ATF CLASSIFING AR UPPERS AS FIREARMS

So am I. But imo being on the NFA registry is a good way to get a visit from the party van if things ever get worse. Katrina was an example with that owners being targeted for confiscation. But I’m not aware if they went after NFA owners in that instance

ATF has the duty of interpreting federal law and deciding what does or doesn't fit into the federal classifications. As long as their decisions aren't patently arbitrary or directly contradict Congressional directions they're good to go.

Those blew up like a mad cunt tho

seeand
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevron_U.S.A.,_Inc._v._Natural_Resources_Defense_Council,_Inc.

Name ONE person arrested for that shit.
THE ATF CAN NOT INTERPRET LAWS, THAT'S FOR THE COURTS TO DECIDE.

THE ATF CAN DO WHATEVER IT DAMN WELL PLEASES, AND IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, WE'LL SHOOT YOUR DOG.

Basically.

Yeah, apparently Zel Customs outsourced their barrels to Mexico, where the quality control was dogshit.

I haven't heard anything about that when McCutchen took over, though.

Apparently, this isn't a new thing for the ATF to pull.

A while back someone made an MG34 that could take an AR lower. People were slapping on full auto M16 lowers on them and the ATF decided you couldn't do that.

Attached: xmgadc.jpg (1200x404, 88K)

>mg34 compatible with AR lower
Nigger fucking what? I didn’t know I needed something that badly

>giving a fuck about the party van when you have a 20mm

you are the party

Is it legal to use a semi auto AR lower in one of these? Or is it just the full auto?

so you need 2 firearms to make one functional firearm?

if the lower is legally registered why do they care?

their opinions are unconstitutional!

Because they say it's "manufacturing" a different full auto than what the registered lower is.

>Name ONE person arrested for that shit.
atf.gov/news/pr/latham-man-pleads-guilty-possessing-short-barreled-rifle

>sabot down to .50
>sabot down to .30
>sabot down to .224
>.22 cal tungsten rod
>ND into the round
>kill some fucker in China

>As part of his plea, Clemente admitted that he intentionally removed the upper receiver of a rifle that he had purchased at a gun store, and replaced it with an upper receiver he purchased on the Internet, which he knew included a 9-inch barrel. The resulting firearm he possessed was a rifle with a barrel of less than 16 inches, also known as a “short-barreled rifle,” which is illegal to possess.
So do you just not read shit before you post it, Mr Retard?

Attached: download_20180808_164809.jpg (210x280, 48K)

Nobody within the ATF thinks this will survive in a court.

Attached: 20180712_065147.jpg (4032x3024, 3.88M)

why does that matter, what about MAC uppers?

I think you're confused buddy, "stabilizing braces" aren't listed anywhere in the NFA, they are an ATF invention but serve as a way to circumvent SBR laws. You asked me to name one case where someone was arrested "for that shit".

Well this bloke got his door kicked in for having a stock instead of a stabilizing brace.

>the uppers they are referring to cost thousands of dollars
This affects no Jow Forumsommando

What world do you live in?
The ATF can literally respond via letter tons citizen, and that is law.
The ATF can make any law around alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives that it wants, they only way to strike it down is if it goes to the SCOTUS.
But they have been denying to hear gun cases the last few years.

what if he had had 1 standard AR and 1 AR "pistol" with the stabilizing brace?
The ATF view that as a rifle and a pistol? or a short barreled rifle with parts on a separate pistol?

It was only a matter of time.

Attached: img_5201.jpg (1000x618, 48K)

You guys are cock sucking faggots. I just want you to know that.

The fuck am I looking at

Attached: nice_try_ATF.jpg (1436x957, 508K)

Looks like a lage mac11 lower with an upper that takes assault rifle 15 clips

Looks like a macbren-15
What are you? A fudd?

anything that's threaded is now a firearm?
garden hoses are now firearms

oh yeah and they totally don't have a database of 4473s

An Glock 7 88mag

thanks for the sensationalist title you fuck. this is an obvious decision. if I go mod a remington 700 to somehow work on a ar15 lower should it no longer be classified as a firearm?

>The fuck am I looking at
It is obviously a MAC-11. Just a MAC-11. Please don't ask any more questions Mr. ATF man.

Attached: MAX31kRtSide.jpg (1600x1200, 869K)

>not patently arbitrary
so like 99% of their bullshit then?

also:
>ATF has the duty of interpreting federal law
ATF has the duty of ENFORCING the law as interpreted by the courts. all of their bullshit is 100% mission creep.

