Oh Shoot

Yep. Anybody who hasn't seen it, it goes on here: There's also this thang I've seen mentioned, that claims it pulls top down. Doesn't actually seem to be for sale on the site, though, odd: http://www.jprifles.com/1.5.1.7_small_tp.php - OS

  Yes, they could start by reading the directions on the 4473 itself .. there are three pages of them after the parts that are filled out. They would learn therein as far as legality of answering question 11a, that:    "ACTUAL TRANSFEREE/BUYER EXAMPLES:   Mr. Smith asks Mr. Jones to purchase a firearm for Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith gives Mr. Jones the money for the firearm. Mr. Jones is NOT THE ACTUAL TRANSFEREE/BUYER of the firearm and must answer “NO” to question 11.a. The licensee may not transfer the firearm to Mr. Jones. However, if Mr. Brown goes to buy a firearm with his own money to give to Mr. Black as a present, Mr. Brown is the actual transferee/buyer of the firearm and should answer “YES” to question 11.a."   - OS

  Main thing I see is that definition of "knife" and "common knife"  was modified to include 'bout anything maybe short of a sword, and that no laws can be enacted regarding them, even including knives used as "weapons".   As I see it, pretty much a sweeping bill that says "all knives are legal for ownership and carry".   Might actually be too rad to pass, dunno. Maybe it's that rad so that can be amended down to allowing switchblades and > 4" blades, which was actual aim of previous bill, dunno.   - OS

  It doesn't exactly say he changed his mind, guess it implies that.  Further, though, can he alone speak for entire org?   - OS

  Yeah, I guess it would now that I think about it -- it is after all just a shim really.   - OS

Accuwedge does some, by basically adding thickness to the lower: But still, I guess it is a nice feature. Certainly anything that makes the upper not wobble is good. - OS

  Well, it would "firm" it up, but since it presses against upper, would actually spread the two halves more apart rather than bring them closer together.   - OS

    Yeah, you overlooked it. All CMT billet lowers have it. Big ass set screw right next to grip screw hole.   - OS

Has anybody used the "tension screw" thing on the CMT lower?   Seems like to me if a lower and upper were so unmatched as to actually rattle or something, adjusting the screw upward to make solid would also leave a gap between them?   Anyway, my pistol upper fit uber slickly onto the lower, was just wondering.   - OS

So what's the plan to minimize influence of the frigging TN Sherrif's Association?   - OS

  They do, that's how we know about them, as per the one I posted above. Whole section of scanned "letters" on arfcom pistol section for example, since there are so many finer "rulings" that have come up since they became popular. They are almost all from division heads though, not rank and file "agents"; they seem to be pretty careful about who they let write these things.   - OS

Agree. A letter is "just a letter", but then again, they do have significance. SIG is selling the AR "brace" on "just a letter", and the letter is not even to SIG. And folks are all buying it, due to only a letter, and the letter is not to them. Same with Magpul Angled Fore Grip, and the various mag well grip adapters, cheek risers, even cane tips for pistols, etc. All approved by letter, but not to the end user. But once you see several of them that all say same thing to different folks, you tend to get the gist of things from them. And obviously, a letter from some agent or other certainly wouldn't carry same weight as one from head of entire national division. Matter of fact, didn't know they let but certain personnel even issue a letter. But anyway, a butt stock alone simply does not make a firearm a rifle or shotgun. Indeed, you can have a stocked receiver that can be both a rifle AND a shotgun. With the exception of machine guns (where mere full auto part counts under the definition) a firearm must have a barrel along with the butt stock to determine the type of long gun it then becomes -- a legally configured rifle or shotgun or a legally or illegally configured SBR or SBS. About the only AR lower I know of that couldn't be configured as a pistol without some wild modification first is the Cavalry Arms "unibody" deal: But even it is to be transferred as "other firearm" -- perhaps this oddball example is one of the reasons that the 4473 says, "If a frame or receiver can only be made into a long gun (rifle or shotgun), it is still a frame or receiver, not a handgun or long gun." Why? Because it ain't a rifle or shotgun without a barrel on it -- a non-NFA receiver with a stock on it is just that, a receiver with a stock on it. - OS

Their "letters" vary quite a bit over time, and they are masters at incomplete answers, using "could constitute" and "may be determined to be" and the like -- I notice the ones I've seen since they themselves came clean in the 2011 published ruling have been more consistent. Before that you still see some verbiage that still "suggests" that if a firearm was ever a rifle, has to stay one, even after the SCOTUS ruling in 1992. Here's one, for example, only saved the last page from it, so don't know date, but reading it seems to suggest that. But I'm putting it here because it does state that a stock on a lower does not a rifle make, can still be made a pistol, even though that would seem to be common sense to me even within the BATF's convoluted thinking. See "Can an AR-15 type lower receiver, with buttstock attached...". So at least Spencer got that part right. :) - OS

Just what will enforce that the Fed will abide by changes to the Constitution any more than they abide by the existing one?   It embraces any parts that further its agenda and ignore or subvert the parts that don't.   - OS

  That's all fine, I wasn't addressing the issue of Ft. Campbell, on which I have not opined at all, only cited federal law regarding private transfers in answer to Phizzle. You can ascertain that because I quoted him.   What de hale does "So maybe Craigslist, BooKoo, The Peddler and all other outlets here should stop our GI's from selling firearms? Not..." mean?   - OS

  No biggie, but thread this AM, your link in there too.   http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/73430-gawker-story-inept-atf-uses-children-and-people-with-low-iqs-in-sting-operations/   - OS

