Proposed 'ghost gun' rule could reshape battle against homemade guns: Experts

[TRX]

They may also be counting pre-1968 guns that didn't have serial numbers. Not all manufacturers numbered all their guns. There were also imported military surplus rifles that had no numbers; they came with "rack numbers" painted on the stocks or unit badges screwed to the stocks.

 

[N555]

They may also be counting pre-1968 guns that didn't have serial numbers. Not all manufacturers numbered all their guns. There were also imported military surplus rifles that had no numbers; they came with "rack numbers" painted on the stocks or unit badges screwed to the stocks.

Good point. Or old milsurp that has Russian letters and therefore effectively no S/N.

 

[armoredman]

I believe one of the motives behind this was a legal case in CA, IIRC, where a guy had been building ARs for criminal types, and when the busted him he said I have no firearms, because nether the upper or lower meet the traditional definition of a firearm receiver. He was right, and, again, IIRC, the case was quietly dismissed.
I can see serialized uppers to lowers on ARs being the main push here, and getting spread out to other parts/firearms will only be a bonus for the gun grabbers, and never, ever, ever used against the criminal element.

 

[12Bravo20]

I can see serialized uppers to lowers on ARs being the main push here, and getting spread out to other parts/firearms will only be a bonus for the gun grabbers, and never, ever, ever used against the criminal element.

It is NOT just AR uppers that they want serialized. They want pistol slides and all barrels serialized too. So no more buying spare/conversion barrels or different slides for your pistols either (without going through a FFL). What this rule change basically does is make it so one can't buy spare/replacement parts without going through a FFL and doing a background check. Do we need to go through a background check for a stripped slide, stripped upper receiver or barrel????? No we do NOT.

And serializing BOTH upper and lower receivers of an AR makes no sense considering so many people will buy just one lower and multiple uppers in different calibers.

 

[Megawatt maker]

It is NOT just AR uppers that they want serialized. They want pistol slides and all barrels serialized too. So no more buying spare/conversion barrels or different slides for your pistols either (without going through a FFL). What this rule change basically does is make it so one can't buy spare/replacement parts without going through a FFL and doing a background check. Do we need to go through a background check for a stripped slide, stripped upper receiver or barrel????? No we do NOT.

And serializing BOTH upper and lower receivers of an AR makes no sense considering so many people will buy just one lower and multiple uppers in different calibers.

Again, I haven't actually seen this in writing yet...only internet conjecture. 80% lowers and frames...ya...thats in the writing...but nothing about any other parts.

That may be what they want...but this new rule doesn't seem to do that...unless I'm wrong..

Am I? Can anyone point out how I am?

 

[12Bravo20]

Again, I haven't actually seen this in writing yet...only internet conjecture. 80% lowers and frames...ya...thats in the writing...but nothing about any other parts.

That may be what they want...but this new rule doesn't seem to do that...unless I'm wrong..

Am I? Can anyone point out how I am?

Here is the paragraph talking about requiring slides will need to be serialized. https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-10058/p-21

Here is the full proposed rule change: https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...me-or-receiver-and-identification-of-firearms

The ATF must have taken out the part about barrels needing to be serialized, or I over looked it myself. I do know in one draft, they did call for barrels to be serialized also.

 

[Megawatt maker]

Here is the paragraph talking about requiring slides will need to be serialized. https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-10058/p-21

Here is the full proposed rule change: https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...me-or-receiver-and-identification-of-firearms

The ATF must have taken out the part about barrels needing to be serialized, or I over looked it myself. I do know in one draft, they did call for barrels to be serialized also.

I've read it...and while it will make your eyes go crossed, it states that its not changing the definition of receiver or frame, several times in fact, and nowhere does it specify that the uppers must now be serialed. They are expanding it to 80% lowers no doubt..but it doesn't say in black and white that uppers will now have to be numbered.

 

[12Bravo20]

I've read it...and while it will make your eyes go crossed, it states that its not changing the definition of receiver or frame, several times in fact, and nowhere does it specify that the uppers must now be serialed. They are expanding it to 80% lowers no doubt..but it doesn't say in black and white that uppers will now have to be numbered.

You need to go re-read it then. The proposed rule change does indeed talk about AR uppers and striker fired slides being considered "firearms"

 

[herrwalther]

I've read it...and while it will make your eyes go crossed, it states that its not changing the definition of receiver or frame, several times in fact, and nowhere does it specify that the uppers must now be serialed. They are expanding it to 80% lowers no doubt..but it doesn't say in black and white that uppers will now have to be numbered.

