Breaking! A T F "clarifies" rule on 80% frames. Is this is the end?!?

Breaking news!
I especially like this section of the letter:

"If anyone remains unclear about a specific model or configuration, they may submit a request with a sample to ATF, who can only render a formal determination upon receipt of a formal request and physically examining a submitted sample. "

We'll issue you a ruling which will be valid until we change our minds -- all of these 80% frames (as well as other devices like bump stocks) had been ruled ok in the past...
 
Yeah, came out yesterday. My hot take? They’re getting bruised and beaten in the Tactical Machining case and therefore are getting out in front of this in the only area they can given that other case’s injunctions: 80% pistols.
 
The other issue I see here is that this is more ‘lawfare.’ They are likely more than aware this won’t hold up in the courts given how their other cases are going. However, by simply issuing something like this they know sellers will clam up and stop selling until the courts address it. Therefore, legally right or wrong, they at minimum stop sales for several months.
 
GenericUserName said:
Therefore, legally right or wrong, they at minimum stop sales for several months.
Click to expand...

More realistically, they put merchants out of business by simply waiting them out. The small businesses don't have the UNLIMITED time and money that the alphabet agencies have. All the alphabet boys have to do is drag it out long enough. And it won't take much time at all.
 
Touché.
But I have a feeling Polymer80 will fight this. But that may also assume P80 is bigger than I give them credit for? But given that massive NE State financial ruling awhile ago didn’t bury them, I think they’re big enough to fight this. Temporary injunction should be pretty swift if they do. If that temp injunction applies to them AND THEIR CUSTOMERS (like the ones in Tactical Machining injunction) then their distributors should be safe in the meantime.
 
Fuck 'em

ATF does not legislate law, and for this specific reason. "Opinions" hang on the wind and are apt to change with Administration attitudes, and "agencies" - be they Constitutional or not - tend t be overseen by agenda-driven political appointees. The US Constitution does not contain a "Bill of Opinions".

We have a severe backbone shortage in this country.

/K
 
Miltonboro said:
AAAAH!

I assume this applies to both pistol and AR lowers?
Click to expand...
No. It specifically doesn’t from what I read. AR lowers don’t have the control group area pre-milled. This, on the latter pages, seems to be what they are hinging their new opinion about P80s on. Basically, the FCG area is pre-milled and therefore the frame alone is readily convertible. Not so on 80% AR lowers.
 
https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...idance-closes-👻guns-loophole-in-federal-rule/
 
GenericUserName said:
No. It specifically doesn’t from what I read. AR lowers don’t have the control group area pre-milled. This, on the latter pages, seems to be what they are hinging their new opinion about P80s on. Basically, the FCG area is pre-milled and therefore the frame alone is readily convertible. Not so on 80% AR lowers.
Click to expand...
Agree…specifically states strikers fired / pistol numerous times.
Is a rule really enforceable ? It’s not equal to a law. What local LEO is going to enforce this ? Businesses won’t want to hassle with this… so they won’t sell unserialized frames. That leaves builders with DIY frames… 3d print, ghost gunner or mill.
 
I assume Americans still have the right to make Privately Made Firearms?
If a PMF is made, I'm under the understanding that serializing is not required.
This must apply to all future sales of 80%, however, it'll be grey area and shakey ground owning a completed 80 without serial numbers.
 
GenericUserName said:
No. It specifically doesn’t from what I read. AR lowers don’t have the control group area pre-milled. This, on the latter pages, seems to be what they are hinging their new opinion about P80s on. Basically, the FCG area is pre-milled and therefore the frame alone is readily convertible. Not so on 80% AR lowers.
Click to expand...
And 80% frame manufacturers (some of which ALSO produce AR blanks) can simply adjust the mold to occlude more area, which could be as simple as a partition within the magazine well, or heavier fill of the RSA channel - which would be readily addressable with a simple end-mill bit and the most basic of drill presses by the end-user.

The trivialities lie in that they/ we shouldn't need to have such silly concerns and need to participate in the dancing to a tune played by tone-deaf people - "You have a working firearm in less than thirty minutes on your kitchen table". While we all know that if you're working on a quality finished product, "thirty minutes" is just getting started good; nowhere can I find within the US Constitution this arbitrary time restriction, nor within the GCA'68 or '94 Crime Bill (of which Joe Biden and many of the current Congress members participated).

The point is, by changing this or that in order to meet arbitrary benchmarks, when the people you're trying to please can move/ alter the benchmarks at-will - how far does the knee have to bend and how low should the head bow before your rulers grant you permission?

What about the next time?

/K
 
Last edited:
Remember, the term "80%" is a marketing term. This was never even an official 'line in the sand' for what the ATF judged to be a 'firearm'.

1672265731360.png

1672265772958.png

Polymer 80 will lose a lot of business if they do not mold the "fire-control cavity" as they do, as that would be far more difficult for the average Builder to complete satisfactorily, even with a decent jig adapted for this purpose. BUT, they would stay in business. Well, until the NEXT change of mind happens to make everyone a criminal...

I had recommended back on MGB's Forum that EVERYONE obtain/download/PRINT the rules and determination-letters from the ATF website. You simply never know when they will 'conveniently' rewrite, alter, or delete the documents. The ATF is NOT on the side of the Builder, consumer, or legal firearms owner. So... Whose side are they on?
 

Attachments

  • ATF Build Legal #9.pdf
    179.5 KB · Views: 60
  • ATF-DetLetters.pdf
    4 MB · Views: 60
Racer88 said:
seems to contradict....

Why would it be "shaky ground?"
Click to expand...
Yes, but not by my logic, but their's.
They'll say, "You have a 👻gun, where's its serial number?"
They're much ignorant about simpler rules. This new one won't fit into their brains.
 

Share this page

Back
Top