Kind of a wierd conclusion, actually. It looks like someone modified a bolt action to fit on a lower. I’m guessing that the alphabet bureau found a way to make it function without a lower.

Kind of stupid, but I’m interested to see how this turns out. Maybe we might see 50 BMG 80%ers.

>ATF has the duty of interpreting federal law
This can't be right

Thats literally the judges job

>stock instead of brace
So he didn't follow nfa laws? SHALL and all of that, sure, but this isn't about an atf letter being law.

Tbh it looks like they converted an already existing reciever, thus this specific upper still goes as the original reciver. Shitty af if true, but it makes more sence than saying all uppers are magicly firearms.

Basically an 5.56 upper for moderately wealthy people, who can afford full retard Mac 10/11s so they can shoot 5.56 in f/a

>You asked me
I didn't ask shit mr retard, I'm not the guy who you responded to originally. I'm just pointing out your response had LITERALLY NOTHING to do with braces but was instead of a man blatantly creating an illegal SBR. The issue was he took a gun originally barreled as a rifle and put a pistol-length upper on it. Not only is that illegal in the first place, but then he clearly had rifle furniture on a gun with

Attached: WZJrKiP.gif (600x398, 3.72M)

cant wait for you obama holdover gunwalkers to get out of the doj

If truly in the ATF
You guys know you're the absolute laughingstock of literally every LEO community on the planet, right? Like we literally sit around and laugh our asses off when you're mentioned in any positive capacity.

No, just poor.

They did the same thing with belt fed Mac uppers.
Spergs who don't know this are having a meltdown because they think that all 5.56 AR uppers are going to be classified as firearms now.

Attached: Alliance Armament RPD MAC-10 upper.jpg (640x480, 55K)

>Well this bloke got his door kicked in for having a stock instead of a stabilizing brace.
Which makes it a rifle you fucking retard.

>"stabilizing braces" aren't listed anywhere in the NFA
No shit - that’s the whole point. A rifle has a stock, a pistol does not. A brace can be stretched to a pistol because there is no law regarding it.

What a stupid post.

Attached, fucking phone

ATF doesn’t give a shit about your rights, they’re just autistically going to deny them any way they can.

It isn't right and it is quite certainly what federal law enforcement agencies do.

>What a stupid post.

>WE
Fuck off fed

i have one

Nice get, now prove it faggot

Implying those digits aren't proof enough

Attached: 20180816_132528.jpg (640x480, 107K)

>Gee Billy, how come the BATFAGs say you have TWO receivers?

Attached: images.jpg (224x225, 9K)

>ATF CAN'T CLASSIFY SHIT
They're enforcement. They decide who to arrest and charge. They're expressing their interpretation of the law. If you think a court won't agree with them, you're welcome to violate the law and become a test case. That's how it works.

Looks pretty reasonable to me. It uses an AR-15 receiver for a bolt-action gun, and requires modification of the receiver.

With this particular design, they're not using the lower receiver as a receiver, but more like a stock. The specific design details of an assembled AR-15 that cause the lower receiver to be classified as the receiver and the upper assembly to be classified as a mere part don't apply to an assembled SHTF .50 BMG. This implies that they could sell a purpose-designed lower assembly for a SHTF .50 BMG as a part.

I doubt they'd lose a court case over it.

>requires modification of the receiver.
only if you count needing a heavier hammer.

And the bolt catch. The fact that it doesn't interface with the AR-15 lower receiver bolt catch is a significant technical detail for determining whether the AR-15 lower receiver is the receiver of the assembled gun: in the assembled SHTF .50 BMG, the AR-15 lower receiver does not interact with the bolt, nor does it interact with the magazine.

Major functions of the AR-15 lower receiver in an assembled AR-15 are bypassed in the assembled SHTF .50 BMG with structures serving the same purpose. If you built a lower assembly lacking those unnecessary structures, it could be sold as an unserialized part.

>tl;dr If you can't feed your ammo through the AR-15 lower receiver magazine well, don't expect anyone to believe your frankenrifle is an AR-15.

still not a modification of the lower though.

>If you think a court won't agree with them, you're welcome to violate the law and become a test case. That's how it works
So, basically terrorism then?

>purchased at a gun store
Do these retards really not make these with a blank receiver that they can throw in the river and have plausible deniability over?

