Need some opinions/ advice from some of you "gun hands"

-
No, it's no that simple... It should be, but it's not. If you are in a situation in which you actually need to do this...

Firearms - Guides - Importation & Verification of Firearms, Ammunition - Firearms Verification Overview | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

Previous Page Table of Contents Download the Guidebook Next Page Firearms Verification Firearms Verification Overview Marking Requirements Serial Number Must be conspicuously engraved, cast or stamped (impressed) on the firearm frame or receiver The serial number cannot duplicate the serial...
www.atf.gov www.atf.gov

Federal law provides certain standards for serializing a firearm. States like California, which require serialization, have adopted those same federal standards. To meet the standards, your 80% lower, frame, or receiver's markings must:

  • Be engraved at least 0.003" into the material.
  • Have a minimum text size of no less than 1/16" in height.
The engraved markings must include the following information:

  • Model of the firearm (if chosen or described)
  • City and state of manufacture (where you live)
  • Caliber or gauge of the firearm (cannot be "MULTI")
  • Manufacturer's first and last name (that's you)
 
Interesting.
It's only "required" on the lower. If I read that right. Used ones can be picked up with no stamp on anything but the lower. Of course those are long numbers.
IF chose or described
city or state ? Ok.
If the barrel has the caliber is it required in the "serial" number on the 80?
man's name, John.

your 80% lower, frame, or receiver's markings must:

Notice the OR . That would mean one of the following. Not all which would be an AND.
 
Cuda Hunter said:
Interesting.
It's only "required" on the lower. If I read that right. Used ones can be picked up with no stamp on anything but the lower. Of course those are long numbers.
IF chose or described
city or state ? Ok.
If the barrel has the caliber is it required in the "serial" number on the 80?
man's name, John.

your 80% lower, frame, or receiver's markings must:

Notice the OR . That would mean one of the following. Not all which would be an AND.
Click to expand...


The "model" is optional.
The "Lower" for all intents and purposes, is the "firearm" and the only part that requires serialization.
City AND State
Name is First AND Last name
 
Cuda Hunter said:
I'm not arguing. I really know nothing other than what I have learned online..
Click to expand...
I understand, there is LOT of misinformation because people are pissed and don't want to follow the rules (not saying you're spreading misinfo, just that it's out there). At the end of the day, the rule of law is what is found at the ATF web site.
 
Bottom line, as long as you're building these for "yourself", and don't live in a state which requires it, you are NOT reuqired to serialize.
 
The grey area is if you transfer it to someone else. if it's been a short time since the build was completed, it an get dicey. If it's a longer time, it's not as big of a deal. Problem is the time is subjective. The way I read it, is lets say I built one 10 years ago. I can transfer that to someone without problems as long as there was the initial intention to keep it when built. You do NOT want to be seen as manufacturing them for sale ....
 
Way too much to deal with being a "manufacturer".

In Colorado you can't give your child your heirloom 22 without getting a federal check and registration of the gun. The claws penetrate deep.
Again, as I understand it and have been told by gun shops.
 
Cuda Hunter said:
Way too much to deal with being a "manufacturer".

In Colorado you can't give your child your heirloom 22 without getting a federal check and registration of the gun. The claws penetrate deep.
Again, as I understand it and have been told by gun shops.
Click to expand...
You can give it, just not legally. If it was never registered originally, the state doesn't know it exists.
 
toolmanmike said:
You can give it, just not legally. If it was never registered originally, the state doesn't know it exists.
Click to expand...

As I understand, current ATF rules apply to licensees, ie. dealers, FFL's, , manufacturers etc. I my state, I don't have to do anything special to sell.
 
The AR lower is what is considered the "firearm" by the ATF. The upper assemblies are not regulated and can be bought by anyone without going through an FFL. For a bolt action rifle, it is the receiver and for a semi-auto pistol or revolver, the frame assy. Generally the part that houses the trigger and/or firing mechanism, not the barrel, stock, etc.. Muzzleloaders and airguns are not considered firearms and thus don't require to be serialized and don't have to go through an FFL transfer and can be mail ordered and shipped direct in most states. The fact that they can be more powerful than many cartridge firing arms proves that the gov'ts logic is impeccable. That doesn't mean that they won't change their interpretation the next time the wind changes direction, it's happened before.
 
You can build a kit, or, buy all the pieces from different places, it all fits together fine.
On the lower, buy a complete finished, serialized lower, do the background check, and put it all together. I see no point in buying an 80% lower and finishing it yourself, just asking for trouble with the law.
 
