ATF Ruling 2015-1

[AWick]

http://blog.princelaw.com/2015/01/03/atf-issues-first-ruling-of-the-new-year-is-it-the-end-of-80-lowers/

PDF: http://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/Firearms/FirearmsIndustry/atf-ruling-2015-1-manufacturing-and-gunsmithing.pdf

" 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."

[shooter]

 not sure it does anything, the part that stands out to me is

   " using machinery or equipment under its dominion and control "

    that sounds like you can still do it yourself, but a company cant

[Mali]

not sure it does anything, the part that stands out to me is

   " using machinery or equipment under its dominion and control "

    that sounds like you can still do it yourself, but a company cant

I think the only thing this rules out is being able to do this on someone else's equipment.  From the sounds of it they want to make it so you MUST use your own equipment instead of borrowing equipment.

[DenmanShooter]

The ruling is written pretty narrowly.

Only people who are using machines or equipment to produce firearms are prohibited from lending or allowing others to use that equipment.  Think ARES ARMOR.

You can still use your own equipment or go over to your neighbors as long as they or you are not engaged in the business of manufacturing firearms or parts.

[SS_N_NE]

The BATFE allows capable persons to fashion their own firearms that comply with current laws.

A number of places were selling 80% receivers and letting people finish the machine work in a CNC mill center.  A basic clamp the part in place and press a single button. At that point, the persons were not really capable of doing machine work, only press a button.

There is an assumed limit of capable persons with machine knowledge and equipment. There is not much of a limit with button pushers.

[RedDot]

So what determines whether or not you are "in the business of manufacturing firearms"?
The "process"? Sale of a product?  Who makes the determination of whether an individual is "engaged" in business?

I guess I'm not real familiar with the nuts and bolts of ATF operating procedures but from the words I see written it appears that ATF has created, made a ruling on, and plans to enforce a new law. Does that only bother just me? 

[DenmanShooter]

So what determines whether or not you are "in the business of manufacturing firearms"?
The "process"? Sale of a product?  Who makes the determination of whether an individual is "engaged" in business?

I guess I'm not real familiar with the nuts and bolts of ATF operating procedures but from the words I see written it appears that ATF has created, made a ruling on, and plans to enforce a new law. Does that only bother just me? 

The ATF is useless, unneeded and unconstitutional.  However we are stuck with it. For now.

But there were/are certain businesses who were allowing customers to finish machining 80% lowers (mostly) and other things on their equipment.  Also businesses that were setup for the express purpose of renting the space and etc for the purpose of this. For the express purpose of skirting the law/ruling. 

I am not in the ATF nor am I a lawyer.  This may get overturned if it ever goes to court.

As it says, it is clarifying a previous ruling.

[AWick]

They've addresses "build parties" in previous rulings, this extends to more than just pushing a button. By listing CNC, machines, tools and equipment of their dominion they extend it much further. Additionally, they are also limiting any person from ever touching a finished 80% lower other than the owner. It seems like they are disallowing work on updating a LPK, engraving, other modificatios, or coatings by anyone other than the owner/maker of a finished 80% lower.

[kozball]

Ran across this letter that is posted on Ares Arms website.

http://aresarmor.com/store/NewsArticle/atf_rul2015-1

Hmmmm.

[SS_N_NE]

So what determines whether or not you are "in the business of manufacturing firearms"?The "process"? Sale of a product?  Who makes the determination of whether an individual is "engaged" in business?

That is the basic function of the BATFE. If you want to produce firearm components of specific types, and sell those components you have to aquire proper documentation from the BATFE. From sales to Manufacturing to getting your hands on some new toys....good thing to become familiar with.
https://www.atf.gov/content/Firearms/firearms-industry/FAQ-firearms

[SS_N_NE]

Ran across this letter that is posted on Ares Arms website.

That is a fun read. I have an Ares 80% billet AR "receiver".  Haven't yet cut the FCG pockets and drilled the trigger, hammer, safety holes.  It is pretty much a worthless piece of aluminum until those details are completed. The BAFTE started getting freaky when polymer receivers with "carve out the different color" receviers became popular. It was really disappointing that people considered these plastic receivers for a build. Sure, they work, but what a piece of crap for a firearm.

[unfy]

I've not read the full ATF decision as of yet.

I will gladly ask why a NON ELECTED ****head is allowed to WRITE LAW ... but we'll get beyond that for a moment.

This is:

The act of forming a blank and bending into the shape of the receiver is what constitutes making a "firearm".  If someone else wants to make a firearm and use my tools - I am not allowed to do the bending operation myself - they have to make the bend.  This is a known hair split (akin to "who actually did the action").

What this appends is that if you *are* a gunsmith, and registered as such - you can't let folks come over and use your tools without YOU YOURSELF doing all the paper work.


Now, lets say I happen to make a dozen firearms a year for myself (I don't, but I believe it's legally permissible) - and thus I have all the tools.  I do NOT sell these firearms. I do NOT trade them.  Therefore I am NOT in the business of making firearms and are thus not registered etc.  (For safety sake you prolly can't even GIVE them away, I dunno). 

Since you are NOT in business of firemarms, you CAN let someone else use your tools to "make that bend".


This just stops businesses from letting other folks "push the button" etc heh.


edit: a few edits for clarity

[SS_N_NE]

I will gladly ask why a NON ELECTED ****head is allowed to WRITE LAW

This is one of the greatest issues with government entities. Law sets them up, provides money and often lets them set their own regulations (since it would be too much effort for legistlation to set the regulations also). Unfortunately a lot of these offices, departments, entities (whatever, IRS, NFA, NSA, HSD, EPA ad nauseum ) have too much power and can even have a certain amount of exemption granted by the law that puts them in place. Some are given certain powers and are lawfully beyond reproach (an incredibly stupid idea). Unfortunately, without term limit and continued budget, many entities just keep going and just do stuff for the sake of their existence.

[SS_N_NE]

you CAN let someone else use your tools to "make that bend".

Some business were selling sheetmetal blanks (AK receiver) or 80% "paperweight" (AR), then direct the customer to a place that had the capacity to complete the receiver. That concerned the BATFE that their stranglehold on individual capacity had become too easy.