>If you built a lower assembly lacking those unnecessary structures
You're saying ATF is gonna consider a complete AR-15 lower with no magwell and no bolt catch, but with the takedown pins, FCG pocket, and FCG pins all standard AR-15, to not be a firearm receiver?
Good luck with that.

Why would it be a firearm? It would essentially be a reverse 80% lower.

>it would essentially be an 80% lower, only with the features that make it a firearm completed, and the features that don't matter left out
Exactly my point.

You know what’s not a firearm? An 80% lower. It doesn’t matter which part is completed, it’s measured by work done. The reason commercial 80% lowers have the mag well finished is that’s the more critical portion dimensionally.
Also an AR lower without a mag well cant feed.

>80% lower
>measured by work done.
Sorry, but you have been misinformed. "80%" is a marketing term. ATF doesn't care about percentage of completion, but whether certain features they decide constitute a firearm are present.
See e.g. ammoland.com/2014/11/atf-answers-questions-on-80-receiver-blanks/

Also, an AR-15 lower with no magwell, combined with a standard upper receiver, is a perfectly serviceable single-shot rifle.

He didn't have a pistol, he had a rifle. stabilizing braces are for pistols. You cant put a short barrel on your AR if it started it's life as a rifle without paying tax

Christ almighty, let me spell it out for you kids.

The ATF can just make up laws for what is legal and illegal without it being written in law, "braces" are an example of this and if they so wished they could say you couldn't shoulder them, which they did, or they could straight up make braces illegal because there is NO LAW WHATSOEVER SAYING A "BRACE" ISN'T A STOCK.

They could change all of this with a fucking letter. They did this with suppressor wipes if you guys weren't paying attention last year, arbitrarily saying that something you could buy in the mail for decades before was now regulated suppressor parts. The ATF can effectively establish there own laws unless there is direct legislation against it.

The reason is these uppers are what you insert the magazine into to, making it more of the receiver than the lower in this particular application. Same with these.
But honestly for the purposes of keeping order the decision to do so is mostly arbitrary bullshit. A registered full auto anything is so hard to get that it really doesn't make a difference where exactly the ammo goes. And I wouldn't totally put it past them to classify ALL uppers as firearms because technically the lower just holds the magazine in place while the upper actually receives cartridges. After all thats how Europe does it and they're obviously on the cutting edge of doing what the press wants so we have to be exactly like them even in ways the press doesn't particularly whine about.

>safety harbor
Enjoy your pipe threads

So when i order my upper this weekend, I'll have to have it shipped to a FFL dealer?

>Do they just not people to own ghost 50 cal's?
Nothing scares an authoritarian anti-gunner more than someone with an untraceable anti-material rifle that can destroy fuel depots, cars, plane engines, and people wearing even the most advanced body armors. My guess as to one of the specific concern groups is the same people who have a hard on for AP pistols and use .50 BMGs to destroy police vehicles: Mexican Cartels. Speaking of such issues, are gun barrels and AR uppers declared by ITAR? I know AR500 products are.

IF YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE US DO SO MUCH FUCKING PAPERWORK, AT LEAST DO IT QUICK YOU FUCKS AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Attached: 1523928786420.jpg (402x415, 27K)

Nice clickbait title dipshit

The upper receiver of a SCAR is the legal firearm, lowers hold the mags and are considered parts.

these are the sorts of things I love love about the 86 ban. I don't like the act of them being banned post 86, but the oddities and ingenuity that come from working around restrictions

>they have been denying to hear gun cases the last few years.
and that's a good thing

Attached: cutesmuggirl.png (3084x2568, 188K)

The courts have chosen to give deference to agencies much of the time. I don’t like the decision, I feel it’s an abdication of responsibility, but it has reason behind it. In part, it’s because judges are experts in the field of law but are pressed for time and resources, and agencies are intended to be specialists of their own. If EPA decides something, a judge doesn’t have time to to engage in a mini-masters program to discern whether or not it is perfectly sensible.
That said, there are standards for when an agency has messed up, and the deference isn’t a hard and fast rule.

tl;dr
Judges aren’t machines and don’t have time to learn everything in every field, so the system created a compromise. Hence ATF rulemaking.

>This implies that they could sell a purpose-designed lower assembly for a SHTF .50 BMG as a part
128% lowers when?

It’s a bolt action so of course the upper is a receiver. The part that houses a bolt is the receiver for a bolt action.

Look man. Just don't be a dick. I hope your day goes well.

What's up with all the tax stamp waiting times? Is it an actual tactic to get people to not get NFA items?