Actual text for ATF gun parts legislation

[SharpDog]

What does it mean vis-a-vis AR uppers, etc. ie. all I said in the locked thread previously ...

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ered-by-todays-ruling-s.904394/#post-12267203

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/r...frame-or-receiver-and-identification/download

 

[F-111 John]

See https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...identification-of-firearms-final-rule.904400/

As I read the new rules, ARs are grandfathered in and will continue to have the lower receiver as the serialized part.

 

[redcon1]

This is in the third paragraph of the final rule:

In the past few years, some courts have treated the regulatory definition of “firearm frame or receiver” as inflexible when applied to the lower portion of the AR-15- type rifle, one of the most popular firearms in the United States

It looks like the federal government just admitted, in a very official sense, that the AR15 is in common use.

ETA:
They did it again on page 13 and 14:

The NPRM discussed that at the time the regulatory definitions were promulgated, single-framed firearms such as revolvers and break-open shotguns were far more prevalent for civilian (i.e., not military or law enforcement) use in the United States than split receiver weapons, such as semiautomatic rifles and pistols with detachable magazines. Single-framed firearms incorporate the hammer, bolt or breechblock, and firing mechanism within the same housing. 86 FR at 27721.
Over time, split receiver firearms became popular for civilian use, such as the AR-15 semiautomatic rifle (upper receiver and lower receiver), Glock semiautomatic pistol (upper slide assembly and lower grip module), and Sig Sauer P320 pistol (M17/18 as adopted by the U.S. military) (upper slide assembly, chassis, and lower grip module)

and again: The NPRM explained that ATF’s regulatory definitions of “frame or receiver” do not expressly capture these types of firearms (i.e., split frames or receivers) that now constitute the majority of firearms in the United States.

And here on page 15 they flat out admit that there is a difference between the semiautomatic AR15 sold to civilians and the M16 "machinegun" designed for the military (and very specifically referenced by Scalia as being subject to regulation in the Heller decision):

While ATF for decades has classified the lower receiver of the AR-15 rifle as a “frame or receiver,” some courts recently have treated the regulatory definition as inflexible when applied to the lower portion of the AR-15-type rifle, which is the semiautomatic version of the M-16-type machinegun originally designed for the U.S. military.