My $.02, worth the price paid:
There are a bunch of new rules that affect all states when it comes to 80%'ers. I would avoid them. BATFE has been collecting sales records for anyone selling them and then knocking on doors. They're still legal for now (there's an injunction in place that's stopped a 'ban' from being put into effect), but I expect that if the courts side with Brandon that anyone who's bought them in the meantime will meet some unpleasantness in the future. Some folks are OK with that, and I applaud them, but it's not the right choice for everyone.

Poly lowers are junk. Full stop. The stock attachment point is a weak area and poly lowers fail there too easily. Whether 80% or one of the dumbass factory-made ones, they're not worth using to save $20.

The mfg, cost, etc should be dictated by what you want it to do. Self-defense and life-saving tools should be high quality. Plinkers etc can be cheaper. Quality is mostly tied to price, but there's a lot of 'barbecue' guns on the market too. Look nice, cost a lot, don't function for ****. BCM/Daniel defense/Colt/FN are serious brands. PSA/Aero/Spikes make serviceable stuff that tends to be cheap, but customer service is junk and lots of parts are just 'good enough' and not always 'serious use' quality - doesn't mean they don't work, but it's more likely to fail when it can't. BCM is currently running a special with uppers - buy a complete one, and the BCG (bolt carrier group) is included for free - which is nearly $200 off.

A 14.5" barrel with a pin/welded muzzle device to make it a legal 16" makes for a handy package that is easy to deploy. A barrel shorter than 16" requires an 'nfa tax stamp' ($200 tyranny tax plus a background check that can take from a month to several years - mostly because the FBI suck at paperwork). A while back, BATFE decided 'braces' are no longer legit. The courts will eventually work out what's actually 'right', but no one needs a surprise visit over a $35 chunk of plastic. One of the good things about buying a complete gun is that it's almost certainly going to be a legal configuration in every case.

Metal handguards look cool and work great with accessories like lights and lasers, but they get hot within 30-60 rounds (depending on how fast you fire, they can get too hot to hold without gloves within that time). They're a necessity for the warfighter, but whether they're a good choice for an individual depends on the application.

Polymer handguards can be had which can attach lights but not lasers (too wobbly). They don't get anywhere near as hot, and tend to cost MUCH less. Poly handguard builds almost always have a front sight base. FWIW, I highly recommend a white-light (flashlight) on any home-gun. Target identification is always the shooter's responsibility and should be taken seriously on defense tools. For reference and referring to the sale above, A BCM upper complete with a welded flash hider on a 14.5" mid-length with poly handguard is ~$600, with a metal rail the price is closer to $800. Lower groups are out there and are ~$250 ish.

Red dot sights are getting cheaper by the day. Holosun is cheap sabtaged chinese junk, but they're 'top o the heap' for imports - I'd stick with a real optic (aimpoint/trijicon/eotech), but pricing is rough ($500+). 'Dot' sights can suck with eye issues like astigmatism though, holographic (like EOtech) are better for that, but cost is still a barrier. Holographic also have shorter battery life. My aimpoint sights will run for years with the dot set at an indoor friendly brightness level. Dots are much easier than irons when one struggles to focus on the front sight post.

I'd suggest buying a complete upper and a complete lower separately. There's an 11% excise tax for complete firearms and that's built into the price. If you buy separate, it's up to the buyer to pay the tax - just like we all paid sales tax for online orders before it was compulsory - remember? Just make sure the lower assembly has the right buffer for the upper. There's lots of different buffer weights, and they need to match the upper. H2 weighted buffers tend to run with most everything, but lots of lower groups come with a standard carbine (the lightest). Lightest to heaviest 'spec' designs are carbine/H/H2/H3/H6 (proprietary Colt thing).

There's lots of whiz-bang accessories on the market. Most are great for practicing malfunction drills. Keep it simple for reliability. The modern M4 is a great template that runs reliably in a lot of different environments.
 
Phreakish said:
My $.02, worth the price paid:
There are a bunch of new rules that affect all states when it comes to 80%'ers. I would avoid them. BATFE has been collecting sales records for anyone selling them and then knocking on doors. They're still legal for now (there's an injunction in place that's stopped a 'ban' from being put into effect), but I expect that if the courts side with Brandon that anyone who's bought them in the meantime will meet some unpleasantness in the future. Some folks are OK with that, and I applaud them, but it's not the right choice for everyone.
Click to expand...

