How about starting 81% build parties?

[SJ-Chris]

its hard to speculate without an opinion letter so hang in there it has been asked unfortunatly the technical branch fears releasing the obvious and correct opinion on paper

Other than the general concern of doing something that can get one into trouble, does this really need to be this complicated and hard for us to figure out?

Step 1: Figure out what repairs, changes, modifications, etc a Type 1 (dealer) licensed gunsmith is allowed to do on a FIREARM. [Side note: If they do this while you wait and all on the same day it is stated on the ATF's website that the firearm does not need to be put into the gunsmith's "book" and there is no DROS/etc needed to give it back to the owner who brought it in.]

Some quick googling and I found on the ATF's website:

http://www.atf.gov/regulations-rulings/rulings/atf-rulings/atf-ruling-2010-10.htm

or otherwise) provided by a customer for the
purpose of repairing, MODIFYING

In contrast, a dealer-gunsmith may make or acquire his/her
own firearms, and repair, modify, embellish, refurbish, or install parts in or
on those firearms. If the dealer-gunsmith then sells or distributes those
firearms for livelihood and profit, the dealer-gunsmith is engaged in his/her own
business of manufacturing firearms. A person engaged in the business of
manufacturing firearms for sale or distribution is required to be licensed as a
manufacturer, identify/mark all firearms manufactured, maintain permanent
records of manufacture, submit annual manufacturing reports, and pay any taxes
imposed on firearm manufacturers. A licensed dealer-gunsmith who becomes
licensed as a manufacturer must also segregate all firearms manufactured for
that business separately from firearms for which gunsmithing services are being
performed.

From the definition above, from the ATF's very own website, it sounds like a gunsmith that is modifying a FIREARM brought in by a customer and then returning it back to that same customer when they are done working on it is NOT involved in manufacturing. How can this be read any other way?

Step 2: Get the ATF to agree what constitutes a firearm (as it pertains to a receiver that is not 100% complete and functional). This doesn't seem hard and it seems like we already have the answer (courtesy of the ATF). While regulating what we call 80% lower receivers (aka: paperweights) it has been mentioned by several people that they have been told by the ATF performing additional work beyond what we routinely call 80% in fact converts the paperweight into a firearm. Please...does anyone have something from the ATF actually stating this?? There absolutely MUST be some of the 80% lower makers out there that had samples they sent to the ATF that just barely crossed over the line into what the ATF considers a firearm and they must have received something from the ATF stating so. In trying to stop paperweight manufacturers from going too far, the ATF has told us at what point a paperweight becomes a firearm.

To me, this still looks like a legal way to follow the rules to allow many of us to complete our home builds in a way that makes it easier for us, and one where most of us could end up with a much cleaner (and arguably more to spec) complete lower receiver.

I could still be wrong on this (not claiming to be an expert). And I never want to do anything that violates the law. But I don't think anyone has shown yet why this isn't 100% legal with this approach. My facts are coming straight from the ATF's website, along with an understanding of what the ATF has already defined as the threshold between what a paperweight is and what a firearm is.

[SJ-Chris]

Step 2: Get the ATF to agree what constitutes a firearm (as it pertains to a receiver that is not 100% complete and functional). This doesn't seem hard and it seems like we already have the answer (courtesy of the ATF). While regulating what we call 80% lower receivers (aka: paperweights) it has been mentioned by several people that they have been told by the ATF performing additional work beyond what we routinely call 80% in fact converts the paperweight into a firearm. Please...does anyone have something from the ATF actually stating this?? There absolutely MUST be some of the 80% lower makers out there that had samples they sent to the ATF that just barely crossed over the line into what the ATF considers a firearm and they must have received something from the ATF stating so. In trying to stop paperweight manufacturers from going too far, the ATF has told us at what point a paperweight becomes a firearm.

Is this the answer to the above question:

http://www.quentindefense.com/downloads/ATF%20Letter%20Non%20Gun.pdf

According to the ATF, drilling the safety selector hole makes the otherwise 80% paperweight a FIREARM. Their words not mine!

