Engraving on Trigger Gaurd?

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Engraving on Trigger Gaurd? (Page 1 of 2)

Posted: 5/27/2008 9:50:11 PM EDT

I have heard two first hand accounts of a dealer telling me that it is ok to have my info engraved on the trigger gaurd. I think that this would be an ideal setup for me if it is indeed legal. Any firsthand experience? Thanks

Posted: 5/27/2008 10:31:18 PM EDT

[#1]

No personal experience, but it is perfectly legal.

Posted: 5/27/2008 11:32:39 PM EDT

[#2]

One of the local guys claims to have a letter from ATF saying it's ok.

I have no reason to doubt him.

Posted: 5/28/2008 3:37:11 AM EDT

[#3]

It is a removable part of the lower.. How could that possibly be legal???
UNDER the TRIGGER GUARD yes.. That is how mine are done..

Posted: 5/28/2008 4:27:33 AM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
One of the local guys claims to have a letter from ATF saying it's ok.

I have no reason to doubt him.

Other than the fact that his claim directly violates the Federal Regulations on the subject.

Posted: 5/28/2008 4:28:53 AM EDT

[#5]

yeah, I always thought it had to be on the receiver itself and easily seen without having to remove any part (hence why engraving on the grip shelf is a no-no. If you have one of those new fangled lowers with an integral trigger guard, I'd say that's OK. Otherwise, you've engraved a removeable part.

I engraved mine on the underside of the receiver where the cutout for the trigger is. Name on one side of the trigger, Town and State on the other side. Darken the finish, and it pretty much disappears.

Posted: 5/28/2008 4:49:05 AM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:

Quoted:
One of the local guys claims to have a letter from ATF saying it's ok.

I have no reason to doubt him.

Other than the fact that his claim directly violates the Federal Regulations on the subject.

I trust him 100%.

Posted: 5/28/2008 4:51:51 AM EDT

[#7]

I don't believe there is any written law which precludes one from placing markings on a portion of the receiver which can be removed. But common sense dictates that one should not engrave on that portion, but until ATF rules to the contrary, it does technically comply, IMO.

Do I want to be a test dummy and challenge it, no.

Posted: 5/28/2008 5:44:13 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:

Quoted:
One of the local guys claims to have a letter from ATF saying it's ok.

I have no reason to doubt him.

Other than the fact that his claim directly violates the Federal Regulations on the subject.

I trust him 100%.

Federal law requires the markings be engraved on the barrel, frame or receiver. See www.atf.gov/firearms/nfa/nfa_handbook/0607nfa_handbook-rev.pdf, Page 42, Section 7.4: Identification of Firearms.

An individual can apply for a marking variance which, if granted, allows that one individual to place markings somewhere other than the required locations. An approved letter of variance is not a change in the law; it only applies to the one individual named in the letter.

Engraving a removable part such as the trigger guard is the same as engraving the sling swivel or ejection port door. Just make sure you can keep a straight face when you argue with BATFE that those parts constitute a frame/receiver/barrel.

Posted: 5/28/2008 5:57:41 AM EDT

[#9]

Forgive my ignorance ahead of time. It seems 2 different types of idnetification are being discussed one is the manufacturer marking and the other is personal info.

Posted: 5/28/2008 6:07:11 AM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
Forgive my ignorance ahead of time. It seems 2 different types of idnetification are being discussed one is the manufacturer marking and the other is personal info.

If you submit a Form 1 (an application to make a firearm), you become the manufacturer and must engrave the receiver with your information.

Posted: 5/28/2008 6:17:12 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Forgive my ignorance ahead of time. It seems 2 different types of idnetification are being discussed one is the manufacturer marking and the other is personal info.

If you submit a Form 1 (an application to make a firearm), you become the manufacturer and must engrave the receiver with your information.

NM I misread the whole subject. DUH on me

Posted: 5/28/2008 8:40:34 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
I don't believe there is any written law which precludes one from placing markings on a portion of the receiver which can be removed. But common sense dictates that one should not engrave on that portion, but until ATF rules to the contrary, it does technically comply, IMO.

Do I want to be a test dummy and challenge it, no.

Uh, the trigger guard isn't part of the receiver; it's the trigger guard.

Calling it "a removable part of the receiver" doesn't change that fact.

Posted: 5/28/2008 8:41:38 AM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:

Quoted:
One of the local guys claims to have a letter from ATF saying it's ok.

I have no reason to doubt him.

Other than the fact that his claim directly violates the Federal Regulations on the subject.

I trust him 100%.

That's nice, but he's still wrong.

See Tony_k's post for the straight 411, as usual.

Posted: 5/28/2008 9:38:01 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:

Quoted:
One of the local guys claims to have a letter from ATF saying it's ok.

I have no reason to doubt him.

Other than the fact that his claim directly violates the Federal Regulations on the subject.

I trust him 100%.

That's nice, but he's still wrong.

See Tony_k's post for the straight 411, as usual.

Well, he's doing it commercially.

Tony posts no bull, ever.

BUT, ATF regularly speaks from both ends.

Besides, a barrel is just as removable, actually easier to remove.

Posted: 5/28/2008 10:40:03 AM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
Besides, a barrel is just as removable, actually easier to remove.

But the barrel is specifically spelled out in the text of the law.

The maker must mark either the receiver, frame, or barrel. The trigger guard is none of these.

Posted: 5/28/2008 11:12:58 AM EDT

[#16]

Historically, since the mid-19th Century U.S. firearms manufacturers traditionally have placed the caliber, model name and manufacturer's info on the barrel, and the serial number (if required) on the frame/receiver. This was for ease of manufacture, because identical frames were used for many different models and calibers. And it was easier to do all the markings in one location. Frames and receivers were serial-numbered as it was the key part that would not change. When the Gun Control Act of 1968 added the requirement that shotguns and rimfire rifles also be serial-numbered, the law required that the SNs be placed in the same location as on handguns and centerfire rifles: The frame/receiver.

Gene Stoner was 12 years old when the National Firearms Act became law in 1934, and the concept of easily removable or interchangable barrels was only a dream -- 99% of firearms either had fixed barrels or, in the case of shotguns and takedown guns, still required a great deal of gunsmithing and hand-fitting to switch from the factory barrel to an entirely new one.

As far as unlicensed individuals making NFA items at the time, there were few host semiauto firearms (and little common knowledge). In the 1930's, most NFA items legally made by individuals were not MGs or DDs -- instead, they consisted of shotguns and rifles with the permanently fixed barrels cut back to under 18" (the minimum, at that time, for rifle barrels as well as shotguns).

Since many of these individual requirements and definitions were actually codified in the authorizing law as passed by Congress, it would take Congressional action to update the law to better reflect today's firearms technology. And personally, the concept of a bunch of Congresscritters trying to update firearms law scares the living daylights outa me. So I am perfectly happy to live with the law as it is, even if time and technology have made it seem somewhat illogical.

YMMV.

Posted: 5/28/2008 11:22:35 AM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Besides, a barrel is just as removable, actually easier to remove.

But the barrel is specifically spelled out in the text of the law.

The maker must mark either the receiver, frame, or barrel. The trigger guard is none of these.

y

Yeah I get it.

But when a trusted friend says he has a letter from ATF, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.

Posted: 5/28/2008 6:04:01 PM EDT

[#18]

Hi, I'm the guy with the letter. I will post a scan of the letter for review but I was hoping this doesn't sprawl into a big internet fight. I guess you could all write your own letters until someone proved me wrong. That would be outstanding considering how this benefits the AR15 community.

Here is an example of a typical legal firearm marking:

Posted: 5/28/2008 6:17:36 PM EDT

[#19]

Wow.

It's already been established that a manufacturer can get a variance from ATF saying they can use an alternate marking method. So the picture of the Beretta demonstrates... that a manufacturer can get a variance.

The law still says barrel, frame, or receiver. My money says if the ATF won't let you mark the receiver under the pistol grip, they're not going to let you mark the trigger guard, ejection port cover, or sling swivel screw, either.

Even if the ATF gives you a letter, you're still not in the clear. Cavarms had a letter saying they could mold receiver halves off site, and weld them together at their licensed location. Then, they raided them, took all their stuff, and said they couldn't really do that after all...and I think we've all seen examples of two people writing letters, and getting two answers to the same question. So just keep writing letters until you get the answer you want.

Posted: 5/28/2008 7:19:12 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Wow.

It's already been established that a manufacturer can get a variance from ATF saying they can use an alternate marking method. So the picture of the Beretta demonstrates... that a manufacturer can get a variance.

The law still says barrel, frame, or receiver. My money says if the ATF won't let you mark the receiver under the pistol grip, they're not going to let you mark the trigger guard, ejection port cover, or sling swivel screw, either.

Even if the ATF gives you a letter, you're still not in the clear. Cavarms had a letter saying they could mold receiver halves off site, and weld them together at their licensed location. Then, they raided them, took all their stuff, and said they couldn't really do that after all...and I think we've all seen examples of two people writing letters, and getting two answers to the same question. So just keep writing letters until you get the answer you want.

