Post by: Windwalker on January 04, 2015, 02:39:02 AM
Just when I think of something fun to do they spoil it.
ATF Rul. 2015-1
http://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/Firearms/FirearmsIndustry/atf-ruling-2015-1-manufacturing-and-gunsmithing.pdf (http://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/Firearms/FirearmsIndustry/atf-ruling-2015-1-manufacturing-and-gunsmithing.pdf)
January 2, 2015
Any person (including any corporation or other legal entity) engaged in the business of
performing machining, molding, casting, forging, printing (additive manufacturing) or other
manufacturing process to create a firearm frame or receiver, or to make a frame or receiver
suitable for use as part of a “weapon ... which will or is designed to or may readily be converted
to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive,” i.e., a “ firearm,” must be licensed as a
manufacturer under the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA); identify (mark) any such firearm; and
maintain required manufacturer’s records. A business (including an association or society) may
not avoid the manufacturing license, marking, and recordkeeping requirements of the GCA by
allowing persons to perform manufacturing processes on firearms (including frames or
receivers) using machinery or equipment under its dominion and control where that business
controls access to, and use of, such machinery or equipment. ATF Ruling 2010-10 is hereby clarified.
(summarized for brevity)
Held, any person (including any corporation or other legal entity) engaged in the business
of performing machining, molding, casting, forging, printing (additive manufacturing) or other
manufacturing process to create a firearm frame or receiver, or to make a frame or receiver
suitable for use as part of a “weapon … which will or is designed to or may readily be converted
to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive,” i.e., a “firearm,” must be licensed as a
manufacturer under the GCA; identify (mark) any such firearm; and maintain required
manufacturer’s records.
- 6 -
Held further, a business (including an association or society) may not avoid the
manufacturing license, marking, and recordkeeping requirements of the GCA by allowing
persons to perform manufacturing processes on blanks or incomplete firearms (including frames
or receivers) using machinery, tools, or equipment under its dominion and control where that
business controls access to, and use of, such machinery, tools, or equipment.
Held further, this ruling is limited to an interpretation of the requirements imposed on
persons under the GCA, and does not interpret the requirements of the National Firearms Act, 26
U.S.C. 5801 et. seq.
ATF Ruling 2010-10 is hereby clarified.
Date approved: January 2, 2015
B. Todd Jones
Director
Post by: Jingles on January 04, 2015, 05:54:14 AM
Post by: Fl0und3rz on January 04, 2015, 10:26:59 AM
Post by: addicted on January 04, 2015, 10:31:14 AM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on January 04, 2015, 10:45:29 AM
Post by: Bean Counter on January 04, 2015, 10:49:35 AM
Post by: jay.sharkbait on January 04, 2015, 11:01:06 AM
This clarification only applies to people finishing 80% rec'rs at commercial machine shops......
Post by: T Pearce on January 04, 2015, 01:45:24 PM
Anyone read unintended consequences?Recommended reading.
Between that book and the movie No country for old men, I rather not leave the BOL.
:tinfoil:
Post by: Bigshooter on January 04, 2015, 02:12:21 PM
Post by: csaaphill on January 04, 2015, 04:55:36 PM
Not to be a total non conformists or question my government but I think I would have to check exactly what is in the Gun Control Act of 1968. Departments DO NOT MAKE federal laws the congress does then they are either signed or vetoed by the President. That is why the constitution is so important and we need to get back to a Constitutionally run Government. Tired of all this change this or that to suit someone in charge saying I want to change this so I'll make it a regulation.. Regulations Are NOT LAWS........ fu-- THEIR REGULATIONS:yeah: exaclty seems like just because they know tons of people might be doing this they make this crap up F that crap.
How many more usurpations and absolute despotisms do we put up with?
Post by: Windwalker on January 05, 2015, 12:37:22 AM
The spirit of this IMHO is focused on warning businesses intent on machining AR blanks for others.
Which...doesn't make sense financially so the other tact would be reining in unserialized build projects with decent CNC machines.
More of a risk if you take it to a buddy's shop or do it at work if they decide a "distribution" has taken place and require you to be licensed as a manufacturer..