So if I buy an 80% paperweight and drill the safety selector hole I have made a home built firearm according to the ATF. This could be easily accomplished with a vise and a hand-held drill (free-hand). While the gunsmith is doing the other repairs/modifications to my ATF determined lower receiver firearm they can also fix my safety selector hole in case it isn't perfect.

If I bring this firearm to a Type 1 licensed gunsmith, then according to this from the ATF website the gunsmith can finish the firearm legally.

http://www.atf.gov/regulations-rulings/rulings/atf-rulings/atf-ruling-2010-10.htm

or otherwise) provided by a customer for the
purpose of repairing, MODIFYING

A gunsmith is likely allowed to use any tools they like....for example, a CNC, to make modifications/repairs to the firearm.

As mentioned before, it looks relatively easy and might cost only $200 for a person (....maybe one that owns a CNC shop....) to become a licensed Type 1 FFL gunsmith. Then they would be able to work on anyone's firearm (as long as they aren't a prohibited person) in much the same way as they did before (...just now they would be working on firearms and not paperweights, and THEY could do the work so nobody would even need to be taught how to use the CNC machine). The home builder *might* need to put a serial number on it for the purposes of having a gunsmith work on it, but I don't think that would be a deal breaker for most. Then again, gunsmiths I assume are allowed to work on older guns...those that might not have serial numbers on them, so maybe this step isn't even needed. [Side note: I think it is a good idea to put a serial number on a home built firearm for all the obvious reasons]

Looks okay to me. Agree/disagree? I'm no expert, but this looks promising.

[UnknownShooter]

Is this the answer to the above question:

http://www.quentindefense.com/downloads/ATF%20Letter%20Non%20Gun.pdf

According to the ATF, drilling the safety selector hole makes the otherwise 80% paperweight a FIREARM. Their words not mine!

So if I buy an 80% paperweight and drill the safety selector hole I have made a home built firearm according to the ATF. This could be easily accomplished with a vise and a hand-held drill (free-hand). While the gunsmith is doing the other repairs/modifications to my ATF determined lower receiver firearm they can also fix my safety selector hole in case it isn't perfect.

If I bring this firearm to a Type 1 licensed gunsmith, then according to this from the ATF website the gunsmith can finish the firearm legally.


A gunsmith is likely allowed to use any tools they like....for example, a CNC, to make modifications/repairs to the firearm.

As mentioned before, it looks relatively easy and might cost only $200 for a person (....maybe one that owns a CNC shop....) to become a licensed Type 1 FFL gunsmith. Then they would be able to work on anyone's firearm (as long as they aren't a prohibited person) in much the same way as they did before (...just now they would be working on firearms and not paperweights, and THEY could do the work so nobody would even need to be taught how to use the CNC machine). The home builder *might* need to put a serial number on it for the purposes of having a gunsmith work on it, but I don't think that would be a deal breaker for most. Then again, gunsmiths I assume are allowed to work on older guns...those that might not have serial numbers on them, so maybe this step isn't even needed. [Side note: I think it is a good idea to put a serial number on a home built firearm for all the obvious reasons]

Looks okay to me. Agree/disagree? I'm no expert, but this looks promising.

I agree with most of what you've said, ****but*****...

the shops who were doing cnc rentals before weren't actually doing that many.. you could walk in on just about any weekday & the mill would be idle. despite what the anti's say, there weren't thousands, hundreds or even dozens of fireams being manufactured every day..

not sure on the actual cost of a cnc mill, but lets say $20k, for a well-used one, plus the cost of a machinist to run it, plus insurance and a storefront - that needs to be open whenever all of those freedom-loving Californians decide to toddle-in and get their "firearms" repaired..

I wouldn't do it for less than $1k each, and that's *if* I knew the ATF wasn't going to pop in, shoot my dog and "perp walk" me on the news as a terrorist, baby-killing murder-death-kill-machinist.

They seized a bunch of airsoft guns and called them "machine guns" for chrissake, why would anyone bet their freedom and their future on anything the ATF said, even if it was in writing and notarized by Barack Obama himself?

What's the "upside" for the FFL/gunsmith?