Next, the new definition more broadly describes a “frame or receiver” as one that provides housing or a structure designed to hold or integrate any fire control component. Unlike the prior definitions of “frame or receiver” that were rigidly tied to three specific fire control components (i.e., those necessary for the firearm to initiate or complete the firing sequence), the new regulatory definition is intended to be general enough to encompass changes in technology and parts terminology. With respect to the fire control components housed by the frame or receiver, the definition would include, at a minimum, any housing or holding structure for a hammer, bolt, bolt carrier, breechblock, cylinder, trigger mechanism, firing pin, striker, or slide rails. However, the definition is not limited to those particular fire control components.

 

[Old Dog]

Here’s a question for current FFLs and LE - In the majority of cases, does it even help an investigation to be able to discover the first transaction of a firearm?

Nope, not usually, and typically only aids the investigation/prosecution if the perpetrator of the crime (1) is in possession of a firearm reported as stolen and/or (2) is a prohibited person, one who by law cannot legally possess a firearm.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Know what really matters?

That people who commit criminal acts are held accountable for their actions.

Know what has exceptionally little impact on criminal acts? Serial numbers on any weapons used.

Know what has historically been of next to zero usefulness in criminal apprehension and prosecution? Serial numbers on any weapons used.

ANYTHING having to do with serial numbers and tracking of firearms has so little effect on criminal activities, apprehension, and prosecution that it's practically off the "point of diminishing returns" scale.

It's like taking your car to a mechanic because its gas mileage has dropped from its normal 36 mpg to 8 mpg with a significant loss of power and the mechanic saying "Hey, I noticed your VIN number is wrong on your registration card in the glove compartment!" Yeah, well how about diagnosing and fixing that fuel injection system, Sherlock.

 

[AlexanderA]

Like everything else gun-related, this proposal is a day late and a dollar short. I have the impression that everyone remotely interested in doing an "80%" build, either now or in the future, has already stocked up on unfinished receivers. Or at least, they're on notice and will do so soon. The proposal, when it goes into effect, will have zero effect on anything.

 

[SchmidtRubin]

You can't cure a disease by treating the symptoms.
Why are violent people violent? Why are they concentrated in certain cities that have been under a certain political parties control for decades?

 

[CapnMac]

Here is the full proposed rule change:

And, that's still in the same limbo that the "pistol brace" Rule Change still is.
There were a quarter of a million public comments on the one and an eight of a million for the other--and, by law, they all have to be answered.
I made extensive, and multiple Comments on both, and in considerable detail--and have not heard anything back at all. If they--BATFE--fail to answer the Public Comments before the mandated response time is reached, then they have to retract the Proposed Changes.
This is arguing about the shape of yesterday's clouds and similarly productive.

 

[DoubleMag]

Here is the paragraph talking about requiring slides will need to be serialized. https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-10058/p-21

from the linked paragraph AutoTransFluid p) doc ... ''At the time these definitions were published around 50 years ago, single-framed firearms such as revolvers and break-open shotguns were far more prevalent for civilian use than split/multi-piece receiver weapons, such as semiautomatic rifles and pistols with detachable magazines.''

SOMETHING tells me...the proposal being 2021 and 50 yrs before that places the statement at 1971 and 50 + yrs BEFORE THAT was the...1911. Which was NOT the only so-called 'split receiver' pistol.

In the very next paragraph they admit to, these 2 portion style guns are in common use. To that I add, VERY common use.

 

[DoubleMag]

AGAIN I say...sharpen your pencils and ready that $5 spot for the lawsuits. If I have any influence at all with the FPC, I will be asking for non-use damages or some type of monetary settlement for any & all affected parties. If someone has to send in their rare pre-68 firearm for service and it gits serialized, well, PAY THE CITIZEN.

Johnny gangbanger goes thru the extremely large and revolving door of court SANS PRISON is the problem , NOT ppl building personal guns since before the nations founding.

 

[Officers'Wife]

Forgive my cynicism but we all know this is "some" major AR-15 manufacturer "influencing" the government to stifle their competition.

 

[N555]

Forgive my cynicism but we all know this is "some" major AR-15 manufacturer "influencing" the government to stifle their competition.

Not to be ruled out. Sounds like something colt would do.

 

[kwguy]

Let these morons codify “80%”. It’s literally a meaningless number, made up to sound cool. Then, the manufacturers of these non firearms can just change the label to “paperweight”.

 

[Buzznrose]

I’m a huge supporter of all things firearm, including the right for law abiding people to make and use their own firearms. ( I live in a State where you can’t make your own handguns and the 80% AR is going the way of the dodo bird in July.) But the misuse of these home made guns by the criminal element across the Country is going to absolutely ruin it for all of us who abide by the rules and don’t go out looking to shoot other people.

Once this ban mentality gets traction, and it gets more every week with incessant reporting of the latest act of criminal ignorance, it’ll be the end of them for everyone.

Stay safe.

Is there really a trend that this is happening? I've heard otherwise from Cam Edwards but would like to know if he's wrong...

