User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/11/2018 2:51:37 AM EDT
First off let me state that I have no plans to sell any of my SBRs. This is a hypothetical question.
I just got my eForm 1 approved (10 days  ) for the B&T TP9 I just bought and the proprietary can is in jail with a long ways to go. This was by far the most money I’ve dropped on a gun and can all at once so I probably just have some cold feet. All my other rifles have been pieced together over time to lighten the blow even though some cost about the same in the end. So I started thinking if I ever needed to sell the TP9, would someone want to buy a gun with someone else’s name engraved on the side? I probably wouldn’t unless I got a deal I couldn’t pass up but to each their own. Obviously, with an AR I could separate the upper and lower and just sell the upper. With the TP9 I could remove the stock and sell it as a pistol. Did a quick google search and found the following article:
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/01/foghorn/do-you-need-to-engrave-your-form-1ed-sbr/ It states that the original manufacturer engravings are good enough and you don’t have to engrave your name and location unless you intend to sell the gun AS an SBR. Now, I always thought you had to engrave the gun when your form 1 was approved like I did with my other SBR but this article says otherwise. This article is a couple years old so something could’ve changed since then but does anybody know what the answer is here? Thanks all! ETA: I can't get the link to go hot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/11/2018 3:04:46 AM EDT
[#1]
That TTAG article is incorrect. It's been discussed here before (many times).
Yes the maker/manufacturer is required to engrave. You may adopt existing markings, but you'll still have to add the name of yourself (or your legal entity) as well as the location where initially assembled (unless it just happens to be the same location already engraved on the firearm originally). You can add the markings to the barrel if you prefer. It's usually the least expensive part to replace if you ever want to sell. (Maybe not on a TP9 though). Quoted:
So I started thinking if I ever needed to sell the TP9, would someone want to buy a gun with someone else's name engraved on the side? Most people will pay a little more to start with an unengraved gun to add their own markings to. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/11/2018 3:11:21 AM EDT
[#2]
You could also engrave the barrel.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/11/2018 3:34:36 AM EDT
[#3]
Barrel is a good call. That’s probably what I’ll do then. Does the engraving have to be visible without taking the gun apart?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/11/2018 3:46:07 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Barrel is a good call. That’s probably what I’ll do then. Does the engraving have to be visible without taking the gun apart? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/11/2018 4:05:25 AM EDT
[#5]
My unofficial theory is that if you have the required engraving somewhere on the frame/receiver/barrel (and at the minimum depth and height), you'll be fine. (A strict reading of the law says otherwise however).
The worst I've heard of is an ATF SA taking someone's unengraved NFA firearm and engraving it for them right there with an electro-pencil super ugly on the side. (I think at the Knob Creek MG shoot years ago). Others without engraving have been told by ATF "Go fix this." So if you actually have it, likely they'd just say, "Make this better." (if anything). Some here will tell you how they haven't engraved, and it's been fine (which is in violation of USC/CFR of course). The question I never see anyone discussing is the scenario where you aren't the maker/manufacturer, but purchased it from them, and they failed to engrave. There's nothing stating it can't be possessed that way. USC specifies "the maker/manufacturer shall engrave..." |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/11/2018 10:46:25 AM EDT
[#6]
As far as putting a gun on Form1..... and then selling it as a pistol?? You have placed that firearm on the NFA registry. I am curious what happens to the guy that you sell it to (maybe even out of state) and they try to Form1 it. Then they have a NFA registered firearm, across state lines, that wasn't transferred on a Form4. Am I missing something here? Maybe I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/11/2018 11:11:56 AM EDT
[#7]
You must mark the gun. Ignore any source that says otherwise.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/27/479.102 § 479.102 How must firearms be identified? (a) You, as a manufacturer, importer, or maker of a firearm, must legibly identify the firearm as follows: (1) By engraving, casting, stamping (impressing), or otherwise conspicuously placing or causing to be engraved, cast, stamped (impressed) or placed on the frame or receiver thereof an individual serial number. 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. For firearms manufactured, imported, or made on and after January 30, 2002, the engraving, casting, or stamping (impressing) of the serial number must be to a minimum depth of .003 inch and in a print size no smaller than 1/16 inch; and (2) By engraving, casting, stamping (impressing), or otherwise conspicuously placing or causing to be engraved, cast, stamped (impressed), or placed on the frame, receiver, or barrel thereof certain additional information. This information must be placed in a manner not susceptible of being readily obliterated, altered or removed. For firearms manufactured, imported, or made on and after January 30, 2002, the engraving, casting, or stamping (impressing) of this information must be to a minimum depth of .003 inch. The additional information includes: (i) The model, if such designation has been made; (ii) The caliber or gauge; (iii) Your name (or recognized abbreviation) and also, when applicable, the name of the foreign manufacturer or maker; (iv) In the case of a domestically made firearm, the city and State (or recognized abbreviation thereof) where you as the manufacturer maintain your place of business, or where you, as the maker, made the firearm; and |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/11/2018 11:50:57 AM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
ETA: I can't get the link to go hot. That's because it (the article) is so stupid the internet rejects it. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/11/2018 11:55:24 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's supposed to be 'readily visible' or something like that. That said, IIRC ATF has said that guns inside of "shell stocks" are ok, and their markings are not really visible without disassembly so, yeah. And the only time I've seen them define that was in ATF Ruling 2002-6, which included: ...and "conspicuous" means that all required markings must be placed in such a manner as to be wholly unobstructed from plain view. For example, required markings may not be placed on a portion of the barrel where the markings would be wholly or partially obstructed from view by another part of the firearm, such as a flash suppressor or bayonet mount. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/11/2018 11:57:06 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
As far as putting a gun on Form1..... and then selling it as a pistol?? You have placed that firearm on the NFA registry. I am curious what happens to the guy that you sell it to (maybe even out of state) and they try to Form1 it. Then they have a NFA registered firearm, across state lines, that wasn't transferred on a Form4. Am I missing something here? Maybe I am wrong. A: A stripped receiver without a barrel does not meet the definition of a SBR or SBS under the NFA. Although the previously registered firearm would remain registered unless the possessor notified the NFA Branch of the change, there is no provision in statute or regulation requiring registration of a firearm without a barrel because its physical characteristics would make it only a GCA firearm pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(3)(B). If the subsequent owner buys the receiver as a GCA firearm and installs a barrel less than 16 inches in length (SBR) or 18 inches in length (SBS), the firearm would be subject to a $200 making tax and registration under the NFA by the manufacturer or maker of the SBR or SBS. Because registration depends upon the stated intent of the applicant, there is no provision to allow registration of a NFA firearm by anyone other than the maker or manufacturer. Same would go for any other non-NFA configuration, like a pistol or rifle with at least a 16" barrel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/11/2018 11:57:12 AM EDT
[#11]
I was told that a penalty wasn’t specified for failing to engrave. Is this true?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/11/2018 11:59:21 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was told that a penalty wasn’t specified for failing to engrave. Is this true? It's a generic penalty for not following any part of the NFA regulations. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/11/2018 1:36:58 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Conspicuously placed is the wording IIRC. And the only time I've seen them define that was in ATF Ruling 2002-6, which included: ...and "conspicuous" means that all required markings must be placed in such a manner as to be wholly unobstructed from plain view. For example, required markings may not be placed on a portion of the barrel where the markings would be wholly or partially obstructed from view by another part of the firearm, such as a flash suppressor or bayonet mount. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/11/2018 7:49:51 PM EDT
[#14]
The newer Form1 has it in the instructions as well;
Description of Firearm and Markings. (1) Item 4a. If you are modifying an existing firearm, enter the name and location of the original manufacturer. If you are creating the firearm, enter the maker's name, city and state. (2) Item 4b. The types of NFA firearms are listed in the definitions. (3) Item 4c. Specify one caliber or gauge. If there is another designation, indicate the designation in item 4h. (4) Item 4d. Show the model designation (if known). (5) Items 4e and 4f. Specify one barrel length and overall length in items 4e and 4f as applicable. Note: if the firearm has a folding or collapsible stock, the overall measurement is to be made with the stock extended. (6) Item 4g. Do not alter or modify the serial number of an existing firearm. Enter the existing serial number or, if a new firearm, one you create. (7) Markings: The maker is required to mark the firearm with his or her name, city and state. All markings are to be in compliance with 27 CFR 478.92 and 479.102. And yeah, the 478.92 for markings other than serial number: By engraving, casting, stamping (impressing), or otherwise conspicuously placing or causing to be engraved, cast, stamped (impressed) or placed on the frame, receiver, or barrel thereof certain additional information. This information must be placed in a manner not susceptible of being readily obliterated, altered, or removed. I'm not sure if "conspicuously placing" means visibility overall, or in regards to how it is placed (engraving, casting, stamping OR conspicuously) rather than where. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/12/2018 1:28:40 AM EDT
[#15]
I'm almost positive there is an ATF letter stating that a SBR (or was it sbs?) inside an aftermarket bullpup kit that encased pretty much the entire gun, obscuring the nfa engraving, was a-ok. It's been a while, and my memory sucks these days. Anyone else seen this?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/13/2018 9:16:42 PM EDT
[#16]
