You can comment on BATFE's new rules here

45/70 hunter

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
I don't have the attention span to read that. What's the meat

to provide new regulatory definitions of “firearm frame or receiver” and “frame or receiver"

amending ATF's definitions of “firearm” and “gunsmith”

to provide definitions of terms such as “complete weapon,” “complete muffler or silencer device,” “privately made firearm,” and “readily”
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CRC

CRC

Old Mossy Horns
Last edited:

Deep River

Ten Pointer
Contributor
80%, unfinished AR lowers would now be required to be serial numbered and regulated as a firearm, and so would AR upper halves.

If I understand that second point correctly, an AR would be considered and regulated as two separate firearms: the lower half and the upper half. Why??
 

Deep River

Ten Pointer
Contributor
... so, what part on an AR upper must carry a serial number, and therefore must functionally be regulated as a firearm?

The upper receiver half. After a quick read, BATF is claiming that they have to change their definitions of what constitutes a firearm receiver because they have been losing battles in court. They currently classify the lower receiver of ARs (and many other firearms) as the receiver, but the lower receiver does not house all of the components that governing law says the receiver of a firearm houses. For an AR, the hammer is in the lower receiver while the bolt is in the upper.

So, it appears that they may be trying to 'fix' this by defining both halves of the receiver group as a receiver, neither of which meets the legal definition of a receiver? If that is what this change is saying, I predict many more loses in court.
 
Last edited:

Deep River

Ten Pointer
Contributor
I just did a more thorough reading of the proposed rule change. With regard to this split frame/receiver issue, I think the way it is being portrayed by some advocacy groups may not be correct. They specifically say that they will continue to identify the individual part of existing split frame designs as THE receiver that they had been previously.

The change with regard to 80% lowers looks like the real deal though. I predict that most of us won't care.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CRC

CRC

Old Mossy Horns
No I don't think an AR-15 upper will have to be serialized

From the proposed regs:

Although the new definition would more broadly define the term “frame or receiver” than the current definition, it is not intended to alter any prior determinations by ATF of what it considers the frame or receiver of a particular split/modular weapon. ATF would also continue to consider the same factors when classifying firearms (see Section I.A of the preamble).

Too many split receiver firearms used by law enforcement and bodyguards of the elite to go that far.

NEW split/multi piece receiver designs will require serialization of all receivers as I read it.
 
Last edited:
Top