ATF raids polymer 80.

[Hot Sauce]

Just so I'm understanding this absurdity right...

If an end user separately buys all the parts needed to later self-manufacture a complete firearm, including an unfinished receiver that the ATF has explicitly stated is NOT a firearm until machined by said user, the end user HAS NOT bought a firearm according to the ATF.

If an end user buys all the parts needed to later self-manufacture a complete firearm together as a one line item kit, including an unfinished receiver that the ATF has explicitly stated is NOT a firearm until machined by said user, the end user HAS bought a firearm according to the ATF.

Is the issue the fact that this was sold/marketed as a kit by Polymer80? Or that it all came from the same source? If an end user buys all the parts that would go into the kit from Polymer80, but as separate line items, would the ATF then apparently not have a grievance?

[BehindBlueI's]

Just so I'm understanding this absurdity right...

If an end user separately buys all the parts needed to later self-manufacture a complete firearm, including an unfinished receiver that the ATF has explicitly stated is NOT a firearm until machined by said user, the end user HAS NOT bought a firearm according to the ATF.

If an end user buys all the parts needed to later self-manufacture a complete firearm together as a one line item kit, including an unfinished receiver that the ATF has explicitly stated is NOT a firearm until machined by said user, the end user HAS bought a firearm according to the ATF.

Is the issue the fact that this was sold/marketed as a kit by Polymer80? Or that it all came from the same source? If an end user buys all the parts that would go into the kit from Polymer80, but as separate line items, would the ATF then apparently not have a grievance?

...Maybe. We just don't know at this point what the exact issue is, but that interpretation remains a possibility.

If one isn’t a prohibited person - what alleged or potential crime could atf be building upon?

See:

(a)It shall be unlawful—
(1)for any person—
(A)except a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer, to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in firearms, or in the course of such business to ship, transport, or receive any firearm in interstate or foreign commerce; or...

....
for any person, other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector to transport into or receive in the State where he resides (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, the State where it maintains a place of business) any firearm purchased or otherwise obtained by such person outside that State, except that

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/922


I don't know how much culpability a receiver has vs how much the shipper has in the matter if the receiver was told by the shipper that it wasn't a firearm, as this isn't something that's in my training or experience. My *assumption* would be that there would be little to no interest in pursing the buyer since they weren't knowingly and intentionally engaging in an illegal transfer but that's strictly an assumption.

[HCM]

Another aspect of the seizers that strikes me as odd -

If one isn’t a prohibited person - what alleged or potential crime could atf be building upon?

The “case by case” thing is total bullshit. It’s a gun or isn’t regardless of who had the item.

I suspect the issue isn't the buyers (unless they are prohibited).

Rather the issue is P80 as a manufacturer. If the complete build kit they sell is a constructively a "firearm" then P80 is supposed to be paying 11% federal excise tax on the "firearm."

[rob_s]

If absolutely nothing else changes over the next few years, you get bet your ass that “home built” guns, “pistol” ARs, and other legal loopholes will likely get closed.

[Jeff22]

To many people, the issue with “ghost” guns is the lack of a serial number.

[CleverNickname]

To many people, the issue with “ghost” guns is the lack of a serial number.

I don't think anyone really cares about whether there's a serial number, per se. If a prohibited possessor made an 80% receiver into a firearm, many/most people would be concerned. Out of that group of people, is there anyone who would change their level of concern just because the guy who made it put a serial number on the gun? I doubt it. A serial number only "helps" if there's record-keeping around the serial number. So if you really want to require that homemade guns have serial numbers and actually do anything worthwhile, then you'll also have to require that everyone who's not an 07 FFL who wants to make a gun apply to the government for a unique serial number. This would effectively be a database of guns manufactured by non-FFLs, which I believe would run afoul of this prohibition in 18 USC 926:

"No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary’s [1] authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation."

[RancidSumo]

If absolutely nothing else changes over the next few years, you get bet your ass that “home built” guns, “pistol” ARs, and other legal loopholes will likely get closed.

This is exactly what is going to happen. Everyone knew from day one the 80% thing was bullshit. Just like everyone knew that a shouldered """pistol brace""" was functionally a stock. Likely going to have very little impact on individuals (nobody ever asked me about my pistol braced guns and nobody has ever asked to see anything on my registered SBRs), but the companies selling them are going to get smacked down. Not what I want, but clearly foreseeable.

Selling an 80% lower in a kit with all the tools needed to immediately turn it into a gun was a stupid idea on their part and was just asking for trouble. They either had no lawyers involved (extra stupid), didn't listen to their lawyers (supremely stupid), or they hired lawyers that are too stupid to practice.

[BehindBlueI's]

I don't think anyone really cares about whether there's a serial number, per se. If a prohibited possessor made an 80% receiver into a firearm, many/most people would be concerned. Out of that group of people, is there anyone who would change their level of concern just because the guy who made it put a serial number on the gun? I doubt it. A serial number only "helps" if there's record-keeping around the serial number. So if you really want to require that homemade guns have serial numbers and actually do anything worthwhile, then you'll also have to require that everyone who's not an 07 FFL who wants to make a gun apply to the government for a unique serial number. This would effectively be a database of guns manufactured by non-FFLs, which I believe would run afoul of this prohibition in 18 USC 926:

I think the lack of a serial number, and the "untraceable" nature of that is how it's sold to the masses, however. I would suppose those getting a visit from the ATF may think it's not as untraceable as they thought, though, and tracing guns is very haphazard anyway. There's a trail from the maker to the distributor to the FFL to the first buyer, but it often stops there.

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.

[TC215]

I don't think anyone really cares about whether there's a serial number, per se. If a prohibited possessor made an 80% receiver into a firearm, many/most people would be concerned. Out of that group of people, is there anyone who would change their level of concern just because the guy who made it put a serial number on the gun? I doubt it. A serial number only "helps" if there's record-keeping around the serial number. So if you really want to require that homemade guns have serial numbers and actually do anything worthwhile, then you'll also have to require that everyone who's not an 07 FFL who wants to make a gun apply to the government for a unique serial number. This would effectively be a database of guns manufactured by non-FFLs, which I believe would run afoul of this prohibition in 18 USC 926:

This isn't illegal at the federal level, because of the interstate commerce issue. ATF has been wanting to make the argument for years that "ghost guns" or "homemade guns" or whatever affect interstate commerce (there's legal precedent for this, just not for firearms). They've been waiting for the right case to come along to make good case law....seems like they may have found it.

[CleverNickname]

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.

Yeah, I know they're not unique. But they also are engraved with the manufacturer's name and location. If you're to require every unlicensed person who's making a gun to put a serial number on the the gun, and you actually want the serial to be useful, either the ATF will have to provide a unique serial number, or the person manufacturing the gun will also include their name and location. An FFL's name and location will almost certainly be unique (unless there's two John Does who personally have FFLs, and who live in the same city/town), but that won't be the case for unlicensed people because there's ~330 million of them, versus thousands of FFLs. So if the serial numbering was to be useful, the think that it would end up with the ATF having to issue serial numbers.