Leaked, New Law Could Upend Firearm Industry

[The Legion]

https://www.newsmax.com/us/firearms-leaked-atf/2021/05/05/id/1020281/

A Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) document leaked by The Reload,  could redefine which parts of a gun are considered a "firearm." The document, according to America's 1st Freedom, would change the federal definition of a frame and receiver as well as change federal marking requirements for firearms.

According to the NRA-ILA, "The rule, if implemented, would completely upend the firearm industry by changing what parts must legally be considered a 'firearm' under federal law."

The document in question, spanning 107 pages, also matches the title and bill number to a bill submitted to the Office of Information and Regulatory affairs in the third week of April titled "Definition of 'Frame or Receiver' and Identification of Firearms."

The ATF's chief of public affairs, April Langwell, said, "I cannot confirm, nor deny, the authenticity of the document, nor can I comment on internal communications or deliberations on potential or hypothetical rulemakings."

The new definitions stated in the document would make it possible for firearms to have more than one "frame or receiver," which is at odds with the federal controlling statute. The rule would also create a new marking requirement for particular Federal Firearms Licensees (FFL). The ATF said the law would significantly impact companies selling unfinished receivers--they would have to "adapt."

Based on current marketing related to the unregulated sale of certain firearm parts kits, ATF anticipates that these non-FFLs would either become FFLs or would take a loss in revenue to sell a parts kit that does not contain a frame or receiver, or simply sell the frame or receiver, but not both," the document stated.

The document went on to state the law could impact small firearm manufacturers. "ATF estimates the majority of affected entities are small entities that would experience a range of costs; therefore, this rule may have a significant impact on small entities."

President Joe Biden has also nominated gun-control group advisor David Chipman to run the ATF. He stated told a congressional committee that, "Simply reinstating the 90s-era ban on assault weapons is not enough. Instead, we should regulate a broader class of firearms, including assault weapons manufactured before the law's enactment … while banning the future manufacture and sale of these firearms."

If the document proves authentic, the rule will be published before May 8.  Interested parties would have 90 days to comment on the proposal. All comments must include the documents docket number ATF 2021R-05.

[gregintenn]

That couldn’t be more vague.

[RED333]

2 minutes ago, gregintenn said:

That couldn’t be more vague.

.gov, par for the game!!!

[Garufa]

6 minutes ago, gregintenn said:

That couldn’t be more vague.

Think of an AR upper receiver or that of any other similarly constructed firearm being serial numbered and regulated as an actual firearm...just to get started.

[gregintenn]

13 minutes ago, Garufa said:

Think of an AR upper receiver or that of any other similarly constructed firearm being serial numbered and regulated as an actual firearm...just to get started.

I’d think the barrel would be the better target so to speak.

I’ve always loved to see the imaginative work arounds invented because of various ATF decrees. I expect whatever happens here will see some good ones.

[Chucktshoes]

35 minutes ago, Garufa said:

Think of an AR upper receiver or that of any other similarly constructed firearm being serial numbered and regulated as an actual firearm...just to get started.

The federal government has actually dropped cases against objectively bad people because they were worried about A judgment setting precedent. The way the statue reads, split receiver guns do not have a single part that meets the legal definition of firearms.

Whatever they do here will result in litigation.

Edited May 5, 2021 by Chucktshoes

[Omega]

4 hours ago, Chucktshoes said:

The federal government has actually dropped cases against objectively bad people because they were worried about A judgment setting precedent. The way the statue reads, split receiver guns do not have a single part that meets the legal definition of firearms.

Whatever they do here will result in litigation.

I agree, because they would have to have congress change the statute, because the ATF can't pass any laws themselves, if they try to, it will quickly be challenged and they then run the risk of having that precedent they want to avoid.

Edited May 6, 2021 by Omega
comma

[No_0ne]

On 5/5/2021 at 6:03 PM, gregintenn said:

I’d think the barrel would be the better target so to speak.

European countries have designated the barrel as the part of a gun that makes it a "firearm" for many years ...