My FFL- "ATF audit last week; you must bring an upper or its a pistol" 2/12/15

[jerkin]

I'd still use someone else.

Me too. Even if I knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that I couldn't be in any trouble I'd have it delivered somewhere else. I haven't seen where the OP ever mentioned the ffl trying to get clarification, sounds like he's just going to do what he's told.

[Emptymag]

"Hey guys, my FFL said that the ATF now mandates that all handguns transferred must be placed in a black, lockable container, and secured with a keyed padlock before leaving the shop."


Couldn't get in trouble doing THAT either, but I'd sure as shit not do a transfer with anyone who told me I had to do it.

[InfiniteMotors]

"Hey guys, my FFL said that the ATF now mandates that all handguns transferred must be placed in a black, lockable container, and secured with a keyed padlock before leaving the shop."


Couldn't get in trouble doing THAT either, but I'd sure as shit not do a transfer with anyone who told me I had to do it.

I get your position on this. It's a bit late for me to backtrack/use another FFL since it was already in shipment to him and he already has another of my shipments to put on the same transfer (one transfer fee). If I knew before I placed the order for the lower receiver, I'd have stopped there but made this thread just the same. Either way I'll get to have a nice face to face conversation with him about his interactions with the ATF and maybe even see something in writing.

[vinlander]

Please don't confuse the following with legal information, I'm not a lawyer, it's just like my opinion, man.

I think most people here are confused by what your FFL is telling you, because in the past the ATF has cracked down on FFLs who sold receivers marked as "pistol", and told them to transfer them as "other". In fact that is their publicly stated policy.

Maybe they changed their minds. Again. But it could also be a misunderstanding or bad information.

On top of that, your FFL is telling you that barreling the lower is enough, ignoring previous statements by the ATF that a stock has to be in place as well to properly consider it a rifle, rather than a "firearm." According to current information, just sticking a 16" upper on the lower does not make it a rifle. At least this is how I understand it (remember, IANAL.)

So maybe it would be worth investigating if a handful of other FFLs in your area has been told the same thing, and if not question your FFL or ask him to send the lower somewhere else.

[jerkin]

Please don't confuse the following with legal information, I'm not a lawyer, it's just like my opinion, man.

I think most people here are confused by what your FFL is telling you, because in the past the ATF has cracked down on FFLs who sold receivers marked as "pistol", and told them to transfer them as "other". In fact that is their publicly stated policy.

Maybe they changed their minds. Again. But it could also be a misunderstanding or bad information.

On top of that, your FFL is telling you that barreling the lower is enough, ignoring previous statements by the ATF that a stock has to be in place as well to properly consider it a rifle, rather than a "firearm." According to current information, just sticking a 16" upper on the lower does not make it a rifle. At least this is how I understand it (remember, IANAL.)

So maybe it would be worth investigating if a handful of other FFLs in your area has been told the same thing, and if not question your FFL or ask him to send the lower somewhere else.

You're backwards on the stock/barrel thing. Putting a stock on it doesn't matter, you can take it back off and still make it a pistol. Once you put a barrel on it then it becomes a rifle.

[InfiniteMotors]

I met my FFL last night and signed papers to take my new rifle and virgin lower away with me (2 separate firearms).

No pistol paperwork. No state registry. No worries. My paperwork actually has both the "long arm/rifle" box checked for the rifle as well as "other" for th lower.



Not sure what changed, perhaps our conversation combined with his desire to see congruent, realistic rules in place. Bottom line I walked away happy.

I still have some questions about how this played out and whether there were other FFL's being audited and receiving new instructions this month.

[WCMG]

...I still have some questions about how this played out and whether there were other FFL's being audited and receiving new instructions this month.

We had a visit by our IOI on 09-Dec-2014 and they didn't mention anything about the reclassification of stripped lowers.

[jerkin]

No way I could have left without asking him what happened, lol. Glad it worked out for you.