In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

ATF Trying to Radically Change the Legal Definition of a "Firearm"

competentonecompetentone Member Posts: 4,698 ✭✭✭

I'm not seeing the sort of discussion in gun forums I think there should be on this topic. The comment period is almost over. "Everytown" is spamming the comments with "support" for this radical change in the legal definition of a firearm. I don't know how much good it will do, but if you value your firearm rights, it would probably be wise to say something against this:

In short, this new way the ATF wants to "define" a frame or receiver, will make the slide of a semi-auto pistol a "firearm," the bolt of a bolt-action rifle a "firearm," the grip of a Ruger Mark-series pistol (there are millions of them out there) a "firearm." The upper-receiver, or bolt, or bolt-carrier of an AR-15 pattern rifle each would be its own "firearm." This is NOT just about regulating "kits" for making a frame/receiver; this is a carefully orchestrated attack on the Second Amendment, radically changing the legal definition of a "firearm," that will have far reaching implications for nearly every law-abiding gun owner.

Also, on a more minor note, but a big change from a gun-rights perspective: the Gun Control Act of 1968 required FFLs to keep their records on sales for 20 years; if they went out of business before 20 years, the records would be handed over to the ATF. If they were in business for more than 20 years, there was no legal requirement for them to continue to maintain the old records; most long-time FFLs haven't destroyed old records, but technically, the way the law is written, they have the legal right to purge records 20 years old or older. This "rule" change -- which is the ATF directly re-writing the Gun Control Act of 1968 law (which they do NOT have the authority to do) -- eliminates the 20 year time-period an FFL needs to maintain his records; the FFL now has to keep those records for as long as he is in business, then turn those records over to the ATF when he shuts down his business. Can you say "national gun registry"?


  • Ruger4meRuger4me Member, Moderator Posts: 3,118 ******

    Not sure it will do any good, but I posted my comment of being against the changes...

  • pickenuppickenup Member Posts: 22,844 ✭✭✭✭

    The deadline for comment is the 19th of this month. 2 days from now.

  • competentonecompetentone Member Posts: 4,698 ✭✭✭

    I'm not understanding how the NRA is not "screaming from the rooftops" about this -- and urging people to post comments. There are so many small businesses (not manufacturing firearms, but that are just making, or dealing in parts) that will be severely crippled, or be completely killed, by this radical change in the legal definition of a firearm.

    The ATF approved the "80% receivers" they are now claiming is some scourge upon society. If they thought the 80% receiver was somehow "too easy" to make into a functioning firearm; they can start requiring receiver kits to be finished to only something like "60%" or "50%"-- there is simply no need to radically change the entire definition of a "firearm" (a definition that has been in place for over 50 years) and turn multitudes of "parts" into "firearms."

  • Ditch-RunnerDitch-Runner Member Posts: 24,095 ✭✭✭✭

    a lot of you tube gun related sites and podcasters ( at least the ones I see regular with out subscribing and I would bet many more even sites like GOA have been begging gun owners to go to the sites and protest

    like always 50 million gun owners and about 15k actually took the time to post why the AFT should not push thru there agendas

    I know a lot of people say it does not matter they will do what they want but enough people post and say they will not comply basically will go a long way

    maybe some are scared to post there name and info on a federal site . guess what they most likely know more about us than out moms so filling out a form is nothing

    sad the NRA is a shell of there former self odds are they are promoting and making suggestions to the ATF ( like they need any help in burning the 2nd amendment other groups have taken the reins in a no compromise battle

  • Rocky RaabRocky Raab Member Posts: 13,896 ✭✭✭✭

    If this passes, it will mean that you'd have to buy many parts through an FFL and have a background check for every one.

    I may be a bit crazy - but I didn't drive myself.
  • GrasshopperGrasshopper Member Posts: 16,608 ✭✭✭✭

    Just left my comment.

  • austin20austin20 Member Posts: 34,178 ✭✭✭✭

    Here’s your new car

  • pickenuppickenup Member Posts: 22,844 ✭✭✭✭

    At least it got about 100 other views, before being moved.

    Last day for comments.

Sign In or Register to comment.