Which specific rules are you talking about? I've not heard of them knocking on doors. Doesn't mean is didn't happen, but I'd like to see a reference.

What the new rules are attempting to do is enforce registration. 80 percent lowers aren't/weren't banned anymore than that hunk of aluminum in my shop. What did happen, and what the injunction covers, is the attempted end to the selling of un-serialized lowers but because the ATF still doesn't recognize an unfinished lower as a firearm, the injunction was granted. They are also trying to make it a little harder by preventing the sale of tooling/jig/lower "kits".

There is a memo from the ATF reaffirming what they classify as a "firearm" with respect to the lowers (rifles and pistols) and yes, 80 lowers are still just a hunk of metal.

I'm not above being wrong, so please lt me know where I've made a mistake. This not some "challenge" and I'm serious. I don't want to be wrong on this anymore than the next person.
 
Cuda416 said:
Which specific rules are you talking about? I've not heard of them knocking on doors. Doesn't mean is didn't happen, but I'd like to see a reference.

What the new rules are attempting to do is enforce registration. 80 percent lowers aren't/weren't banned anymore than that hunk of aluminum in my shop. What did happen, and what the injunction covers, is the attempted end to the selling of un-serialized lowers but because the ATF still doesn't recognize an unfinished lower as a firearm, the injunction was granted. They are also trying to make it a little harder by preventing the sale of tooling/jig/lower "kits".

There is a memo from the ATF reaffirming what they classify as a "firearm" with respect to the lowers (rifles and pistols) and yes, 80 lowers are still just a hunk of metal.

I'm not above being wrong, so please lt me know where I've made a mistake. This not some "challenge" and I'm serious. I don't want to be wrong on this anymore than the next person.
Click to expand...

That wasn't my intention. I'm not saying you're wrong at all, or even replying to anything you've posted. I think you've laid it out very well in fact.

The point I was making is that personally I'd avoid it because it's an area where there's active litigation going on, and the outcome of it could change what enforcement looks like in the long term. That's all.

The in-person visits I reference aren't published stories, but come from personal experience. I can't go into details, but it's happened/happening. The ATF also makes a big deal about intent. Selling a single 80% lower is fine. But when a sale includes tools, jigs, fixtures, instructions and the way BATFE looks at it gets more stupid nuanced and has lead to enforcement actions. Those are the kinds of things that people should be educated on, but would probably take pages to explain properly in a digestable way. Or at least more space than I'm willing to commit, lol.
 
Phreakish said:
That wasn't my intention. I'm not saying you're wrong at all, or even replying to anything you've posted. I think you've laid it out very well in fact.

The point I was making is that personally I'd avoid it because it's an area where there's active litigation going on, and the outcome of it could change what enforcement looks like in the long term. That's all.

The in-person visits I reference aren't published stories, but come from personal experience. I can't go into details, but it's happened/happening. The ATF also makes a big deal about intent. Selling a single 80% lower is fine. But when a sale includes tools, jigs, fixtures, instructions and the way BATFE looks at it gets more stupid nuanced and has lead to enforcement actions. Those are the kinds of things that people should be educated on, but would probably take pages to explain properly in a digestable way. Or at least more space than I'm willing to commit, lol.
Click to expand...

Thanks for clarifying, much appreciated and I wasn't taking it as an argument.

The sale of tooling with the lowers as a kit became an issue last year when the rules went into effect.

Even then though, the existence of 80 lowers in and of themselves is not being challenged . It's the serialization aspect. As of last year, if you are a licensed dealer, with intent to sell, you are required to serialize them. Private owners, NOT selling are good to go. In fact, you can still sell if you're careful and can show no intent to be a manufacturer. I would simply avoid selling them altogether though. That has always been sticky.

There is nothing in the rules that went into effect last year that prohibits them.

However, all that said and done, we all make choices. I do agree polymer lowers are a joke and I'd go further and NOT buy a billet one. Forged, while not as tacticool looking, are about twice as strong. If someone has ever used an M-16 to break a fall/dive to the ground, they'll understand.

Thanks again
 
Cuda416 said:
Thanks for clarifying, much appreciated and I wasn't taking it as an argument.

The sale of tooling with the lowers as a kit became an issue last year when the rules went into effect.

Even then though, the existence of 80 lowers in and of themselves is not being challenged . It's the serialization aspect. As of last year, if you are a licensed dealer, with intent to sell, you are required to serialize them. Private owners, NOT selling are good to go. In fact, you can still sell if you're careful and can show no intent to be a manufacturer. I would simply avoid selling them altogether though. That has always been sticky.