  Private sale or gift of any firearm between residents of different states is prohibited by federal law, simple as that.   As Patton says, the only exceptions are:   - "the transfer, transportation, or delivery of a firearm made to carry out a bequest of a firearm to, or an acquisition by intestate succession of a firearm by, a person who is permitted to acquire or possess a firearm under the laws of the State of his residence"   - "loan or rental of a firearm to any person for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes" (forget "rental" methinks, as I believe that actually requires a license under another section)   - OS

  For that to happen all 4473s would indeed have to have been kept, logged, and made automatically searchable in a database. No, I can't prove they aren't, in direct violation of federal law. And it's true that some years ago, a certain amount of un-destroyed 4473 info was discovered, as I understand it. And it is also true that 4473s from closed FFLs are indeed being scanned into database, that's not even secret. But that is part of their separate National Tracing Center, and it's pretty tin foil to think that every 4473 they have is cross audited during every routine FFL NICS query.   But the larger point is that while what a FFL marks on 4473 might be a clue in an investigation, it is not legally definitive at all, and there's nothing in USC or CFR that says a firearm legally becomes what an FFL chose on the 4473.   If it did, an FFL could erroneously:   -  mark a complete SBR as legal "long gun" on line 18 and "rifle" on line 29 of 4473. Would that make it legal for you to posses said SBR without a tax stamp? Of course not. It's still a SBR. - mark a Glock as a "long gun" and "rifle".  Does that mean you could then add a vertical forward grip and a stock to it? Of course not. It's still a handgun. - mark an AR lower as "long gun" and "rifle". Does that make it illegal to make a pistol from it? Assuming it's a virgin lower receiver, of course not. - enter wrong serial number or even brand name. Does that mean the firearm is somehow illegal for you to possess? Is it evidence you changed the serial number?  Of course not. - etc   Of course it is unlikely an FFL would blow both fields on the 4473 in the first place, even the ones who erroneously check "long gun" on 18 will also put "receiver" or "lower" under 29 where they have to actually describe the firearm. Even pre 8/2008, where "other firearm" was not an option, section 18 would have "receiver" or "lower" there too, unless the FFL was just flat out lying for some reason. But all receivers since 1992 have the same "pistol/rifle/pistol" test, ie, that if built as handgun first, can go back and forth.   There is also the issue of what the FFL writes in his bound book, too. But of course the greater evidence would be how the manufacturer/distributor released the receiver to the FFL in the first place. For the FFL to change the status, he would have had to configure it into a long gun or handgun before selling it, which even if he blows it on 4473 should still be reflected in his bound book and/or receipt.   Also, just because someone configured their virgin lower as a rifle, and later sold it as a rifle through an FFL 4473 transfer, that still doesn't mean that the lower cannot be made into a pistol, if indeed the original owner made a pistol first. That would still require some extraordinary proof to convict the second owner for "making a weapon from a rifle" or whatever the charge is.   In short, what an FFL puts on a 4473 does not alone determine the actual legal status of a firearm.   All that being said, though, since indeed there is an "other firearm" choice nowadays, it certainly behooves the buyer to check it before it's submitted, I mean, why not cover every base you can, eh?   - OS

  Okay. That's all I've been saying. That it could screw with you later, if you wanted to sell your SBR and had put in a length you didn't actually have a barrel for as suggested in this thread.   You'd either have to update the registry entry to actually reflect what you had all along, which could take gawd knows how long, or actually procure the correct barrel and install it. Which in the case of an AR would cost money for the barrel and some time, but in the case of an AK and various other rifles would be a major pain.   Thanks.   - OS

    Appreciate your info, but I'm talking about you selling your SBR. Are you saying the FFL/SOT handling the transfer does not communicate the actual status of the firearm, for ATF to check against the existing registry entry? Seems the actual firearm to be transferred does have to still match the existing registry for it?   I have seen a lot of comments on forums that they have to match. Like these, from quick random search:   "I recently talked to a specialist in Martinsburg about this. They don't want to be notified of temporary changes. The definition of a permanent change is that you cannot return the gun to its registered description then you are ready to transfer it. In other words, if you ever plan on transferring the gun then you must either return the gun to its registered configuration or send a change letter before you start the transfer process. You cannot use a Form 4 for that purpose."   "Because if the barrel length doesn't match the Form 1, it can screw up a transfer. They check the data on Form 4s against the original registration, and if they don't match, there are solid reasons for looking into why they don't."   "Personally experience, barrel change held up a form 4 on a M11/9, required the seller to send in a letter. I would think its upper is just as modular as an AR series gun."   etc. ???       - OS

  "Suggests". Okay. "Permanent". Whatever. Like loaning a firearm for "temporary" use, but undefined with no time limit.   Further point is still that firearm must be in length that is registered to transfer it, so if you put in a fictitious length that you don't even have a barrel to achieve, would halt a transfer if you ever wanted to do it. You'd have to update the registry info to reflect what you actually had all along -- which seems to take months according to what I've read, or actually get and have installed a barrel of the appropriate length.   I suppose that last part is up to the transferring FFL to report the accurate description of the firearm.   - OS

  Well, statutes changed some years back: with an HCP you can always carry a handgun during any hunting season.   - OS

  Just to be pedantic, Marlin moved from New Haven in 1970. To North Haven, where they stayed until closing in 2011. :)   - OS

Has been asked many times. Never seen a credible legal opinion regarding the "other lawful activity".   I personally would assume, though, that it is interpreted as activity specified as lawful in other statutes, as a catch-all category. That opinion is worth what you paid for it.       - OS

  Certainly, the judge may not have a statute on which to base his opinion at all -- would be far from a unique instance.   - OS