Ok, you win. Anything new in the NFA realm is taboo and illegal. I post that you can engrave a trigger guard, have an ATF letter to back it up and its still not not enough? I guess you have to get hauled in, mount a successful defense, and win the case before it passes muster? As for the Beretta markings, go look through your pistols, the majority of makers mark pistols this way- Are you saying everybody has a variance for every model of semi auto pistol marked this way?

Take a look at the trigger guard, have you removed one? its quite a bit harder to remove than the upper receiver, another acceptable location for marking on an AR. The TG is conspicuous location, not easily removable. Its following the spirit of the regulations- of course if you don't feel the way I do, have lower marked instead. Or write a letter, like you probably will, for further internet grandstanding.

Posted: 5/28/2008 11:22:00 PM EDT

[#21]

Still somewhat on topic, but...

I was going to mark an MP5 on the area around the rear take-down pic, under the grip-frame. I was told that since to tools are needed to reveal this, it is OK. I know at least one major mfgr that does the same.

Posted: 5/29/2008 12:57:21 AM EDT

[#22]

You could engrave on the trigger guard if you used a billet lower which has the trigger guard machined integrally with the rest of the receiver.

Posted: 5/29/2008 1:02:17 AM EDT

[#23]

On the bottom of the barrel seems like a good place. That's where the import markings on my SKS are located. Putting the markings on an AR upper receiver seems like a good idea, provided it is legal.

Posted: 5/29/2008 1:51:35 AM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
Still somewhat on topic, but...

I was going to mark an MP5 on the area around the rear take-down pic, under the grip-frame. I was told that since to tools are needed to reveal this, it is OK. I know at least one major mfgr that does the same.

But the letter posted above contradicts that.

Of course, many of us know that Vector Arms built a bunch of HK clone SBR's exactly that way.

ETA: Kindly see my previous point about ATF speaking from both ends...

Posted: 5/29/2008 4:01:18 AM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
One of the local guys claims to have a letter from ATF saying it's ok.

I have no reason to doubt him.

BATFE has been known to issue incorrect opininons and still hold you responsible for their errors

Posted: 5/29/2008 11:41:00 AM EDT

[#26]

My dealer also has the letter that now says engraving the TG is acceptable.

That being said I had my latest SBR engraved in the magwell area.

Posted: 5/29/2008 4:39:49 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Wow.

It's already been established that a manufacturer can get a variance from ATF saying they can use an alternate marking method. So the picture of the Beretta demonstrates... that a manufacturer can get a variance.

The law still says barrel, frame, or receiver. My money says if the ATF won't let you mark the receiver under the pistol grip, they're not going to let you mark the trigger guard, ejection port cover, or sling swivel screw, either.

Even if the ATF gives you a letter, you're still not in the clear. Cavarms had a letter saying they could mold receiver halves off site, and weld them together at their licensed location. Then, they raided them, took all their stuff, and said they couldn't really do that after all...and I think we've all seen examples of two people writing letters, and getting two answers to the same question. So just keep writing letters until you get the answer you want.

Ok, you win. Anything new in the NFA realm is taboo and illegal. I post that you can engrave a trigger guard, have an ATF letter to back it up and its still not not enough?

Hooked on phonics didn't work for me, but I don't see anything about trigger guards in that letter (IBTE = In before the edit).

Or write a letter, like you probably will, for further internet grandstanding.

Negatron. Didn't work for Akins, or Cavarms, either. Good on you. You have a letter. With much of the NFA stuff, you just have to find your own comfort level and go with it. Glad you found yours. I don't find it to be a big deal to engrave the receiver.

i29.tinypic.com/1qkeu9.jpg

Posted: 5/30/2008 1:39:38 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Wow.

It's already been established that a manufacturer can get a variance from ATF saying they can use an alternate marking method. So the picture of the Beretta demonstrates... that a manufacturer can get a variance.

The law still says barrel, frame, or receiver. My money says if the ATF won't let you mark the receiver under the pistol grip, they're not going to let you mark the trigger guard, ejection port cover, or sling swivel screw, either.

Even if the ATF gives you a letter, you're still not in the clear. Cavarms had a letter saying they could mold receiver halves off site, and weld them together at their licensed location. Then, they raided them, took all their stuff, and said they couldn't really do that after all...and I think we've all seen examples of two people writing letters, and getting two answers to the same question. So just keep writing letters until you get the answer you want.

Ok, you win. Anything new in the NFA realm is taboo and illegal. I post that you can engrave a trigger guard, have an ATF letter to back it up and its still not not enough?

Hooked on phonics didn't work for me, but I don't see anything about trigger guards in that letter (IBTE = In before the edit).

