First, some of y'all didn't read the entire document. (or jumped to conclusions waaaay to early)
Second, I know,
we all know, the Second Amendment "includes "shall not be infringed" but its clear from US Supreme Court rulings over the years "shall not" really means "sometimes can be infringed".
Third, I don't want this thread to turn into a "ATF vs the Second Amendment" because it isn't. ATF can only develop regulations as the enabling law allows. In this case thats the Gun Control Act of 1968. Feel free to bag on ATF for all sorts of things, but you need to understand ATF's involvement is because OUR elected representatives in D.C. made it so.
Lastly, I'm going to attempt to explain what I think the impact will be. (ATF did that in this document, but I'll bet 87% didn't get past the first paragraph)
• New Definition of Receiver
This has been needed for decades and ATF explains why.
The current definition of "frame or receiver" wasn't well written in 1968 and certainly needs updating. For whatever reason (actually explained in the document) ATF long ago determined what parts were considered a "frame or receiver"....for the AR that's the lower half. Thank your lucky stars it isn't the upper AND lower. if you don't know why the lower only is a good thing educate yourself before posting.
For the same reasons, a Glock frame, a 1911 frame, a Sig 320 FCG.
Further, the new definition seems to bring clarity to silencers.....as they don't currently have a frame or receiver.
• Update Marking Requirements
Currently, homemade, personally made, ghost guns or whatever you think they are called are not required to be marked by the maker. This becomes an issue once the firearm is complete and the maker decides to sell that gun to someone else. Any FFL that receives such a firearm is required by Federal law to record the makers name, address, model, serial#, type and caliber......tough to abide by ATF regs when its not a pre 1968 firearm and it has no markings. This proposed change explains how that maker or the receiving FFL can mark the gun with information required for his records. ATF also says it aids in firearm tracing. Since Congress says thats part of their mission, so be it.
• New Gunsmithing Definition
Updates the definition of "gunsmith" to include those who mark privately made firearms.
• Update Record Retention
Currently, FFL's must keep their 4473's for twenty years, after which time they can destroy them. If they go out of business before the twenty years, they are required to send them to ATF. A dealers bound books are never destroyed, but sent to ATF when the dealer goes out of business. This proposed change will have dealers keeping their 4473's
forever.
• Other Technical Amendments
Little things, like requiring dealers to record multiple manufacturers, etc in their records. An example is a pistol made on a Poly80 frame by Jimmy Joe and has a Glock barrel/slide assembly.............apparently they want Poly80, Jimmy Joe and Glock listed as the manufacturer. Thats going to be a hot mess because it already is. Several years ago I had an ATF trace on a firearm that was sitting in my safe. The requesting agency used the serial# and model# off the Glock slide/barrel and NOT off the frame. The frame was in my safe.
Think about how that may cause you grief if you use parts of guns that you buy elsewhere for your ghost gun.
What a complete waste of taxpayer dollars. As if a crime victim knows or cares whether he was shot with a “ghost gun” or a factory made one.
Well, while I think gun traces work best on TV and the movies, the fact remains that most gun traces ARE NOT on firearms used to shoot someone. They are on firearms recovered by police officers at traffic stops for example. This is how many stolen guns are recovered.
Along with the grip modules for pistols like the Sig P320 and P365, since they house the fire control unit and would become a receiver under the new definition.
The FCG already IS a receiver under current ATF opinion.
That sounds to me like they would, for instance, stick with their long-standing position that the lower receiver of an AR is the "frame" that needs to be serialized, and that the upper receiver would not be controlled.
Yup
I wonder how something like that would affect a Ruger MK series pistol of which the “upper” is serialized but not the “lower”.
Likely no effect whatsoever.
