Quote History Quoted:
What was done 30+ years ago is irrelevant. It has been known for years one caliber was Best Practice. But hey, it is not my xfer being delayed.
View Quote
I disagree. How a gun was originally registered 30+ years ago can be very relevant. Sometimes it's little details from 30+ years ago that determine if a gun is worth tens of thousands of dollars or... a fine and imprisonment. Caliber may not be a big deal today, but what about tomorrow? Today ATF says to only do it one way. A few years ago, "best practice" was to register it in every caliber it might possibly be configured in. And in '86 I understand there was a very real fear that ATF would only allow MGs to be used in the "registered" caliber. We have seen other examples where they make up regulations of when and how certain guns and conversion parts can be used.
ATF claims they are "cleaning up" the registry. But in doing so, they are altering details about the way many guns were originally registered. And now it's causing problems for the end buyers and sellers. For example, I've got an SBR that was originally registered in 4 or 5 different calibers. I've got the original Form 1 from when it was registered. If I were to sell it, what caliber do I list. I've got a 4 out of 5 chance of getting it wrong. Inquiries to ATF often go unanswered for months or years (or sometimes, they don't answer them at all).
Yes, when I bought my Group Uzi 10+ years ago, ATF was just getting into the "only one caliber" thing. I listed it in 9mm, and put a notation in one of the boxes about it also being registered in .22 and .45. The transfer was approved and I picked up my gun. I read somewhere recently that ATF is now kicking back forms for listing things this way as well.
And all of these changes from the original registrations are merely for ATF's convenience.
I wonder what ramifications this will have in another decade or two.