Or write a letter, like you probably will, for further internet grandstanding.

Negatron. Didn't work for Akins, or Cavarms, either. Good on you. You have a letter. With much of the NFA stuff, you just have to find your own comfort level and go with it. Glad you found yours. I don't find it to be a big deal to engrave the receiver.

i29.tinypic.com/1qkeu9.jpg

Part in red is clearly true...

But here it is again, for those of you in the cheap seats:

ETA: Also note the conspicuous use of "eg." rather than "ie."

Posted: 5/30/2008 6:26:23 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Wow.

It's already been established that a manufacturer can get a variance from ATF saying they can use an alternate marking method. So the picture of the Beretta demonstrates... that a manufacturer can get a variance.

The law still says barrel, frame, or receiver. My money says if the ATF won't let you mark the receiver under the pistol grip, they're not going to let you mark the trigger guard, ejection port cover, or sling swivel screw, either.

Even if the ATF gives you a letter, you're still not in the clear. Cavarms had a letter saying they could mold receiver halves off site, and weld them together at their licensed location. Then, they raided them, took all their stuff, and said they couldn't really do that after all...and I think we've all seen examples of two people writing letters, and getting two answers to the same question. So just keep writing letters until you get the answer you want.

Ok, you win. Anything new in the NFA realm is taboo and illegal. I post that you can engrave a trigger guard, have an ATF letter to back it up and its still not not enough?

Hooked on phonics didn't work for me, but I don't see anything about trigger guards in that letter (IBTE = In before the edit).

Or write a letter, like you probably will, for further internet grandstanding.

Negatron. Didn't work for Akins, or Cavarms, either. Good on you. You have a letter. With much of the NFA stuff, you just have to find your own comfort level and go with it. Glad you found yours. I don't find it to be a big deal to engrave the receiver.

i29.tinypic.com/1qkeu9.jpg

Part in red is clearly true...

But here it is again, for those of you in the cheap seats:

img.photobucket.com/albums/v603/nationwide/letter.jpg

ETA: Also note the conspicuous use of "eg." rather than "ie."

And you take from that tidbit that it is now acceptable to put these markings on the trigger guard?

I believe the word for that is "FAIL."

See 27 CFR 479.102 for the actual text of the regulations. In fact, allow me to save you the trouble. See below:

§ 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

(v) In the case of an imported firearm, the name of the country in which it was manufactured and the city and State (or recognized abbreviation thereof) where you as the importer maintain your place of business. For additional requirements relating to imported firearms, see Customs regulations at 19 CFR part 134.

(b) The depth of all markings required by this section will be measured from the flat surface of the metal and not the peaks or ridges. The height of serial numbers required by paragraph (a)(1) of this section will be measured as the distance between the latitudinal ends of the character impression bottoms (bases).

(c) The Director may authorize other means of identification upon receipt of a letter application from you, submitted in duplicate, showing that such other identification is reasonable and will not hinder the effective administration of this part.

(The above was copied from the Federal GPO website, i.e. directly from the Feds.)

A plain English reading of this section, particularly the part in red, clearly shows that the trigger guard is NOT an acceptable location.

The part in blue is the only possible out for this, and it is only on a case-by-case basis.

If you think the posted letter allows NFA markings on the trigger guard, you're sorely mistaken.

Posted: 5/30/2008 4:37:01 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:

If you think the posted letter allows NFA markings on the trigger guard, you're sorely mistaken.

There is no such thing as "NFA markings".

There is simply required manufacturer's markings.

The ATF letter says clearly, in English, the only required marking on the receiver is the serial number.

Of course, I understand plainly that ATF letters apply only the the individual to whom they are addressed, but the letter reads how it reads.

Posted: 5/30/2008 5:11:38 PM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
The ATF letter says clearly, in English, the only required marking on the receiver is the serial number.

Right, and the US Code says clearly, in English, that all other required markings must be on the "frame, receiver or barrel".

The trigger guard is not the "frame, receiver or barrel".

I don't know if you are being intentionally obstinate, or really don't understand, but you are clearly wrong. The letter that has been posted does not reference the "trigger guard" at all, and it is totally irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

Posted: 5/30/2008 5:18:13 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The ATF letter says clearly, in English, the only required marking on the receiver is the serial number.

Right, and the US Code says clearly, in English, that all other required markings must be on the "frame, receiver or barrel".

The trigger guard is not the "frame, receiver or barrel".

I don't know if you are being intentionally obstinate, or really don't understand, but you are clearly wrong. The letter that has been posted does not reference the "trigger guard" at all, and it is totally irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

The Second Amendment also says "shall not be infringed", but we are past that discussion are we not?

