ATF proposed rule change. Time to comment. UPDATE in OP.

[andy t]

I am trying to figure out how it will apply to ARs. p.32, has the following paragraph:

The nonexclusive list identifies the frame or receiver for the following firearms: (i) Colt 1911-type, Beretta/Browning/FN Herstal/Heckler & Koch/Ruger/Sig Sauer/Smith & Wesson/Taurus hammer fired semiautomatic pistols; (ii) Glock-type striker fired semiautomatic pistols; (iii) Sig Sauer P320-type semiautomatic pistols; (iv) certain locking block rail system semiautomatic pistols; (v) AR-15-type and Beretta AR-70-type firearms; (vi) Steyr AUG-type firearms; (vii) Thompson M1A1-type machineguns and semiautomatic variants, and L1A1, FN...

which then leads to p.86 and shows the typical lower classified as the receiver. However, I have difficulty parsing anything about uppers.

[Honu]

Well the president said we the people means the gov people in charge not you people ! So that says it all !

Serfdom and not the kind of surf on waves !

[ViniVidivici]

HA! And we don't even have a president anymore, right now we have an illegally installed oligarch!

So "Constitution limits" this and "checks and balances" that is ALL out the window.

[Combat_Diver]

Why I'm reading this is that nearly all semi auto pistols slides and AR uppers are going to have a SN besides the lower.

CD

[ViperTwoSix]

I am trying to figure out how it will apply to ARs. p.32, has the following paragraph:


which then leads to p.86 and shows the typical lower classified as the receiver. However, I have difficulty parsing anything about uppers.

Since it states the below, I read this to mean that since the ATF has already determined that the lower receiver of an AR type rifle is the regulated “receiver” requiring a serial number, that this new rule would only apply to “new designs” like a future AR type where somehow the configuration of hammer/trigger/BCG is different.

“Application of the rule, as proposed, would not alter these prior ATF classifications. To provide more clarity, this supplement to the definition would include a nonexclusive list of common weapons with a split/multi-piece frame or receiver configuration for which ATF has previously determined a specific part to be the frame or receiver. If a manufacturer produces or an importer imports a firearm falling within one of these designs as they exist as of the date of publication of a final rule, it can refer to this list to know which part is the frame or receiver. The manufacturer or importer can then mark without needing to ask ATF for a classification.”

[Ned Christiansen]

I scrolled through the proposed rules and all that-- after, you know, clicking on "click here to leave a comment". Either they have not yet put it up or they have it buried deeper than I can dig. That's pretty concerning.

[Korgs130]

I scrolled through the proposed rules and all that-- after, you know, clicking on "click here to leave a comment". Either they have not yet put it up or they have it buried deeper than I can dig. That's pretty concerning.

Same for me. Has anyone here actually been able to leave a comment?

[Renegade]

The proposed rule has not been officially published yet.

[opngrnd]

Are they expecting currently owned AR upper receivers to be serialized?

[TMS951]

Are they expecting currently owned AR upper receivers to be serialized?

God that would be an epic goat ****. Imagine all the hoarders and ‘collectors’ who are meant to go out and have the upper of their precious nib colt 6920 serialized.

The number of uppers that would need to be serialiezed is in the 10s of millions if not hundreds. All that said I don’t put it past them to intend exactly that.

A lot of this issue is the AR should have had the upper be the registered part in the first place. When the ATF decided the lower is the reciever is when they screwed up. Almost no other guns are like this.