 

[Zerodefect]

What did they think was going to happen when they let every violent criminal with similar political views off the hook with a free pass for more? Didn't Carolina bring back firing squads? We have way, waaaay too many hardened criminals on the street. They can't be released, if the ain't still around.

I've worked too many prisons. And it appears, that at least half of the inmates will never ever be useful to society. It's an absolute pipe dream that these people will ever be rehabilitated.

The problem isn't easy to build pistols. Pistols will only get easier and easier to fab as hobby mills get more and more advanced. Only the barrel is the slightest challenge.

Serializing barrels might work. For a while. But like posted already, stupid laws only effect the law abiding. Our gov't will never understand this, because most of them.......also aren't law abiding.

 

[dogtown tom]

Here is the paragraph talking about requiring slides will need to be serialized. https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-10058/p-21

That's NOT what that paragraph is discussing.

Here is the full proposed rule change: https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...me-or-receiver-and-identification-of-firearms

The ATF must have taken out the part about barrels needing to be serialized, or I over looked it myself. I do know in one draft, they did call for barrels to be serialized also.

They didn't take it out because it was never part of the proposed regulation.
ATF doesn't want to serialize every part......that will be a nightmare and they know it. Imagine a firearm trace that has a different serial# for the AR lower, the upper and barrel.
The impetus of this proposed regulation was another federal judge's opinion that an AR lower is not a firearm as defined in federal law and ATF regulations. This proposed regulation is to be more precise in defining what part of a firearm is required to have the serial number. The current definition is outdated.

The unenlightened cheered when this article appeared: https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/t...-15-lower-as-a-firearm-is-in-serious-trouble/ thinking "Ooooo...the ATF made a boo boo ha ha ha". Not realizing ATF was doing us a favor by only regulating the AR lower (or 1911 frame, a Glock frame or a Sig FCG).
Well, for the purposes of defining a firearm receiver, which would you rather have:
1. Only the AR lower receiver be considered the firearm receiver?
or
2. Both the AR lower AND upper receiver being considered the firearm receiver?
Me? I'll take #1.

Why didn't ATF's definition of "firearm receiver" keep up with technology? Who knows. It wasn't an issue until the last five years when an eagled eyed attorney bothered reading the definitions in federal law and ATF regulations.....that have been around since 1968. ATF could easily have decided in 1968 that both an AR upper and lower were regulated, but they didn't. Same with handgun slides and frames.

With several recent criminal cases hinging on whether an AR lower or Glock frame BY ITSELF constitutes a "firearm", it should have been expected that ATF would reexamine their definitions. And thats what this proposed regulation is intended to do.........define more precisely what part of a specific firearm is going to be considered the "firearm" and be the part that must bear certain required information.

It DOES NOT mean that every firearm barrel, slide, upper, lower, etc will be considered a "firearm" by itself. It means that ATF gets to determine exactly what part of an AR is the one part that must bear the manufacturer or makers name, serial#, etc.........just as they've been doing since 1968. Same for what part of a 1911 or Glock or Sig FCG,

Further, this proposed regulation DOES NOT requires "privately made" (homemade or ghost guns) to be marked. It's literally in the proposed definition of "Privately Made Firearm".
Only when such a firearm is transferred to an FFL would it be required to be marked......by the FFL.

 

[dogtown tom]

It is NOT just AR uppers that they want serialized. They want pistol slides and all barrels serialized too. So no more buying spare/conversion barrels or different slides for your pistols either (without going through a FFL). What this rule change basically does is make it so one can't buy spare/replacement parts without going through a FFL and doing a background check. Do we need to go through a background check for a stripped slide, stripped upper receiver or barrel????? No we do NOT.

And serializing BOTH upper and lower receivers of an AR makes no sense considering so many people will buy just one lower and multiple uppers in different calibers.

Horsehockey.
The last thing ATF wants is running more than one serial# on a gun trace.....and that already happens with Glocks (barrel, slide and frame).

 

[dogtown tom]

Forgive my cynicism but we all know this is "some" major AR-15 manufacturer "influencing" the government to stifle their competition.

We do?
What on earth would be the reason any "major AR -15 manufacturer" would think any regulation would "stifle" the competition?
Good grief. If you have a conspiracy theory make it better than this.

 

[dogtown tom]

Let these morons codify “80%”. It’s literally a meaningless number, made up to sound cool. Then, the manufacturers of these non firearms can just change the label to “paperweight”.

How much of the proposed regulation did you read?
You missed this:

42.  The term “80% receiver” is a term used by some industry members, the public, and the media to describe a frame or receiver that has not yet reached a stage in manufacture to be classified as a “frame or receiver” under Federal law. However, that term is neither found in Federal law nor accepted by ATF.