Page 9 of 23 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 228

Thread: ATF raids polymer 80.

  1. #81
    Member DMF13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Nomad
    Quote Originally Posted by BehindBlueI's View Post
    Side note, there's no requirement for a s/n to be unique like a VIN. Many manufacturers have repeated serial numbers both with each other and with different models in their own category. If you report a gun stolen, just the s/n alone is insufficient to enter it into NCIC because they aren't unique.
    That's not correct, while manfacturers/importers don't have to make serial numbers unique from other manufacturers/importers, after 1968 they cannot duplicate serial numbers within their own products.

    https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-id...e27.3.479_1102
    "The serial number must be placed in a manner not susceptible of being readily obliterated, altered, or removed, and must not duplicate any serial number placed by you on any other firearm."

    So serial numbers are unique within the products manufactured/imported by a particular licensee, even if different types, models, and/or calibers, but may be the same serial number used by a different manufacturer/importer.
    _______________
    "Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?" Then I said, "Here I am. Send me." - Isaiah 6:8

  2. #82
    IS WHAT PLANTS CRAVE BehindBlueI's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Midwest
    Quote Originally Posted by DMF13 View Post
    That's not correct, while manfacturers/importers don't have to make serial numbers unique from other manufacturers/importers, after 1968 they cannot duplicate serial numbers within their own products.
    It is correct, although this part of your addition is also correct. Makers have repeated serial numbers within their own lineup, as I said. Colt comes to mind immediately. I didn't dive deep enough to mention the changes of '68 or mention that guns didn't require a serial number at all prior to, etc.

    So:

    Quote Originally Posted by DMF13 View Post
    So serial numbers are unique within the products manufactured/imported by a particular licensee....
    Is not correct, because pre-68 guns still exist and were not retroactively given s/n.

    Edit

    See: https://www.colt.com/serial-lookup

    If multiple models appear for your serial number simply match the date with the appropriate model, as certain vintage firearms can share serial numbers between different models.
    Important rule change regarding political discussion here: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....58#post1151858

    Quote Originally Posted by UNM1136 View Post
    Maybe with talented students I would lube up with baby oil and then go at it.

  3. #83
    As a hobby machinist, I'm not making guns for illicit purposes. I have no objection to going to an ATF website (especially for free!) and reporting 'whomever is making a gun, serial number WH999'.

    But I fear such a requirement won't be much of a crimefighting tool ... the whomevers of the world aren't selling guns to crooks, and the people who are are will ignore the requirement. After all, making the gun with intent to sell is already a felony ... will their real-world sentence be longer because they made them without serial numbers, or made them with unregistered serial numbers, or registered one serial number and made a zillion with that number?

  4. #84
    IS WHAT PLANTS CRAVE BehindBlueI's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Midwest
    Quote Originally Posted by whomever View Post
    As a hobby machinist, I'm not making guns for illicit purposes. I have no objection to going to an ATF website (especially for free!) and reporting 'whomever is making a gun, serial number WH999'.

    But I fear such a requirement won't be much of a crimefighting tool ... the whomevers of the world aren't selling guns to crooks, and the people who are are will ignore the requirement. After all, making the gun with intent to sell is already a felony ... will their real-world sentence be longer because they made them without serial numbers, or made them with unregistered serial numbers, or registered one serial number and made a zillion with that number?
    IMO, the s/n issue is a red herring to begin with. It's just a way to rile up the masses with the "ghost gun" narrative. S/N requirements aren't going to solve anything crime wise. For tax purposes *may* be a different question, but that's not the conversation in the public space or the stated goal.
    Important rule change regarding political discussion here: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....58#post1151858

    Quote Originally Posted by UNM1136 View Post
    Maybe with talented students I would lube up with baby oil and then go at it.

  5. #85
    Quote Originally Posted by BehindBlueI's View Post
    ... For tax purposes *may* be a different question, but that's not the conversation in the public space or the stated goal.
    I'm happy to pay the Pittman-Robertson tax on the fair market value of a gun I make. How much would you pay for a bespoke whomever-built AR lower :-). I mean, this wouldn't be one of those cookie cutter lowers like BCM or whoever turns out in mass, made on the latest machinery in ISO-9000 certified shops with rigid quality control. This would be made right in whomever's basement on machinery that helped win WWII, lovingly crafted by whomever himself after a couple of beers, with QC rigorously checked by one of the plastic LL special $8 calipers. That's gotta be worth a big premium over Colt or Larue or Geissele.

    (assuming I was selling, which, of course I'm not ...)

  6. #86
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Southwest Pennsylvania
    I saw in the Ammoland email this morning that ATF unsuccessfully sought customer information from Brownells. Brownells responded that they do not sell the kits which appear to be at issue, and only sell the 80% frames. They refused to provide any information.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  7. #87
    I just reached out to an ATF friend. He said nothing has come down agency-wide in reference to Polymer80, and is unsure where the case is heading. He believes there's certainly potential for ATF to try to ban "ghost guns", but said it would be a lengthy process with a lot of opposition/lawsuits. He also hinted that ATF has other things they're focusing on right now...not sure if he was referencing pistol braces or what, and I didn't ask for specifics.

  8. #88
    IS WHAT PLANTS CRAVE BehindBlueI's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Midwest
    Quote Originally Posted by TC215 View Post
    He also hinted that ATF has other things they're focusing on right now...not sure if he was referencing pistol braces or what, and I didn't ask for specifics.
    Locally the focus was gun store burglaries and serial straw purchasers for awhile. I'm not in the loop any more, though, so not sure what's what at the moment.
    Important rule change regarding political discussion here: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....58#post1151858

    Quote Originally Posted by UNM1136 View Post
    Maybe with talented students I would lube up with baby oil and then go at it.

  9. #89
    Quote Originally Posted by BehindBlueI's View Post
    Locally the focus was gun store burglaries and serial straw purchasers for awhile. I'm not in the loop any more, though, so not sure what's what at the moment.
    A gun store burglary to the ATF is like a bank robbery to the FBI. That's one of their priorities.

    Most of our local agents mainly work drug conspiracies. They're not out there trying to jam up the "good guys" like the internet wants people to believe (though the ATF upper administration is another story...).

  10. #90
    IS WHAT PLANTS CRAVE BehindBlueI's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Midwest
    Quote Originally Posted by TC215 View Post
    I just reached out to an ATF friend. He said nothing has come down agency-wide in reference to Polymer80, and is unsure where the case is heading.
    That sort of goes back to specific state (DC being my original theory, but CA seems like a strong contender now) being the driving focus on this. Would the Tucson office have any overlap with CA, since that's the office on the alleged surrender form circulating online? The only one I've found, anyway.

    I still can't find a pdf of the warrant or warrant application, which is starting to bug me since I'd really like some resolution on this. I figured as much attention as this got someone would have posted it by now. It's not sealed per multiple articles.
    Important rule change regarding political discussion here: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....58#post1151858

    Quote Originally Posted by UNM1136 View Post
    Maybe with talented students I would lube up with baby oil and then go at it.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •