ATF To Expand Definition Of A Regulated Firearm Receiver

[ChattanoogaPhil]

The 6th Circuit did recently rule that Trump's EO on bump stocks was illegal and that it was not appropriate for the ATF to enforce it as both can not make law.

I created a thread on this about a month ago. This is what occurred according to the GOA who ought to know since they were seeking the injunction.

-----------------

GOA e-mail March 25

Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit agreed with GOA on bump stocks.
That’s right. The appeals court reversed an earlier district court decision which had denied GOA’s motion for a preliminary injunction.

This means that for the first time … anywhere in the entire country … a court has sided with a pro-gun organization against the ATF on their bump stock ruling which classified bump stocks as machine guns.

This occurred yesterday when an appeals court agreed with GOA.
Now the battle goes back to the district court. As you can well imagine, Biden’s ATF will be fighting against us at every step of the way.

We were pleased to see that the judges in today’s ruling chided the ATF for their “frequent reversals on major policy issues.”

Indeed, for ten years, the ATF said that bump stocks are not machine guns under federal law.

But then they reversed course and said that a piece of plastic with no moving parts is a machine gun. If the ATF can do that -- with a magic wave of the wand -- then they can say anything is a machine gun.

As of now, bump stocks are not yet legal. By sending this case back to the district court, the appeals court is ordering the lower court to impose an injunction against the ATF’s bump stock ruling.

In a best-case scenario, bump stocks could become legal in the four states within the Sixth Circuit (Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee) and might even apply to members of GOA and VCDL nationwide. Please stay tuned for further updates on this.

Erich Pratt
Senior Vice President
Gun Owners of America
Follow me on Twitter: @erichmpratt
Follow me on Parler: @pratterich

P.S. Please distribute this alert to your pro-gun family and friends.


https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread...cks&highlight=

[Renegade]

The 6th Circuit did recently rule that Trump's EO on bump stocks was illegal and that it was not appropriate for the ATF to enforce it as both can not make law.

No they did not. Nothing has changed legally yet.

[Red*Lion]

No they did not. Nothing has changed legally yet.

Yes they did rule as said, but you are right that nothing has actually changed legally yet.

[Renegade]

Yes they did rule as said, but you are right that nothing has actually changed legally yet.

You fundamentally do not understand what happened. But that is probably because GOA and MAC have misrepresented what happened.

The only "ruling" from the appeals court was the trial court should have issued an injunction. The case was sent back to the trial court, which as far as I know still has not issued an injunction.

"Their motion for an injunction should have been granted."

Attachment 65635

[MA2_Navy_Veteran]

This proposal affects a number of things, but namely seems to affect the following:

unfinished frames/receivers & receiver flats (anything above 0% really)
definitions in regards to what constitutes a "complete" firearm (& regarding firearm parts kits), as well as operational definitions for what constitutes the frame/receiver of Glock & SIG type firearms
defines "PMFs" (Privately Made Firearms) & requires markings (with a week of frame/receiver "completion") for FFL holders (including C&R holders); licensed manufacturers; and importers (of all current & future inventories to include all FFLs & C&Rs personal collections).
creates a new license category for gunsmiths solely for making identifying marks to PMFs
creates mandatory changes to the packaging & labeling of "armor-piercing" ammunition
& basically creates a de-facto permanent national registry of all firearms either manufactured, imported, or transferred as all such existing & future records would be required to be kept & maintained indefinitely (rather than just for 20 yrs in some cases)

Major impacts to 80% receivers (or any material which can be clearly or easily recognized as an unfinished frame or receiver of a firearm).

While the proposal does NOT require PMFs to be marked with a serial # or other identifying info at any time after an unlicensed individual makes/manufactures a PMF, it does require that all 80% frames/receivers (& other items clearly recognizable as an unfinished firearm frame/receiver) currently in existence (& in the inventory of any FFL/Manufacturer/Importer/Retailer/or C&R holder), to be marked/identified with such info & further requires such items to be transferred though an ffl & undergo a NICs check. This essentially means that anyone wishing to make/manufacture a PMF (without undergoing an FFL transfer/NICS check & without building on pre-marked materials), will need to build/manufacture the frame/receiver of such firearm completely from scratch (0% build from basic raw materials), or from an 80% (or other unfinished receiver) which the individual already has in their possession.

The above is simply my take after reading through the entire proposal (took over an hour just to read through the the doc let alone go through the referenced material) It's far too much to summarize here in this post.
Unfortunately, the COC prevents me from telling everyone how I feel about all of this.

[Renegade]

it does require that all 80% frames/receivers (& other items clearly recognizable as an unfinished firearm frame/receiver) currently in existence (& in the inventory of any FFL/Manufacturer/Importer/Retailer/or C&R holder), to be marked/identified with such info & further requires such items to be transferred though an ffl & undergo a NICs check.

And with Universal Background Checks, it will be impossible to legally xfer a pmf firearm without an SN.

[ChattanoogaPhil]

Background checks require ID = Racist.

[MA2_Navy_Veteran]

And with Universal Background Checks, it will be impossible to legally xfer a firearm without an SN.

Universal Background Checks are nothing but feel good legislation.
They are impossible to enforce, since PMFs do not require a serial number to be placed on the frame/receiver by the person who manufactures it & can easily be transfered though a private person-to-person sale using cash, or even given away simply as gifts. Besides which - only an idiot would think that ANY gun control law would ever stop or deter a criminal from obtaining whatever weapon they so choose use in a crime.

[Renegade]

PMFs do not require a serial number to be placed on the frame/receiver by the person who manufactures it

Today yes, if the leaked proposal is enacted, no if you want to legally xfer it after UBC. They have a plan here.....

[Failure2Stop]

Gonna make life for forging houses potentially much more difficult if this goes through.
I would see this as the primary goal for anyone with a passing knowledge of AR manufacturing that didn't like AR's being manufactured.