AK Sponsor
Posted: 5/19/2008 8:57:32 PM EDT
|
I was reading a post and it got me to think about the 80% receivers which the post I read was about. If you have a 80% unbent flat and bend it at all I was under the influence that it became a 100% receiver. Now if you have a 80% bent flat with no holes and some are drilled that would also make that a 100% receiver correct? Just wanted to make sure I was not in the wrong. Mt Hunter |
That used to be the general consensus, but Tapco was able to get an ATF approval letter for their flats that have the upper rail bends already done. One more bend though and it's a receiver for sure. |
|
Yes the BATF rules on a case by case as requested of them. They will NOT define it or everyone could do what THEY say. So even if you want to make a product EXACTLY like company A you must apply and get a letter of approval from them for your company to do the same thing. |
| The 80% does not become 100% simply by bending it, but it does exceed the 80% limit set by the BATFE. Anything 80% and less is safe, while anything 80.1% and above are regulated. So a 80% blank with a hole in it then exceeds the 80% and becomes regulated by the BATFE. Same goes for any firearm, the magic threshold is 80% no matter what it is. I hope this clarifies things. |
|
Yes it does. What I have been told follows what I was thinking. I just hope that the guy who is selling the bent blank that has the holes drilled in it will figure out that he can not sell it. Would not listen to what I had to say so I started to doubt what I knew. Thanks, Mt Hunter |
|
One company used to sell bent blanks that had the magwell, and I think square trigger hole cut out in it. I don't know if they had submitted a sample or not, and I also dont know if they are still available. BTW 80% is a term that is not used by the BATFE. To them it either IS a firearm, or IS NOT a firearm. If you have a bent blank with FCG holes, I would almost guarantee it would be considered a firearm if you submitted it. |
There is no such thing as a 80% receiver in the eyes of the ATF. It is either a receiver or it's not. The whole 0% and 80% terminology was something dreamed up by fellow hobbyists to denote the difference between a raw casting (AR, FAL, 10-22 etc.) and a casting machined as much as possible without being classified as a receiver by the ATF. You will not see the term 80% or any other percent for that matter, in any ATF rulings. |
It is the BATFE that has agreed that "80%" is the safe distance to go before something is considered a firearm. The point is beyond that it is considered and is regulated. That is the whole point of 80% whether it is an AK, AR, 1911, FAL, etc. 10% is another popular term which basically means it has the genral shape of the end project but will need considerable work to be finished. But it is the 80% line that is drawn in the sand that the BATFE does recognize as not being a firearm and not regulated. |
Submit your proposed <80% receiver and you will get the thumbs up which would mean it is not considered a firearm or thumbs down which would mean it is considered a firearm. And yes it will come with BATFE letterhead. The point is they do recognize that something is a firearm after a certain percentage of it is completed and don't recognize stuff before that point. |
|
The BATFE doesnt use any type of % regulation. If you look at the US v ROBERT WILSON STEWART, JR case (http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/451/451.F3d.1071.02-10318.html) you will see that the standard is set at "readily ... converted" Another agent, acting undercover, purchased one of Stewart's kits and determined that it could be "readily ... converted" into an unlawful firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(a)(1)(A) and 921(a)(3)(A). Robert |
Dude, You're missing the whole point. Earlier you stated
The point being made is that the term 80% receiver is not in the ATF's vocabulary, It's a term coined by homebuilders. The ATF only says it is either a receiver or it's not. They don't deal in percentages |
|
Heres some more http://www.justice.gov/osg/briefs/2004/2pet/7pet/2004-0617.pet.aa.html an agent of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives decided to investigate respondent's business. App., infra, 2a. Another agent, acting in an undercover capacity, purchased one of respondent's kits. Ibid. The agent concluded that the kit could be "readily . . . converted" into a working firearm, and that respondent's conduct therefore violated federal restrictions on the sale of firearms by unlicensed persons. |
|
Look at the whole Halo mfg fiasco. Several companies have been making "80%" RSPs for M1919a4s for years. Halo spot marked the rivet holes on his. The holes were not drilled, just spot marked. The plate was technically no more complete than any of the others. The ATF raided Halo, took all their records and computers. They then went to a couple of his customers and confiscated the finished firearms, "for further evaluation" They said that the plate was now to easy to turn into a receiver, now that the rivet hole locations were laid out. The end result was just what they were after. You can no longer find an "80%" RSP available. When the other manufacturers saw what happened to Halo they stopped producing them. To the best of my knowledge nobody has been charged with a crime during this, but if you read the posts at m1919a4.com There was some initial wide spread panic. People were drilling out their plates for fear that the ATF might be knocking on their door next. Robert, Thank you for your input. If anybody here knows a thing or two about 80% receivers, it's you. |
AK Sponsor