ATF raid for client list

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Ab_Normal

    Ab_member
    Feb 2, 2010
    8,613
    Carroll County
    Are you saying the additional 20 percent is the converted part?

    No. I'm saying the law as written does not consider even 100% receivers as firearms until they are configured to be able to expel a projectile.

    Remember it has to meet the requirements of A before it can be considered for B.

    18 U.S. Code § 921 - Definitions

    (3) The term “firearm” means
    (A) any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive;
    (B) the frame or receiver of any such weapon;

    YMMV
     

    chsnprodigy

    Active Member
    Dec 24, 2012
    128
    TTAG has more detail on what's happening:
    http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...rant-sheds-light-reason-atf-raid/#more-304605

    It seems that Ares may have been hosting build parties or otherwise aiding in the manufacturing of true firearms.

    This is a interesting read. I had a gut feeling that something else had to be happening in the background. Lets hope Ares wasnt hosting build parties. Even I the "novice" builder knows not to build firearms for other people......
     

    jpo183

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 20, 2013
    4,116
    in Maryland
    Obviously if that was going on they were going to get raided, however the article is simply speculative and has no proof or evidence of tying those actives to Ares.

    CA was very firm about "build parties" and "rent to build" so if they indeed were partaking in this, not only do they deserve the raid, they deserve a big stupid tattoo on their foreheads.
     

    Cyclone

    Jr. Zombie Killer
    Jan 25, 2010
    835
    Rosedale, MD
    Build parties and such are getting out of control in CA. There are some videos of it you can watch on youtube. IT IS NOT a manufactured firearms if you dont have or owned the equipment to finish it. Pressing the green button on an equipment you rented is the biggest mistake here. A very good example going in into shortcuts of owning a legal firearms. We should admit that these 80% is getting out of control. If it gets as so easy to make, think how easy of it to fall in the wrong hands. I would not worry, I would comply for search if I have nothing to hide. Criminals and illegals who should worry about this.
     

    DC-W

    Ultimate Member
    Patriot Picket
    Jan 23, 2013
    25,290
    ️‍
    Build parties and such are getting out of control in CA. There are some videos of it you can watch on youtube. IT IS NOT a manufactured firearms if you dont have or owned the equipment to finish it. Pressing the green button on an equipment you rented is the biggest mistake here. A very good example going in into shortcuts of owning a legal firearms. We should admit that these 80% is getting out of control. If it gets as so easy to make, think how easy of it to fall in the wrong hands. I would not worry, I would comply for search if I have nothing to hide. Criminals and illegals who should worry about this.
    Absolutely WRONG.

    How are 80% lowers a problem? A problem because our Government cannot TRACK and eventually CONFISCATE them?

    Anyone willing to put in the time can make anything. There's only one crime that I can think of that was committed with a self-milled AR15 and that was a shooting on a CA campus last year (I think it was last year). It is legal for a person to make a firearm for themself so long as they can legally possess it wherever they are. We should not condone laws that cater (pointlessly) to the lowest common denominator.

    There's thousands of illegally possessed, acquired, and circulated firearms in Baltimore City right now that are most likely going to remain hidden until they're used in crimes. Fear of 80% lowers falling into the wrong hands is no different than the fear and sensationalism that drives the civilian disarmament movement.
     

    jpo183

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 20, 2013
    4,116
    in Maryland
    Absolutely WRONG.

    How are 80% lowers a problem? A problem because our Government cannot TRACK and eventually CONFISCATE them?

    Anyone willing to put in the time can make anything. There's only one crime that I can think of that was committed with a self-milled AR15 and that was a shooting on a CA campus last year (I think it was last year). It is legal for a person to make a firearm for themself so long as they can legally possess it wherever they are. We should not condone laws that cater (pointlessly) to the lowest common denominator.

    There's thousands of illegally possessed, acquired, and circulated firearms in Baltimore City right now that are most likely going to remain hidden until they're used in crimes. Fear of 80% lowers falling into the wrong hands is no different than the fear and sensationalism that drives the civilian disarmament movement.

    :thumbsup:
     

    Mark75H

    MD Wear&Carry Instructor
    Industry Partner
    MDS Supporter
    Sep 25, 2011
    17,172
    Outside the Gates
    Absolutely WRONG.

    How are 80% lowers a problem? A problem because our Government cannot TRACK and eventually CONFISCATE them?

    Anyone willing to put in the time can make anything. There's only one crime that I can think of that was committed with a self-milled AR15 and that was a shooting on a CA campus last year (I think it was last year). It is legal for a person to make a firearm for themself so long as they can legally possess it wherever they are. We should not condone laws that cater (pointlessly) to the lowest common denominator.

    There's thousands of illegally possessed, acquired, and circulated firearms in Baltimore City right now that are most likely going to remain hidden until they're used in crimes. Fear of 80% lowers falling into the wrong hands is no different than the fear and sensationalism that drives the civilian disarmament movement.

    Agreed
     

    cap6888

    Ultimate Member
    Oct 2, 2011
    2,556
    Howard County
    +2!

    A criminal obtains guns illegally. They cannot possess one. They steal them from any various sources. If a legal citizen (as in someone who can lawfully possess a firearm) Chooses to manufacture their own, as the law allows, then there is no problem.
     

    chsnprodigy

    Active Member
    Dec 24, 2012
    128
    Absolutely WRONG.

    How are 80% lowers a problem? A problem because our Government cannot TRACK and eventually CONFISCATE them?

    Anyone willing to put in the time can make anything. There's only one crime that I can think of that was committed with a self-milled AR15 and that was a shooting on a CA campus last year (I think it was last year). It is legal for a person to make a firearm for themself so long as they can legally possess it wherever they are. We should not condone laws that cater (pointlessly) to the lowest common denominator.