"(includes making a frame or receiver, or taking any of the steps to make an existing frame or receiver functional)"
Hmm, so no more AR lower machining parties at the local machine shop.
"If the above mentioned activities were permitted, firearms could be legally manufactured without any markings or serialization by dealer-gunsmiths
who could avoid licensing as a manufacturer simply because his/her customer is unlicensed. For example, instead of purchasing marked and serialized
receivers or complete weapons from licensed dealers, individuals might purchase unregulated castings or machined/molded bodies from a supplier,
perform a minor machining or other operation sufficient to create a “firearm frame or receiver,” contract with a gunsmith to perform necessary and
substantial machining operations, and then assemble a complete weapon without marks of identification or records of production. :chuckle:
Such activity runs contrary to a major purpose of the GCA in that it eliminates the ability of law enforcement to trace firearms used in crime, or stolen or lost firearms."
- defines a “person” to include “any individual, corporation, company, association, firm, partnership, society, or joint stock company.”
A business (including an association or society) may not avoid the manufacturing license, marking, and record keeping requirements under the GCA
simply by allowing individuals to initiate or manipulate a CNC machine, or to use machinery, tools, or equipment under its dominion or control to perform
manufacturing processes on blanks, unfinished frames or receivers, or incomplete weapons.
Post by: csaaphill on January 05, 2015, 07:49:49 PM
Not to be a total non conformists or question my government but I think I would have to check exactly what is in the Gun Control Act of 1968. Departments DO NOT MAKE federal laws the congress does then they are either signed or vetoed by the President. That is why the constitution is so important and we need to get back to a Constitutionally run Government. Tired of all this change this or that to suit someone in charge saying I want to change this so I'll make it a regulation.. Regulations Are NOT LAWS........ fu-- THEIR REGULATIONS:yeah:
but it doesn't mater anymore Jingles, a Constitutionaly Protected Republic died long ago, when people began circumventing our rights and no reprisel from us so...
But dunno from what I read anyone means anyone as in Me or anyone else who has thier own machine shop and can do all the steps their own has to comply or die basically. :tinfoil: me all you want, but this is just one more nail in the coffin of those wanting to stay away from GOv entity's knowing what you building etc.. AND ya they shutt down the web site that offered files for 3d prinitng thier own plastic reciever. People really need to shutt up and not advertise freedom to the feds or anyone really, because once the find out liberty dies.
Post by: Windwalker on January 05, 2015, 10:46:03 PM
Sorry state of affairs..
The new trend seems to be public announcement via (well attached) 'leaks' pertaining to a memo or new direction via interpretation or vague ideal held by the supreme commander.
No law, just hearsay.
Leftists tow the line and surround it with published support & it becomes the new way things are done.
Any grief is followed up with IRS inquiries, tip offs to BATF etc.
If you support, coffers filled, special assignments made or favors filled.
They come to be accepted by degrees, by precedent, by implication, by default, by dint of constant pressure on one side and constant retreat on the other –
until the day when they are suddenly declared to be the country’s official ideology.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
Post by: timberfaller on January 06, 2015, 09:20:57 AM
Don't lie,cheat or steal!! The Government Hates competition!!
Yes, the Republic has been under attack for decades mainly by the Democratic Party and lazy Republicans! Aided by LIV'S!
Post by: Special T on January 06, 2015, 10:12:44 AM
The way I read it- unlicensed individuals can convert 80% lowers, if they own all the equipment.
The spirit of this IMHO is focused on warning businesses intent on machining AR blanks for others.Which...doesn't make sense financially so the other tact would be reining in unserialized build projects with decent CNC machines.
More of a risk if you take it to a buddy's shop or do it at work if they decide a "distribution" has taken place and require you to be licensed as a manufacturer..
"(includes making a frame or receiver, or taking any of the steps to make an existing frame or receiver functional)"
Hmm, so no more AR lower machining parties at the local machine shop.
