How about starting 81% build parties?

[Limited-Ten]

The ATF absolutely only uses the terms firearm and non firearm. If you submit something to them that has too much work done to it, they will call it a firearm. This is what happens when determination letters for 80% manufacturers fail. I've seen them. They say "what you submitted has enough stuff done to it to be considered a firearm". If a person can take something which was previously determined to NOT be a firearm, then take it to the level that IS a firearm, I agree with the concept of this thread. However, ATF will not issue blanket statements yet, until they are reformed by some proper controls. Until that point, you would have to take an 80%, do some work to it, submit it to the ATF 'EVERYTIME' and once you receive it back with a letter of determination that it is a firearm someone else could work on it.

Beat me to it. The ATF cares about "YOUR" determination letters addressed to you, before and after your particular "80-81%" threshold has been crossed by sending in samples. Not letters you found on the 'net addressed to somebody else or for various other unfinished firearms.

[glbtrottr]

I believe Jason Davis is doing exactly this by sending an 80% receiver to ATF and asking them to make a determination and then taking same said receiver with a drilled hole and asking for a different determination on behalf of a shop.

I think, it may be a rumor, I didnt stay at a Holiday Inn last night.

[Limited-Ten]

If he did, as far as my understanding of determination letters go in which they are a case by case basis, people can't just mill out one feature and use his letter.

I'm not saying I agree with that, but that is my impression after contacting the ATF numerous times to get our letters.

[morthrane]

Drilling a hole for the fire control group DOES NOT make it a firearm it just does not qualify it to be a BLANK. When the BLANK is completed to the point it is a functional to be able to control the discharge of ammunition then it is considered a firearm. SO drilling one hole puts it into a "limbo" not completed state that makes it neither one or the other.

Please cite your BATFE and legal sources.

[dantodd]

If he did, as far as my understanding of determination letters go in which they are a case by case basis, people can't just mill out one feature and use his letter.

I'm not saying I agree with that, but that is my impression after contacting the ATF numerous times to get our letters.

The ATF cannot make such determinations capriciously. Here is an example of how this could work.

A specific block receives a determination letter deeming it a non- firearm. A certain amount of machining is done to said block and a new determination letter is received declaring said block a firearm.

Now, a machine shop gets a bunch of the blocks determined to not be a firearm cast. The machine shop could potentially sell these blocks to enthusiasts who would then machine/drill the blocks to or past the point that the determination letter has shown them to be a firearm. Now, the person who possesses this firearm can easily take the firearm down to a gunsmith and pay someone to alter their new firearm to work properly.

[UnknownShooter]

If he did, as far as my understanding of determination letters go in which they are a case by case basis, people can't just mill out one feature and use his letter.

I'm not saying I agree with that, but that is my impression after contacting the ATF numerous times to get our letters.

I get that, but if there's a letter out there for "XYZ" brand lowers, stating they aren't firearms, and they (or someone else) submits a second sample part with additional work done (and it is declared a firearm), that will put ATF in a pretty indefensible position.

I suspect that's what's happened in this case - no one wants to admit that the emperor has no clothes..

Ideally,one would submit a second sample with "work" done that is easily replicated & well documented - like dimpling a hole location to a specified depth using a specified jig. If that "firearm" sample was recovered from ATF after the determination, it could be preserved & stored with a Calguns-friendly lawyer & any prosecutions based on it's progeny would risk the "original" being introduced as evidence at trial for a jury to compare against..

[Eagle Eyes]

Just read the indictment of the Sacramento Cortez-Garcia brothers it gives all the information and legal references. That indictment shows how the BATF&E refers to them as receiver blanks and not by any number or percentage of completion.

That indictment gives you a very good idea of how the BATF&E would proceed against those charged with illegal firearms manufacturing.


The BATF&E will do determination letters for those that will be in the business of manufacturing receiver blanks. They would not be taking them from individuals because they are exempt from needing a determination when making for themselves (besides the fact they would be flooded with requests and take years to get a determination letter back from them).

The other thing that you guys are overlooking that even if you get BATF&E to sign off on the OPs idea the work would be classified as customization not repair work. In CA customizing is considered a manufacturing process so the gunsmith would need a 07 FFL and manufacturing license for CA and would be required to charge sales tax on parts and labor.

The problem is since it is considered a manufacturing process and sales tax has to be charged on all costs would it need to be serialized and DROSed by the gunsmith afterwards?

That is the unknown at the moment and would be a CA DOJ and Franchise Tax Board as well as a BATF&E decision.

[bigcalidave]

We all recognize that ATF doesn't consider 80% to be a technical term. However, there is no "limbo" as you stated earlier. They are firearms or not firearms.

[Eagle Eyes]

Actually there is they classify it as a incomplete firearm which is something I know about because years ago I worked for a company that manufactured firearms. So it is clasified as a firearm but not in a completed state to discharge ammunition.

The OP is not bringing up some new idea that has not been thought of many times since the passage of the GCA in 1968, just enough time passes each time someone brings it up that people forget.

You guys can push the issue and get BATF&E and CA DOJ to give administrative rulings but remember it goes both ways, and more times than not not how you wanted it.

The OP is trying to find a way to get around the "personal" exemption in the law by somehow defining that personal means "me, myself, my family, my friends and that guy down the street with the cool machines".

I have posted this many times before short of a court ruling or the repeal of the 1968 GCA it is a uphill battle while pushing a boulder and dragging one at the same time. NO ONE seems to want to take the hit and go head to head with BATF&E over what they can and can not restrict per the 1968 GCA in regards to personal manufacturing or firearms in court.


BUT like I said before even is you get the BATF&E to allow it you still have to get around CA seeing customizing as a manufacturing process.

[bigcalidave]

I didn't say ATF would make this easy, and I specified the process for each individual. You said they wouldn't call it a firearm, now that they would, just incomplete. Show me a determination letter that says "incomplete firearm". The law (and the GCA) doesn't allow for partial definitions, it is either a firearm, or not.

[bohoki]

i wonder if the technical branch is dragging their feet on this because the minute they give the correct opinion machine shops will have a drill press set up with locator pins a for you to drill one hole then they will bring it in and put it on their cnc

since they are just doing minor fitting of your "firearm"

[M1NM]

Before I worked on it I'd want a determination letter from ATF stating it is a firearm. I'd also want a serial # on it and listed in the letter. It's called CYA.

[SJ-Chris]

I did finally get a reply from the ATF agent I had been communicating with. Here is his response...

Yes, if you took what the industry calls an 80% paperweight and you perform just one more step, then you have in fact created a firearm. However, there are several more "steps" required to complete the firearm and performing those steps is also considered manufacturing in the eyes of the ATF.

I believe I now have what I would consider an official answer and I will abide by that. As always mentioned, the intention of this discussion was NOT to get around the law....but rather to get the answer to this question so that we had clarification about how the law would be interpreted. Not the answer we hoped for, but none-the-less nice to get to the bottom of the issue.

[Eagle Eyes]

Bigcalidave:

I think you not understanding that I am talking about personal manufacturing and you talking about business manufacturing since the BATF&E would not give an individual a determination letter as they would be exempt if they are personally making it for them.

[bigcalidave]

An individual can most certainly get a determination letter from ATF. They do it all the time to avoid making machine guns from parts kits. People who do not have a business yet also get them to determine product validity.