[n2fooz]

I agree with most of what you've said, ****but*****...

the shops who were doing cnc rentals before weren't actually doing that many.. you could walk in on just about any weekday & the mill would be idle. despite what the anti's say, there weren't thousands, hundreds or even dozens of fireams being manufactured every day..

not sure on the actual cost of a cnc mill, but lets say $20k, for a well-used one, plus the cost of a machinist to run it, plus insurance and a storefront - that needs to be open whenever all of those freedom-loving Californians decide to toddle-in and get their "firearms" repaired..

I wouldn't do it for less than $1k each, and that's *if* I knew the ATF wasn't going to pop in, shoot my dog and "perp walk" me on the news as a terrorist, baby-killing murder-death-kill-machinist.

They seized a bunch of airsoft guns and called them "machine guns" for chrissake, why would anyone bet their freedom and their future on anything the ATF said, even if it was in writing and notarized by Barack Obama himself?

What's the "upside" for the FFL/gunsmith?

What does that matter? He is bringing up a great point that should be explored.

[SJ-Chris]

I agree with most of what you've said, ****but*****...

the shops who were doing cnc rentals before weren't actually doing that many.. you could walk in on just about any weekday & the mill would be idle. despite what the anti's say, there weren't thousands, hundreds or even dozens of fireams being manufactured every day..

This is not relevant to the discussion. Most of these shops were cnc businesses first, and then they decided that on the side they could also do several paperweights per day/week/etc and make some extra money.

not sure on the actual cost of a cnc mill, but lets say $20k, for a well-used one, plus the cost of a machinist to run it, plus insurance and a storefront - that needs to be open whenever all of those freedom-loving Californians decide to toddle-in and get their "firearms" repaired..

This is also not relevant to the discussion. You are bringing up business reasons as to what might be worthwhile and what might not. That is not the issue here. As mentioned, most places that were doing cnc parties were already cnc businesses having nothing to do with firearms. This was something that was being done on the side.

I wouldn't do it for less than $1k each...

The cnc shops that were doing it were doing it for ~$65 per paperweight. The run-time for the program was about 10 minutes. Assuming they could get in let's say 4 per hour that's $260/hr they are making. All on machines they already have, in a shop they already rent, under insurance they already have (...okay, maybe their insurance companies might not have known they were assisting in turning paperweights into firearms). Do you think there are any machinists that would be willing to put in some overtime if they were making an extra $260/hr? I think so.

...and that's *if* I knew the ATF wasn't going to pop in, shoot my dog and "perp walk" me on the news as a terrorist, baby-killing murder-death-kill-machinist.

They seized a bunch of airsoft guns and called them "machine guns" for chrissake, why would anyone bet their freedom and their future on anything the ATF said, even if it was in writing and notarized by Barack Obama himself?

I understand this sentiment completely! If I was going to do this (which personally, I'm not) I would first get confirmation from the ATF that a gunsmith is allowed to perform this work on a FIREARM. Based on what is currently on the ATF's website it sounds like the answer is "Yes" and it sounds pretty clear actually (although IANAL). If that is the case, why should the CNC-using Type 1 FFL licensed gunsmith need to worry?

Consider this...there were several unlicensed (no FFL) CNC machinists across the state that were perfectly fine with allowing people with paperweights to come into their shops, use their cnc machines/programs to have the customer manufacture a firearm, and walk out the door with firearms (all for $65 a pop). They advertised on websites, in forums, and I even heard about billboards!

Isn't the approach I am suggesting 100 times more in line with the letter of the law?

Licensed Gunsmiths work on FIREARMs (allowed by the ATF)
Customer brings in a FIREARM (as defined by the ATF)
Gunsmith makes repairs, modifications, etc to the FIREARM (allowed by the ATF)
Gunsmith does not need to record it in their book if completed on same day (as allowed by ATF)
Customer leaves with the same FIREARM (allowed by the ATF)

vs.

Unlicensed CNC machinist allows customers to bring in paperweights and the customer converts it into a firearm using the CNC shop's tools/programs and leaves with a firearm.