"If the above mentioned activities were permitted, firearms could be legally manufactured without any markings or serialization by dealer-gunsmiths
who could avoid licensing as a manufacturer simply because his/her customer is unlicensed. For example, instead of purchasing marked and serialized
receivers or complete weapons from licensed dealers, individuals might purchase unregulated castings or machined/molded bodies from a supplier,
perform a minor machining or other operation sufficient to create a “firearm frame or receiver,” contract with a gunsmith to perform necessary and
substantial machining operations, and then assemble a complete weapon without marks of identification or records of production. :chuckle:
Such activity runs contrary to a major purpose of the GCA in that it eliminates the ability of law enforcement to trace firearms used in crime, or stolen or lost firearms."
- defines a “person” to include “any individual, corporation, company, association, firm, partnership, society, or joint stock company.”
A business (including an association or society) may not avoid the manufacturing license, marking, and record keeping requirements under the GCA
simply by allowing individuals to initiate or manipulate a CNC machine, or to use machinery, tools, or equipment under its dominion or control to perform
manufacturing processes on blanks, unfinished frames or receivers, or incomplete weapons.
I agree with yourstatment. I know of several guys who have done the build your own party with an automated CNC machine... most actually bought 60% lowers and finished them. Government is behind the times and since the manufacture of the jigs has been so sucessful the end product works too well. The ATF is going after those with the most to lose, and strong arming them into complience. Since the risk VS reward is low you wont find people bucking this ruling... you will however find Jigs to do this as a great investment. :twocents:
Post by: Windwalker on January 09, 2015, 07:41:55 PM
http://jpfo.org/articles-2015/atf-rules-and-private-guns.htm (http://jpfo.org/articles-2015/atf-rules-and-private-guns.htm)
Monday, JPFO contributor and National Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea noted that in its first ruling of the new year, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) has determined that a business, merely by making its machining equipment available for a fee, to individuals to use in building a firearm, has now "manufactured" the gun, and must meet all the requirements imposed on commercial gun manufacturers. This includes a gun manufacturer's license from the BATFE, the marking of the firearm (or receiver, which for legal purposes is the firearm) with a serial number, manufacturers' record keeping, and conducting a background check on the person who actually did the work in making the gun.
This, although heinous, should not have been unexpected. The BATFE had asserted such a position, if only informally, almost two years ago. Again from David Codrea:
. . . an April 12, 2013 letter from Debra S. Satowiak, Chief, Firearms and Explosives Industry Division, to Jason Davis, attorney for Ares Armor Metal Works, LLC, advised that a Federal Firearms License is required for “a business premises at which, for a fee, it makes available a computer numeric control (CNC) machine, tools, equipment, and instructions to persons who bring in castings or raw materials for the purpose of creating firearms.”
This, of course, raises a good many questions. Attorney Joshua Prince asks one:
“Can a company offer membership, whereby any member is entitled to utilize the company equipment for free, and the member complete his/her/its firearm on the company equipment since the business would not be engage in the business?” he asks. “Do machine shops now need to inquire of the individual as to what he/she/it is going to be utilizing the machinery for?”
If you own one of Defense Distributed's "Ghost Gunner" firearm-optimized CNC milling machines, and a buddy wanting to complete his "80% complete" AR-15 receiver offers to bring a pizza in exchange for use of the machine, would you become an "unlicensed gun manufacturer" (and a gun trafficker) if you agreed?
For that matter, if renting out access to one's machining equipment, which is then used to manufacture a gun, is to be considered "being in the business of" manufacturing firearms, how is selling the equipment any different?
Incredibly, the rampant illogic gets worse. Ares Armor, a company that manufactures "80% complete" AR-15 receivers (some polymer, and some aluminum), and has been doing battle with the BATFE for nearly a year now, took to their Facebook page to amusingly summarize perhaps the most ridiculous aspect of the new ruling (warning: mild profanity in the link): https://www.facebook.com/AresArmor/posts/983560471673517?fref=nf (https://www.facebook.com/AresArmor/posts/983560471673517?fref=nf)
Question 1: So an 80% lower is not a firearm...
ATF Answer: Correct
Question 2: So if I drill a single hole in the fire-control pocket of an 80% lower then it is a firearm...
ATF Answer: Correct
Question 3: Ok then... If an 80% lower with one hole drilled in the FCP is a firearm... can I then take the firearm that I made at home to an FFL and have him complete the rest of the work because he isn't manufacturing the firearm, he is just "gunsmithing" the firearm... I already manufactured the firearm by drilling the hole so it should be no problem right...
