The ruling I think is solid and the description in the title or explanation via AMMOLAND is fogged. The reason this ruling or determination came about is because an attorney was looking for verification of when a non-firearm actually becomes a firearm. The letter that was sent to the ATF was an attempt to not only poke the bear, but make an attempt to circumvent the current legal definition behind the manufacturing of a Do It Yourself firearm. With the current language used by the ATF an 80% with no prior machining is not considered a firearm, but if the user or purchaser were to take the 80% home and drill a couple of holes into this, it would then make it an actual firearm. Under a previous ruling by the ATF, one could return the now Firearm to a gunsmith to finish the needed work or gunsmithing. This is circumventing the system and completely contradicting . Now dont get me wrong I am all for pushing the limits and using legal loopholes to assist law abiding Ca folks in exercising our second amendment rights but this was ludicrous. What the ATF has voiced, simply put, was an explanation of how splitting hairs is properly done. Better yet!! What this has done for my companys current legal battle is they have clearly stated that making indentations, drilling, and indexing does not make it a firearm. What makes an 80% a firearm is the moment it is readily converted to a functioning firearm via GUNSMITHING or consumer machining NOT exclusively because of extroverted pin guides or color coded guides. -Chris Cook, CEO E P Armory ammoland/2015/01/atf-reverses-50-years-of-agency-practice-to-go-after-home-made-gun-makers/#axzz3O4A1xfyd
Posted on: Fri, 09 Jan 2015 02:24:50 +0000
Trending Topics
© 2015