Let me again be very clear: I am NOT looking for ways around the law. I am looking for ways WITHIN the law. I strive to follow the law and I don't even like to push the limits. That is why I am looking directly on the ATF's site, trying to get licensed gunsmith's opinions, etc.

What's the "upside" for the FFL/gunsmith?

The same "upside" that was there for the CNC shop machinist, except this is hopefully a 100% legal way to accomplish a similar result.

[Capybara]

Regardless of the outcome, I like the way you thought about this SJ-Chris.

[SJ-Chris]

So far, there seems to be no good reason to think that this approach wouldn't be 100% legal. My details are all coming directly from the ATF's website/etc.

Time to take the next step...

I'm wondering if anyone can share their experience with talking to their LOCAL ATF branch.

Either via email or by simply walking in and talking with someone, I'm thinking about bringing this in: [ATF Determination Letter showing an 80% lower that has had the Selector hole drilled out, where the ATF has determined that it IS a firearm]

http://www.quentindefense.com/downlo...0Non%20Gun.pdf

and asking them the following:
Since the ATF has determined that this object is a firearm, would I be allowed to bring it to a Type 1 licensed gunsmith and have them do work on it? If their answer is yes, then I would ask a few more specific questions...

Can the TYPE 1 licensed gunsmith perform the following modifications to this firearm:
Miling out:
- fire control group
- trigger pin
- hammer pin
- trigger slot

Does it matter what tools the gunsmith uses, specifically a CNC machine?

Also, since this is a firearm that a licensed gunsmith would be working on, would it need to have a serial number on it and any manufacturing info in order for the gunsmith to perform the work? [Yes, I know that it is optional for a home built firearm, but this question pertains to whether or not a licensed gunsmith would require such items under the law.]

Before I take this step, let me know if you think there is anything else I should ask while I'm at it.

I will likely be contacting the local ATF in the Bay Area (South Bay). If there are any of you that are interested, please feel free to take the same ATF determination letter and list of questions and go and ask YOUR local ATF. My hope is that we could get confirmation from multiple ATF sources saying "yes, that would all be perfectly legal". I guess we will see...

[dchang0]

My advice would be to contact different ATF agents that would have little likelihood of knowing each other so that you don't get a lie from the one you do ask, in the same way that Dark Knight on AK Files is currently being lied to by his assigned ATF agent about having to return a heat-treated 100% AK receiver to the owner via an FFL transfer. (FFL-holding gunsmiths and manufacturers can ship the repaired firearm back to the owner directly, even across state lines.) This is true FUD: the ATF spreading Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. Out of fear, Dark Knight is complying with this agent's false claim, which obviously cuts into his heat-treating service business. If Dark Knight were assigned a different agent, the answer might be different, such as this quote about it being perfectly fine for a FFL-holding gunsmith to ship a firearm back to the owner from Doug's Gunsmith Shop:

"Shipping Information

Federal law allows any gun owner, to ship their firearm to a manufacturer or repair facility, as long as the manufacturer or repair facility has a current Federal Firearms License (FFL). It is not necessary to ship from a FFL holder. Once the repair is completed, the firearm can then be shipped directly back to the owner only. If it is to be shipped to someone other than the current owner of the firearm, then the return shipment must be made to another FFL holder. It is then required that this other person fill out the necessary paper work (4473 and back ground check), before taking possession."

Of course, a cynic could say, this is just Doug saying so, but if that's true, how come Glock (mfg, pistols) and Benelli (mfg, long guns) and Robar (plater) have all shipped firearms directly back to their owner? Either Dark Knight's ATF agent is wrong/lying, or these four (of many other FFL holders) are breaking the law.


So, ask a couple of ATF agents, just in case you get one that lies. And get it all in writing, of course.