ATF Answer: Oh Crap!!!!!!!! ummmmm... Let me get back to you on that. No that can't be right... There is no way you can do that... That is not fair! you cheated!
What this is about is that the BATFE has previously ruled that by drilling a single hole in the fire control cavity of an 80% complete receiver, or even making the material that should be removed a different color, so that the home gun maker can more easily see what must be done to make the receiver usable, the 80% complete receiver is not just an 80% complete receiver, and is instead a full-blown firearm (well, firearm receiver, which amounts to the same thing by law).
This became a problem for them when people realized that they could buy an 80% receiver, drill a single hole in the fire control cavity themselves, thus making the receiver "complete" in the BATFE's eyes, even though considerably more machining would be required to make the receiver usable in a functional firearm. That, in turn, means that if now the owner of the "gun" turns it over to a gunsmith with the right machining equipment, the gunsmith could do the rest of the machining, and it wouldn't be "manufacturing" a gun (which, after all," has already been "manufactured), but merely "gunsmithing" (modifying, repairing, etc.), requiring no serial number, no background check, etc.
This, of course, could not be borne. So part of this new ruling www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/Firearms/FirearmsIndustry/atf-ruling-2015-1-manufacturing-and-gunsmithing.pdf (http://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/Firearms/FirearmsIndustry/atf-ruling-2015-1-manufacturing-and-gunsmithing.pdf) fabricates a new, artificial distinction in gunsmithing.
ATF Ruling 2010-10 does recognize that gunsmiths may improve firearms by participating in the manufacturing process. However, none of the enumerated processes (i.e., repairing, modifying,embellishing, refurbishing, installing parts, or specialized finishing) actually create a frame or receiver, or make an existing frame or receiver suitable for use in assembling a “weapon” capable of expelling a projectile.
This is consistent with the traditional services that gunsmiths offer. Generally, licensed gunsmiths perform actions in repairing or improving firearms that are already complete weapons, or capable of being assembled as such. Gunsmiths do not perform the machining or other manufacturing processes to create frames or receivers, or make them suitable for use in assembling a weapon that can expel a projectile.
So now, any gunsmith or machinist who is hired by the "gun" owner to complete the machining is going to be ruled to have "manufactured" a gun, and will thus be held to the same restrictions that apply to all commercial gun manufacturers. The BATFE is insisting on having its cake and eating it, too. They have previously argued that an 80% receiver ceases to be an 80% receiver, and becomes a "firearm," if the manufacturer does so much as scratch an outline showing where material needs to be milled away; but now, if the buyer of what the BATFE recognizes as an incomplete receiver similarly removes some of the material that must be removed in order to make the receiver function in a firearm, and then turns it over to a skilled professional gunsmith or machinist to finish the work, the professional ends up being considered the one to have "manufactured" the gun.
We're incessantly told about the dangers of failing to keep firearms out of the hands of the mentally incompetent. How much more dangerous, though, is it to hand guns, badges, and the power to formulate gun policy (no legislation needed!) to such people?
Post by: Special T on January 09, 2015, 10:26:23 PM
Post by: csaaphill on January 09, 2015, 10:34:30 PM
That example just shows how absurd this really is. A good jig, drill press and some bits can hog out aluminum with enough tolerance to make this work. Im tempted to do this just to thumb my nose at these jack wagons. :bash::yeah:
Post by: Greenhorn on December 31, 2015, 03:29:23 PM
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/29/cnc-ghost-gunner-machine-forges-path-homemade-ar-15-rifles/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social
https://www.ghostgunner.net/
Post by: jay.sharkbait on December 31, 2015, 03:39:19 PM
Resurrecting an old thread, but I just saw this article on Breitbart and I was wondering if anything has changed in the last year with milling your own 80% lower.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/29/cnc-ghost-gunner-machine-forges-path-homemade-ar-15-rifles/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social
https://www.ghostgunner.net/
Nothing has changed.
It looks like they have a modified 3D printer that has a cutting head instead of an extruder. I think you could get similar or even better results with the jigs that are available.
The stepper motors and belts he's using aren't up to machining quality parts.
Actually the whole thing could be a spoof.