I engraved mine. I will not engrave any future lowers. I have friends and relatives who are LEO and they don't even engrave theirs. I know more people personally who don't have their lowers engraved than do. But, to each his own.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/13/2018 9:47:56 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I engraved mine. I will not engrave any future lowers. I have friends and relatives who are LEO and they don't even engrave theirs. I know more people personally who don't have their lowers engraved than do. But, to each his own. Asking LEOs for legal advice is probably equally as bad as asking the guy behind the counter of your LGS. The regulations are very clear on the requirements. But you do you... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2018 3:43:05 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I know a lot of people who drive over the speed limit. Including LEO. But that doesn't make it legal...or guarantee none of them ever get a ticket. An NFA violation could be a lot more expensive than a speeding ticket. Asking LEOs for legal advice is probably equally as bad as asking the guy behind the counter of your LGS. The regulations are very clear on the requirements. But you do you... Ever read up the punishment for NFA violations?
Plus THSF makes it simple and easy...and in the trigger area...its hardly noticeable. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2018 9:59:20 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I engraved mine. I will not engrave any future lowers. I have friends and relatives who are LEO and they don't even engrave theirs. I know more people personally who don't have their lowers engraved than do. But, to each his own. Just engrave your Form1 weapons. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2018 7:28:42 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I engraved mine. I will not engrave any future lowers. I have friends and relatives who are LEO and they don't even engrave theirs. I know more people personally who don't have their lowers engraved than do. But, to each his own. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2018 11:27:42 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I know a lot of people who drive over the speed limit. Including LEO. But that doesn't make it legal...or guarantee none of them ever get a ticket. An NFA violation could be a lot more expensive than a speeding ticket. Asking LEOs for legal advice is probably equally as bad as asking the guy behind the counter of your LGS. The regulations are very clear on the requirements. But you do you... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I engraved mine. I will not engrave any future lowers. I have friends and relatives who are LEO and they don't even engrave theirs. I know more people personally who don't have their lowers engraved than do. But, to each his own. Asking LEOs for legal advice is probably equally as bad as asking the guy behind the counter of your LGS. The regulations are very clear on the requirements. But you do you...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2018 11:05:52 PM EDT
[#22]
The last Form 1 I received was “approved with the following conditions” that it would be engraved with maker name/location. Can’t be clearer than that. It was in black and white on the actual fucking Form 1.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2018 11:16:09 PM EDT
[#23]
I asked the ATF via email and they gave me this response..
[email protected]
The barrel may be attached after you receive the approved Form 1. Markings have to be engraved regardless of whether you want to keep it or sell it. There is no specific guidance on exactly when but most people in law enforcement will consider what is reasonable. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2018 9:58:23 AM EDT
[#24]
People that are willing to go through the NFA process, pay the $200, wait for months in end etc. but are not willing to engrave their SBR are completely ridiculous. You're not "sticking it to the Man", you're just screwing yourself if you're ever unfortunate enough to find yourself in a situation where a zealous prosecutor is looking for some kind of charge that will stick. It's a pretty low chance of being the victim of The System, but there's certainly a chance and there's no good reason to risk it. Diane Fienstein isn't crying herself to sleep thinking about unengraved SBRs.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2018 1:43:23 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're not "sticking it to the Man", you're just screwing yourself if you're ever unfortunate enough to find yourself in a situation where a zealous prosecutor is looking for some kind of charge that will stick. I found no information where anyone who failed to engrave was actually charged. I don't think it's ever happened. I would argue that possessing an unengraved (but lawfully registered) NFA firearm puts one at much less legal risk than possessing an unregistered NFA firearm. I completely agree they are not "sticking it to the man" by failing to engrave. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2018 1:48:49 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The last Form 1 I received was "approved with the following conditions" that it would be engraved with maker name/location. Can't be clearer than that. It was in black and white on the actual fucking Form 1. Thousands of citizens have approved NFA registrations without such conditions named on the form. The owners holding those forms are likely impossible to prosecute. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2018 2:10:18 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't know that the charge would stick. There isn't a "seperate" charge simply for failing to engrave, so they'd have to charge you with violating the whole USC for registration, except you did register. I found no information where anyone who failed to engrave was actually charged. I don't think it's ever happened. Tony posts a case where ATF engraved a gun for a person who did not, then gave it back. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2018 4:19:09 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes, but that is a fairly recent development. Thousands of citizens have approved NFA registrations without such conditions named on the form. The owners holding those forms are likely impossible to prosecute. Don’t get the big deal about engraving. Just do it. It’s cheap and plenty of places are able to do it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2018 8:13:17 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes, but that is a fairly recent development. Thousands of citizens have approved NFA registrations without such conditions named on the form. The owners holding those forms are likely impossible to prosecute. The red condition of approval should clarify for anyone what the ATFs view is... they are literally quoting the law that uses word such as "Must", "Stamp" "Firearm" and "maker". "Per 27 CFR 478.92 and 479.102, the maker must stamp the firearm with the makers name, city and state" |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2018 8:18:21 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes, but that is a fairly recent development. Thousands of citizens have approved NFA registrations without such conditions named on the form. The owners holding those forms are likely impossible to prosecute. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The last Form 1 I received was "approved with the following conditions" that it would be engraved with maker name/location. Can't be clearer than that. It was in black and white on the actual fucking Form 1. Thousands of citizens have approved NFA registrations without such conditions named on the form. The owners holding those forms are likely impossible to prosecute. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2018 11:24:57 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There was no big problem until thousands of people ignorant to the rules started form 1ing everything under the sun and then being told they didn’t follow the law. The .gov is thankful that we're all still playing by the rules at this time. Nobody has ever been prosecuted for failing to engrave. There is no penalty for failing to engrave. Many, many years ago the guidance was specifically NOT to engrave because the various Law Enforcement databases that existed at the time (think green monochrome and flashing cursor) didn't have multiple fields for different "Manufacturers" and the Feds knew that characterizing SBR-ing as "manufacturing an NFA item" was just a sleazy play. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2018 11:49:03 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There is no penalty for failing to engrave. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2018 12:10:04 AM EDT
[#33]
I engraved my receiver on the last one. Going forward I may do the barrels on each upper as without the uppers they are just regular old receivers with a stamp.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2018 2:09:35 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nobody has ever been prosecuted for failing to engrave... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nobody has ever been prosecuted for failing to engrave... USAO filing charges is the last action they would take. They can seize your firearm for starters. You might beat the rap, you'll never beat the ride. Many, many years ago the guidance was specifically NOT to engrave because the various Law Enforcement databases that existed at the time (think green monochrome and flashing cursor) didn't have multiple fields for different "Manufacturers" and the Feds knew that characterizing SBR-ing as "manufacturing an NFA item" was just a sleazy play Was this "guidance" from ATF? I've not seen any guidance contrary to what ATF regs have always said. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2018 3:04:50 PM EDT
[#35]
Anyone betting the next 10 years of their freedom on the "they've never charged anyone else for it!" defense has WAY more faith in government than I do. The US Government is the all time world wide champ in coming up with novel ways to screw up, and I sure as heck don't want to be the first victim. What other people do is up to them, but I'm engraving my nfa stuff.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2018 3:22:28 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Conspicuously placed is the wording IIRC. And the only time I've seen them define that was in ATF Ruling 2002-6, which included: ...and "conspicuous" means that all required markings must be placed in such a manner as to be wholly unobstructed from plain view. For example, required markings may not be placed on a portion of the barrel where the markings would be wholly or partially obstructed from view by another part of the firearm, such as a flash suppressor or bayonet mount. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: It's supposed to be 'readily visible' or something like that. That said, IIRC ATF has said that guns inside of "shell stocks" are ok, and their markings are not really visible without disassembly so, yeah. And the only time I've seen them define that was in ATF Ruling 2002-6, which included: ...and "conspicuous" means that all required markings must be placed in such a manner as to be wholly unobstructed from plain view. For example, required markings may not be placed on a portion of the barrel where the markings would be wholly or partially obstructed from view by another part of the firearm, such as a flash suppressor or bayonet mount.  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2018 3:25:43 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You can’t see the SN on light bearing Glocks. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/371851/CD9F868B-18BE-4D2D-8822-0F285C970377_jpeg-790129.JPG |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2018 3:30:16 PM EDT
[#38]
My last form 1 actually has a stamp in red on it mentoining that it has to be engraved as part of the approval.
 Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2018 3:36:46 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"Conspicuous" only applies to the MFG or Maker during the MFG or Making. Does not apply to the end-user. End-user is only bound to not "removed, obliterated, or alter". Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You can’t see the SN on light bearing Glocks. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/371851/CD9F868B-18BE-4D2D-8822-0F285C970377_jpeg-790129.JPG |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2018 4:03:16 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"Conspicuous" only applies to the MFG or Maker during the MFG or Making. Does not apply to the end-user. End-user is only bound to not "removed, obliterated, or alter". Any intel on that situation? I mean, can you engrave the prior owner's info on their behalf? (Seems like you shouldn't.) Would you have any risk if you didn't? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2018 5:28:16 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How about if the maker/manufacturer failed to engrave their name and location (on a SBR), but then the NFA firearm was transferred to you... Any intel on that situation? I mean, can you engrave the prior owner's info on their behalf? (Seems like you shouldn't.) Would you have any risk if you didn't? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
"Conspicuous" only applies to the MFG or Maker during the MFG or Making. Does not apply to the end-user. End-user is only bound to not "removed, obliterated, or alter". Any intel on that situation? I mean, can you engrave the prior owner's info on their behalf? (Seems like you shouldn't.) Would you have any risk if you didn't? Wonder if they would catch it because the info wouldn’t match up and the gun wouldn’t be in the registry? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2018 5:31:33 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How about if the maker/manufacturer failed to engrave their name and location (on a SBR), but then the NFA firearm was transferred to you... Any intel on that situation? I mean, can you engrave the prior owner's info on their behalf? (Seems like you shouldn't.) Would you have any risk if you didn't? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2018 7:27:19 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Never heard of that happening. My general rule is if a gun is not in compliance, bring it into compliance, if possible. I'm not sure what USC they could seize it under. We bought a SBS at a shop I was working at. The maker had never added any engraving, so the shop just swapped barrels and later sold it as a 18" Title I gun. It was worth more like that anyway. (We had the previous owner send a letter advising it was permanently returned to Title I config) |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/31/2018 1:32:09 AM EDT
[#44]
What if the previous owner never engraved their info but then unregistered the gun as an SBR? Wouldn’t it be considered a pistol at that point and be transferred like any other sale?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/31/2018 11:46:08 AM EDT
[#45]
Yes I believe if it makes it all the way back to Title I, it's good to go. The extra NFA markings aren't required at that point.
That's exactly what happened with that 870 SBS in the above example. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/31/2018 3:22:24 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes I believe if it makes it all the way back to Title I, it's good to go. The extra NFA markings aren't required at that point. That's exactly what happened with that 870 SBS in the above example. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2019 12:01:12 AM EDT
[#47]
Man.. what a waste of $200 for that SBS.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/11/2019 9:38:14 AM EDT
[#48]
Here's a case that should really titty twist you guys.
So you engrave the maker name and location on the barrel. You wear out the barrel and replace it but.....do you have to engrave the new one? The form 1 does not include the engraved info on the form other than that of the original manufacturer and serial number. Several older non NFA guns did not have serial numbers before 1968 and others serial numbered the barrel only. Replacing the barrel would essentially remove the serial number from a gun. Its an area that ATF really has not addressed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2019 5:38:17 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Here's a case that should really titty twist you guys. So you engrave the maker name and location on the barrel. You wear out the barrel and replace it but.....do you have to engrave the new one? The form 1 does not include the engraved info on the form other than that of the original manufacturer and serial number. Several older non NFA guns did not have serial numbers before 1968 and others serial numbered the barrel only. Replacing the barrel would essentially remove the serial number from a gun. Its an area that ATF really has not addressed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2019 9:36:55 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I believe you can not replace the barrel with new barrel if it was the NFA serialized item.. Think the ruling would fall under Gemtax when AAC resealized a new suppressor with the Gemtech markings and serial #, ATF stopped the practice so if your casing breaks beyond compare, your screwed. Would think this would apply to NFA barrels. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