    There's thousands of illegally possessed, acquired, and circulated firearms in Baltimore City right now that are most likely going to remain hidden until they're used in crimes. Fear of 80% lowers falling into the wrong hands is no different than the fear and sensationalism that drives the civilian disarmament movement.


    Well said sir, well said. :thumbsup:
     

    Tyeraxus

    Ultimate Member
    May 15, 2012
    1,165
    East Tennessee
    No. I'm saying the law as written does not consider even 100% receivers as firearms until they are configured to be able to expel a projectile.

    Remember it has to meet the requirements of A before it can be considered for B.

    YMMV

    This is counter to how I understood it. With the "or" in (C), it was my understanding that any of (A)-(D) could be met to consider an item a "firearm" under 921, not all or multiples. So merely the "receiver" of a "weapon that will or is designed to..." fits the definition, no matter the current configuration. Can you please elaborate?
     

    Ab_Normal

    Ab_member
    Feb 2, 2010
    8,613
    Carroll County
    This is counter to how I understood it. With the "or" in (C), it was my understanding that any of (A)-(D) could be met to consider an item a "firearm" under 921, not all or multiples. So merely the "receiver" of a "weapon that will or is designed to..." fits the definition, no matter the current configuration. Can you please elaborate?

    I'll try.

    18 U.S. Code § 921 - Definitions

    (3) The term “firearm” means
    (A) any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive;
    (B) the frame or receiver of any such weapon;

    A lays out the parameters for the configuration of a weapon - will/designed to/may readily be converted to expel a projectile.

    B defines what part of the object defined in A is a firearm once it meets the parameters of the object defined in A.

    B is considered a dependent clause - it is dependent on A defining a weapon. Without A B could encompass anything that could be used as a weapon - a bed frame or a radio receiver for example. So without A we would potentially need to fill out a 4473 to purchase a bed or radio. But we know that wasn't the purpose because B is dependent on the part in A about expelling a projectile. Beds and radios don't generally have the capability to expel projectiles so they are not considered firearms.
     

    john_bud

    Ultimate Member
    Sep 23, 2009
    2,045
    claymores and welcome mat tiger traps. That or toss one in a offsite location from your home and wait to see how this plays out for other customers. If someone comes knocking, "I screwed up and threw it away", is easy to say if it's nowhere on your property.

    Bad plan. Remember Martha Stewart for moment. She was suspected of getting "insider information" and making a bundle on a stock transaction. Turns out, she wasn't guilty of that, but she LIED to the feds about it and WENT TO JAIL.


    Feds come knocking, politely tell them you don't want to buy any magazines or cookies and to "get off my lawn".

    But don't lie. Silence is still not illegal... yet.
     

    beretta_maven

    Free Thinking Member
    Jan 2, 2014
    1,725
    SoMD
    Absolutely WRONG.

    How are 80% lowers a problem? A problem because our Government cannot TRACK and eventually CONFISCATE them?

    Anyone willing to put in the time can make anything. There's only one crime that I can think of that was committed with a self-milled AR15 and that was a shooting on a CA campus last year (I think it was last year). It is legal for a person to make a firearm for themself so long as they can legally possess it wherever they are. We should not condone laws that cater (pointlessly) to the lowest common denominator.

    There's thousands of illegally possessed, acquired, and circulated firearms in Baltimore City right now that are most likely going to remain hidden until they're used in crimes. Fear of 80% lowers falling into the wrong hands is no different than the fear and sensationalism that drives the civilian disarmament movement.

    What he said...:party29:
     

    Tyeraxus

    Ultimate Member
    May 15, 2012
    1,165
    East Tennessee
    I'll try.

    A lays out the parameters for the configuration of a weapon - will/designed to/may readily be converted to expel a projectile.

    B defines what part of the object defined in A is a firearm once it meets the parameters of the object defined in A.

    B is considered a dependent clause - it is dependent on A defining a weapon. Without A B could encompass anything that could be used as a weapon - a bed frame or a radio receiver for example. So without A we would potentially need to fill out a 4473 to purchase a bed or radio. But we know that wasn't the purpose because B is dependent on the part in A about expelling a projectile. Beds and radios don't generally have the capability to expel projectiles so they are not considered firearms.

    I hear what you're saying, and I agree to a point. However, I deal with CFR and USC construction on a daily basis, so I read it as:

    A) Defines a type of item as a firearm, and then B)further defines the frame or receiver of the weapon, by itself, also as a firearm. Yes, B) depends on the definition of A), but it's not so tightly defined as to only define B) when it is in the configuration of A)... otherwise, there would be no point to separate definitions. The general rule is that if an interpretation of a clause (not plain language of the clause) renders another clause meaningless or redundant, then the ambiguity is resolved in favor of the interpretation that does not render the other clause meaningless.

    Since your interpretation would mean that there is no distinction between A) and B), then the application of that principle of ambiguity resolution means that we must resolve in favor of the other interpretation - that is, the interpretation where B) refers to a specific part of A) at all times, rather than when B) is configured as A) only.

    IANAL.
     

    jcbvh

    Active Member
    Dec 30, 2012
    982
    Louisiana Cajun Country
    Build parties and such are getting out of control in CA. There are some videos of it you can watch on youtube. IT IS NOT a manufactured firearms if you dont have or owned the equipment to finish it. Pressing the green button on an equipment you rented is the biggest mistake here. A very good example going in into shortcuts of owning a legal firearms. We should admit that these 80% is getting out of control. If it gets as so easy to make, think how easy of it to fall in the wrong hands. I would not worry, I would comply for search if I have nothing to hide. Criminals and illegals who should worry about this.

    Good Grief :sad20:
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,918
    Messages
    7,258,713
    Members
    33,348
    Latest member
    Eric_Hehl

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom