Based on your description of what is hanging on your wall and why you have it, it's a gun to me. I've never met you, but you play a reasonable person on line and I pretend to be reasonable at times, so I'm guessing between you and me we could agree on what that thing on your wall really is even if we disagree on whether someone should regulate it.

But yeah, open it up beyond a couple of reasonable people and you gotta get the lawyers involved. I concede that.

Re: ATF's 2021

18
and (what i think is) your point is perfectly valid. we're agonizing over the definition of a bit of hardware, while the real question should probably be who gets them, and what do they do with them?
never submit! (click "submit" button now.)

Re: ATF's 2021

19
So for the sake of argument say 80% is a technical definition and it's a firearm. What isn't? 75%? 60%? 50%? Less? Now come up with a working definition of when it became a firearm. What will you do when Ghost Gunner comes up with a CNC that will change that solid block into a firearm?

I don't understand why you'd want to go down that road.

Re: ATF's 2021

21
BKinzey wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 10:18 am So for the sake of argument say 80% is a technical definition and it's a firearm. What isn't? 75%? 60%? 50%? Less? Now come up with a working definition of when it became a firearm. What will you do when Ghost Gunner comes up with a CNC that will change that solid block into a firearm?

I don't understand why you'd want to go down that road.
The slippery slope. Agreed. Somewhere between a fully functional receiver and a can of sardines there's a point where it's not a gun. Hence, lawyers.

My point was. Let's be honest among reasonable people on why one buys an 80 percent glock.

Re: ATF's 2021

22
There are numerous reasons that someone might want to build from an eighty percent lower receiver. I suspect for many it's simply the fun of making something custom. Making guns has not been illegal and having guns that have no serial number has likewise not been illegal. I do wonder why this waste of time is being pursued. I also wonder what benefit there is to crying that people are making un-serialized guns for their own use and enjoyment, be they handguns or rifles. There is no registry of guns and who owns them, so the only reason one would push for a serial number even on home made guns is the eventual goal of pushing for a registry. I don't see the benefit of going down that road. We are heading into pre-crime territory with some of the ATF's writing, 'possible crime scene' is just as bogus as the term "assault weapon". Both have a huge undefined area that can be arbitrarily manipulated. No thanks.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: ATF's 2021

23
So, if I rent a 3D printer capable of making a Glock receiver, all I need to do is press a button and wait. Does that mean possessing the electricity, raw polymer, and the plan means I’m possessing a firearm?
Glad that federal government is boring again.

Re: ATF's 2021

24
Stiff wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 11:29 am So, if I rent a 3D printer capable of making a Glock receiver, all I need to do is press a button and wait. Does that mean possessing the electricity, raw polymer, and the plan means I’m possessing a firearm?
Like I said. I love gun forum arguments. We just hit the can of sardines argument and surpassed it.

Call out the lawyers.

Re: ATF's 2021

25
cooper wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 11:35 am
Stiff wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 11:29 am So, if I rent a 3D printer capable of making a Glock receiver, all I need to do is press a button and wait. Does that mean possessing the electricity, raw polymer, and the plan means I’m possessing a firearm?
Like I said. I love gun forum arguments. We just hit the can of sardines argument and surpassed it.

Call out the lawyers.
We need less lawyers. Lawyers are the reason we create messes like this. (Not including some of our lawyers, meaning politicians who are lawyers.)
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

cron