What's new
What's new

AR lowers still receivers or not? Silly ATF....................

Lol, yeah this is an interesting legal case.

At this point it’s likely up to the individual judge. Some judges are undoubtly going to rule in favor of the ATF, while others, as we’ve seen, will rule against.

Either way I don’t want to be the guy who gets stuck with the legal bills.


Check out my website!
The Ballistic Assistant
 
I read the CNN article. This does raise a lot of questions regarding numerous modern firearm designs.

If we find ourselves in a situation where a rifle isn't a firearm until the two halves are put together by the buyer, where does this leave the industry? At that point why would anyone buy a complete rifle? Could a complete rifle be disassembled and both halves sold without a background check?

The easy way out is for Congress to ban the manufacture of firearms by unlicenced parties. That would mean we would all have to buy reciever sets as both halves together do fulfill the definition of reciever. It would also mean no more home built rolling blocks.
 
Federal law, to the degree that I understand it, is that anyone who has no background prohibitions can build a firearm of his/her own as long as he doesn't sell it, it's the selling that draws the legal problems. So if some kind hearted person makes a firearm and gives it to his kid (Of age) or a friend he knows there's no problem. Of course in states like mine where tyrants rule the Bill of Rights doesn't apply (Boggles my mind typing that) and I'd have to have a background check done to even give a gun I made to a friend I've known for 50 years, of course it doesn't make any sense, nor do tyrants need it to, the object is to restrict gun ownership and use, you know, the "Keep and bear" stuff.
But the guy running the "Build your own AR" parties, did he get paid for the machine usage, or the knowledge of what to do?
I don't understand why the BATF cannot consider two component parts of a single gun to both be the firearm, after all, any single baffle of a suppressor is considered a suppressor for legal means, how is that different?
 
Federal law, to the degree that I understand it, is that anyone who has no background prohibitions can build a firearm of his/her own as long as he doesn't sell it, it's the selling that draws the legal problems. So if some kind hearted person makes a firearm and gives it to his kid (Of age) or a friend he knows there's no problem.


The prohibition is on "INTENT TO TRANSFER" NOT sale.
 
The prohibition is on "INTENT TO TRANSFER" NOT sale.

Exactly. Manufacturing with intent to transfer. While intent can never be proven, the ATF will generally assume you made them with intent to transfer if you make more than three firearms per year or if you hold one for less than two years before transferring.
 
Exactly. Manufacturing with intent to transfer. While intent can never be proven, the ATF will generally assume you made them with intent to transfer if you make more than three firearms per year or if you hold one for less than two years before transferring.

Which is just another bullshit ATF number like 16" or 10rds.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
 








 
Back
Top