Limit on personal made guns

[JayBell]

Thanks alot guys for all the great info!! Now the worst part, me admitting im wrong. . . .damnit!! hate it when that happens lol. Thanks again guys!! Kyle

meh, you just got fed the same old "internet lore" that took over for the "fat old guys in gunshops lore"...

stuff like...owning machineguns means teh ATF can walk in yer house anytime without a search warrant... not

[nfafan]

We all know the ATF would never just make schiit up as they go...

[JayBell]

We all know the ATF would never just make schiit up as they go...

A couple years ago, the ATF admitted they have an amount of UNFILED by subject "opinion" letters thats some 90 feet long.

that should tell ya something right there.

[Little Cloud]

exactly right... whats next?

ATF Opinion letter #267733564421

"All home built firearms must come with a roast beef sandwich when transferred..."

What happens is that this recommendation letter suddenly disappears and the ATF shows up at your house, demanding to see your FFL builders licensure. That's what.

[JayBell]

What happens is that this recommendation letter suddenly disappears and the ATF shows up at your house, demanding to see your FFL builders licensure. That's what.

LOL, tthe letters are worthless anywaysince they dotn keep track of them, in general, they will lie

[GunLawyer001]

LOL, tthe letters are worthless anywaysince they dotn keep track of them, in general, they will lie

I don't recall the details, but there was a case where a citizen was prosecuted by ATF for something that he claimed ATF had told him to do; ATF denied telling him that; the defendant said "but I have you recorded saying it on tape, here...." and the court excluded the tape because he didn't have consent from the ATF employee to record the call. So ATF went ahead with their sworn denial (how you simultaneously say "there is no such conversation" and "I didn't consent to the taping of that conversation", I dunno, I guess they teach that to government workers). I believe he was convicted.

Wish I had the details, it's been a few years.

[justashooter]

if you hunt thru the archives of the FALFILES forum you will see that in 2003 i raised this issue in light of the AK flat bending jig i had just designed and published. in that moment i copied the text of the statute into the forum and remarked that it pertains only to liscensed manufacturers and importers. within a month the ATF issued the first opinion letter on the subject (all of these forums are monitored by ATF, and some are sponsored and operated by ATF).

over the next several months i was subject to a series of attempted entrapments. they were coming out of the woodwork, no matter where i went. the truth shall set you free, but speaking it out loud and in public can get you looked at awfully hard.

for reference, copied below in italics, the current ATF FAQ page answer to this question. noted that the word should is used in regard to marking homemade firearms before sale (last sentence). this differes from the original letter, which used the word shall, IIRC.

on a related note, in our interview for Type 1 FFL a few weeks ago i discussed the issue with the auditing inspector. he was aware of the issue and remarked that any firearm made must be marked as per manufacturer's requirements before entering the stream of interstate commerce. he also remarked that as a Type 1 FFL i was prohibited from manufacturing (Type 6), though enforcement seems to begin somewhere around the 50 piece per year mark, historically. (incidentally, we did get the liscense, in it's entirety, but i am in the midst of renovating some space in our house to operate out of at the moment, so we are not yet actively in business).

perhaps the lawyer will enlighten us as to the limits of the ATF to create "administrative law".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_law

ATF has historically taken the stance that activities not specifically covered by statute are subject to said on the grounds that they acheive the same ends. witness the case involving the stock patented some years ago for AK-47 and 10-22 rifles that was not a machine gun, and yet allowed a standard rifle to effectively function as such (Atkins Accelerator). after ATF approval was granted and production began, secondary review declared the device a non-registerable machine gun.

Q: Is it legal to assemble a firearm from commercially available parts kits that can be purchased via internet or shotgun news?
For your information, per provisions of the Gun Control Act (GCA) of 1968, 18 U.S.C. Chapter 44, an unlicensed individual may make a “firearm” as defined in the GCA for his own personal use, but not for sale or distribution.

The GCA, 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(3), defines the term “firearm” to include the following:

… (A) any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may be readily converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive: (B) the frame or receiver of any such weapon; (C) any firearm muffler or silencer; or (D) any destructive device. Such term does not include an antique firearm.
In addition, the National Firearms Act (NFA), 26 U.S.C. § 5845(b), defines the term “machinegun” as:

… any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. This term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.
Finally, the GCA, 18 U.S.C. § 922(r), specifically states the following:

It shall be unlawful for any person to assemble from imported parts any semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun which is identical to any rifle or shotgun prohibited from importation under the…[GCA]…Section 925(d)(3)…as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes ….
Also, 27 C.F.R. § 478.39 states:

…
(a) No person shall assemble a semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun using more than 10 of the imported parts listed in paragraph (c) of this section if the assembled firearm is prohibited from importation under section 925(d)(3) as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes ….
(b) The provisions of this section shall not apply to:
(1) The assembly of such rifle or shotgun for sale or distribution by a licensed manufacturer to the United States or any department or agency thereof or to any State or any department, agency, or political subdivision thereof; or (2) The assembly of such rifle or shotgun for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Director under the provisions of [§478.151(formerly 178.151)]; or (3) The repair of any rifle or shotgun which had been imported into or assembled in the United States prior to November 30, 1990, or the replacement of any part of such firearm.
(c) For purposes of this section, the term imported parts [tabulated below] are:
(1) Frames, receivers, receiver castings, forgings, or castings.
(2) Barrels.
(3) Barrel extensions.
(4) Mounting blocks (trunnions).
(5) Muzzle attachments.
(6) Bolts.
(7) Bolt carriers.
(8) Operating rods.
(9) Gas pistons.
(10) Trigger housings.
(11) Triggers.
(12) Hammers.
(13) Sears.
(14) Disconnectors.
(15) Buttstocks.
(16) Pistol grips.
(17) Forearms, handguards.
(18) Magazine bodies.
(19) Followers.
(20) Floor plates.
…
As a result of a 1989 study by the U.S. Treasury Department regarding the importability of certain firearms, an import ban was placed on military-style firearms. This ban included not only military-type firearms, but also extended to firearms with certain features that were considered to be “nonsporting.”

Among such nonsporting features were the ability to accept a detachable magazine; folding/telescoping stocks; separate pistol grips; and the ability to accept a bayonet, flash suppressors, bipods, grenade launchers, and night sights.

Please note that the foreign parts kits that are sold through commercial means are usually cut up machineguns, such as Russian AK-47 types, British Sten types, etc. Generally, an acceptable semiautomatic copy of a machinegun is one that has been significantly redesigned. The receiver must be incapable of accepting the original fire-control components that are designed to permit full automatic fire. The method of operation should employ a closed-bolt firing design that incorporates an inertia-type firing pin within the bolt assembly.

Further, an acceptably redesigned semiautomatic copy of nonsporting firearm must be limited to using less than 10 of the imported parts listed in 27 CFR § 478.39(c). Otherwise, it is considered to be assembled into a nonsporting configuration per the provisions of 18 U.S.C. 925(d)(3) and is thus a violation of § 922(r).

Individuals manufacturing sporting-type firearms for their own use need not hold Federal Firearms Licenses (FFLs). However, we suggest that the manufacturer at least identify the firearm with a serial number as a safeguard in the event that the firearm is lost or stolen. Also, the firearm should be identified as required in 27 CFR 478.92 if it is sold or otherwise lawfully transferred in the future.

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/fire...echnology.html

[JayBell]

as you say, they dropped the "SHALL" and put "should" and "suggest" in its place...they KNOW there is no basis in law to prosecute someone for failure to mark a home made firearm built for their own use, thuus they cannot promulgate their opinion as law, if there is no law to back it up.

congress makes the law, ATF interprets it, they cant make it.