[SJ-Chris]

My advice would be to contact different ATF agents that would have little likelihood of knowing each other so that you don't get a lie from the one you do ask, in the same way that Dark Knight on AK Files is currently being lied to by his assigned ATF agent about having to return a heat-treated 100% AK receiver to the owner via an FFL transfer. (FFL-holding gunsmiths and manufacturers can ship the repaired firearm back to the owner directly, even across state lines.) This is true FUD: the ATF spreading Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. Out of fear, Dark Knight is complying with this agent's false claim, which obviously cuts into his heat-treating service business. If Dark Knight were assigned a different agent, the answer might be different, such as this quote about it being perfectly fine for a FFL-holding gunsmith to ship a firearm back to the owner from Doug's Gunsmith Shop:

"Shipping Information

Federal law allows any gun owner, to ship their firearm to a manufacturer or repair facility, as long as the manufacturer or repair facility has a current Federal Firearms License (FFL). It is not necessary to ship from a FFL holder. Once the repair is completed, the firearm can then be shipped directly back to the owner only. If it is to be shipped to someone other than the current owner of the firearm, then the return shipment must be made to another FFL holder. It is then required that this other person fill out the necessary paper work (4473 and back ground check), before taking possession."

Of course, a cynic could say, this is just Doug saying so, but if that's true, how come Glock (mfg, pistols) and Benelli (mfg, long guns) and Robar (plater) have all shipped firearms directly back to their owner? Either Dark Knight's ATF agent is wrong/lying, or these four (of many other FFL holders) are breaking the law.


So, ask a couple of ATF agents, just in case you get one that lies. And get it all in writing, of course.

I'm not familiar with the specific incident you are referring to. But yes, the plan would be to get verification from multiple ATF sources.

[SJ-Chris]

I have talked to a Special Agent with the ATF. I asked many questions related to this discussion. He found them interesting and wasn't 100% sure what the ATF's definitive answers would be (he didn't seem anti-home build at all). So I emailed him some questions and he is in the process of getting specific answers. He seems to be doing so in a helpful manner. He understood and agreed that he should send me answers that were supported with relevant penal code, ATF rules, etc rather than simply off-the-cuff answers. I look forward to seeing what the response is. I'll keep you posted.

[Maltese Falcon]

I have talked to a Special Agent with the ATF. I asked many questions related to this discussion. He found them interesting and wasn't 100% sure what the ATF's definitive answers would be (he didn't seem anti-home build at all). So I emailed him some questions and he is in the process of getting specific answers. He seems to be doing so in a helpful manner. He understood and agreed that he should send me answers that were supported with relevant penal code, ATF rules, etc rather than simply off-the-cuff answers. I look forward to seeing what the response is. I'll keep you posted.

Very good work Sir!

.

[Fryall4]

This is really interesting Chris, thanks for taking it on. The information received will be great to know... whichever way it goes.

[SJ-Chris]

Very good work Sir!

.

Not sure how this will turn out, but my hope is that it will be clear one way or another. While the ATF agent followed and appreciated my thought process (namely, if *I* crossed the paperweight over the line into a firearm then I was the one who manufactured it), he thought it didn't sound right to him that a gunsmith could actually do any/many of the other steps without it somehow also being considered manufacturing. But he said he really didn't know and he wanted to do the research (for his own knowledge as well) to see what the actual/legal answer is. It is probably going to take several days for him to get back to me. We'll see...

[SJ-Chris]

This is really interesting Chris, thanks for taking it on. The information received will be great to know... whichever way it goes.

Just trying to do my small part. I learn SO MUCH from calguns.net that it is my pleasure to try to contribute myself...

[dchang0]

I'm not familiar with the specific incident you are referring to. But yes, the plan would be to get verification from multiple ATF sources.

Yeah, it's a relatively small but true anecdote, not something that most would be expected to know about. The Dark Knight has posted about it on AK Files. His ATF agent claims among other claims that heat treating services do not count as gunsmithing work because it's not "custom work." And yet, you send him your own >80% receiver, he heat treats just your receiver and not a big, manufactured batch. That's pretty obviously custom work.

Also, why is heat treatment not considered gunsmithing when plating/anodizing is? They're both treatment of the material, right? Other questions arise--the ATF agent said that it would be okay if it were a long gun but not a bare receiver, and yet plenty of bare receivers have been sent in to various gunsmiths for work and returned directly to the owner.

Stuff like this means you gotta ask multiple agents and offices to get something close to the truth.