There is nothing in the rules that went into effect last year that prohibits them.

However, all that said and done, we all make choices. I do agree polymer lowers are a joke and I'd go further and NOT buy a billet one. Forged, while not as tacticool looking, are about twice as strong. If someone has ever used an M-16 to break a fall/dive to the ground, they'll understand.

Thanks again
Click to expand...

Agreed 100%.

I know there's no 80% lower ban, but lots of the pre-final proposals were appearing to try and do just that. Nothing which has been discussed or passed would ban them outright, but there were pre-final proposals to require SOTs for simply selling them because the suggestion was that it 'engaged those companies in the business'. The final rules rejected all that, luckily, but it's obvious there's an end goal in mind whether through new rules or through future laws. The 80% lower in and of itself is not the thing which will get banned, but one of the steps in the process which leads to that random hunk of metal finding it's way to a person's doorstep. It's all stupid and a hunk of metal is a hunk of metal, but jackboots gonna jackboot.

I also hate billet. It can be done well, but usually isn't. Forgings have too many benefits to ignore and the minor cosmetic gains a billet set can yeild aren't worth the squeeze IMO.
 
Like mentioned, if the overall thought for an 80% is to have it off the books. You'd be better buying a second hand rifle from some guy in a parking lot. 100% legal in most states (obviously check your laws first). If you aren't paying cash for an 80%, there is a paper trail.
 
72Duster440 said:
Like mentioned, if the overall thought for an 80% is to have it off the books. You'd be better buying a second hand rifle from some guy in a parking lot. 100% legal in most states (obviously check your laws first). If you aren't paying cash for an 80%, there is a paper trail.
Click to expand...

There might be a paper trail that a person bought one, there is no paper trail stating they were successful in their endeavor of building the rifle.
 
That is a true statement, but when there is also credit card transactions buying the jig, a barrel, a LPK, handguard, trigger and upper.....

Not saying they will do anything about it, but someone posted above that apparently the ATF is going door to door collecting 80%'s that people bought (news to me), why even give them the option?

A cash deal in a parking lot is always best! (Where local rules allow). The law here in Michigan looks like it might be changing to require background checks on private long gun sales soon, which I think many other states have already adopted.
 
72Duster440 said:
That is a true statement, but when there is also credit card transactions buying the jig, a barrel, a LPK, handguard, trigger and upper.....

Not saying they will do anything about it, but someone posted above that apparently the ATF is going door to door collecting 80%'s that people bought (news to me), why even give them the option?

A cash deal in a parking lot is always best! (Where local rules allow). The law here in Michigan looks like it might be changing to require background checks on private long gun sales soon, which I think many other states have already adopted.
Click to expand...

I understand the paper trail.

just because I buy a 9 second car, doesn't mean I am going 9 seconds. Those other parts are just parts. i haven't seen any reference to anything like the ATF going door to door for random people. If they show up at a door, there is likely some forcing function (right or wrong) that caused them to look at the person. Could be a pissed off ex for all I know making an anon tip.

I am not disagreeing with private sales btw. It's a valid point to be sure. Glad I live where I live....
 
Agreed, I find it hard to believe they would go door to door for people buying 1 or 2. Maybe if they bought enough to make it appear they were going to make them to sell. Like I said, I was just repeating what was said above...

What ever happened to the law in TX that you could own a TX made supressor without getting a tax stamp? Did that go through? I'd love to get another can, but don't want to wait another year. Lol
 
72Duster440 said:
Agreed, I find it hard to believe they would go door to door for people buying 1 or 2. Maybe if they bought enough to make it appear they were going to make them to sell. Like I said, I was just repeating what was said above...

What ever happened to the law in TX that you could own a TX made supressor without getting a tax stamp? Did that go through? I'd love to get another can, but don't want to wait another year. Lol
Click to expand...
I haven't been tracking it but like pot, state law can't override federal law. The feds could still come after folks.

According to the article below, at the time of it's writing, no one had stepped up to manufacture and thus begin the process.

here is some info..

thetexan.news

Texas Suppressor Manufacturers Say New State Law Failed to Sidestep National Firearms Act

Until Paxton seeks a court judgment that the new bill is constitutional, the law can't change the suppressor purchase process.
thetexan.news thetexan.news
 
Sounds like a Form 1 might be the better way to go, avoid the long wait but still have all the proper paperwork.


Sorry to sidetrack the thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top