The ATF letter says "eg.", not "ie." with regards to placing of other markings.

We can argue in cute little circles all night if you like. My relief will be in after 2100

Posted: 5/30/2008 5:47:54 PM EDT

[#33]

(reserved for future comment.)

Posted: 5/31/2008 1:50:44 AM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
The ATF letter says "eg.", not "ie." with regards to placing of other markings.

i.e.
abbr. Latin
id est; that is

e.g.
abbr. Latin
exempli gratia; for example

Even when we bust out the pocket protectors, and use Latin, I can't see that 'i.e.' vs. 'e.g.' changes anything. They merely referenced the other possible places the manufacturers markings, sometimes referred to as 'NFA markings', could go, as referenced in the CFR.

Posted: 5/31/2008 2:01:29 AM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The ATF letter says "eg.", not "ie." with regards to placing of other markings.

i.e.
abbr. Latin
id est; that is

e.g.
abbr. Latin
exempli gratia; for example

Even when we bust out the pocket protectors, and use Latin, I can't see that 'i.e.' vs. 'e.g.' changes anything. They merely referenced the other possible places the manufacturers markings, sometimes referred to as 'NFA markings', could go, as referenced in the CFR.

Nor would I expect you to

Posted: 6/1/2008 9:41:24 AM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:

Quoted:

If you think the posted letter allows NFA markings on the trigger guard, you're sorely mistaken.

There is no such thing as "NFA markings".

There is simply required manufacturer's markings.

The ATF letter says clearly, in English, the only required marking on the receiver is the serial number.

Of course, I understand plainly that ATF letters apply only the the individual to whom they are addressed, but the letter reads how it reads.

What do you think is spelled out, in plain English, in the regulations I posted?

Since it apparently goes over your head, "NFA markings" in my post refers to the markings required on NFA weapons, spelled out in the Federal regulations. I assumed that you'd have at least reasonable intelligence and could "connect the dots" on that simple statement. Since I was mistaken, "NFA markings" refers to the required serial number and also the manufacturer or maker's name, city, and state.

The regulations spell out, again in plain English, that the serial number has to be on the receiver and the other markings have to be on the receiver, frame, or barrel. Period.

Nothing in that letter states anything to the contrary.

And even if it did, it doesn't matter as it isn't addressed to you and is therefore completely meaningless.

Posted: 6/1/2008 10:52:10 AM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:

Quoted:

If you think the posted letter allows NFA markings on the trigger guard, you're sorely mistaken.

There is no such thing as "NFA markings".

There is simply required manufacturer's markings.

The ATF letter says clearly, in English, the only required marking on the receiver is the serial number.

Of course, I understand plainly that ATF letters apply only the the individual to whom they are addressed, but the letter reads how it reads.

What do you think is spelled out, in plain English, in the regulations I posted?

Since it apparently goes over your head, "NFA markings" in my post refers to the markings required on NFA weapons, spelled out in the Federal regulations. I assumed that you'd have at least reasonable intelligence and could "connect the dots" on that simple statement. Since I was mistaken, "NFA markings" refers to the required serial number and also the manufacturer or maker's name, city, and state.

The regulations spell out, again in plain English, that the serial number has to be on the receiver and the other markings have to be on the receiver, frame, or barrel. Period.

Nothing in that letter states anything to the contrary.

And even if it did, it doesn't matter as it isn't addressed to you and is therefore completely meaningless.

So... long story short... you're butt hurt because our friend karma, is trying to do something different that goes against the fabled and time honored traditions of the NFA community.

How is that for connecting the dots?

Posted: 6/1/2008 11:06:14 AM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
So... long story short... you're butt hurt because our friend karma, is trying to do something different that goes against the fabled and time honored traditions of the NFA community.

How is that for connecting the dots?

Nobody is "butthurt" (except maybe you?)

You are not "trying to do something different", you are suggesting something that is obviously incorrect and illegal upon even the most basic examination of the relevant laws and regulations.

Posted: 6/1/2008 11:47:12 AM EDT

[#39]

Here are some dots to connect: If all you have left are insults, you should go play somewhere else..

Posted: 6/1/2008 1:12:20 PM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:

Quoted:
So... long story short... you're butt hurt because our friend karma, is trying to do something different that goes against the fabled and time honored traditions of the NFA community.

How is that for connecting the dots?

Nobody is "butthurt" (except maybe you?)

You are not "trying to do something different", you are suggesting something that is obviously incorrect and illegal upon even the most basic examination of the relevant laws and regulations.

Hmmm.... think I'll go with ATF on this one.

Posted: 6/1/2008 1:17:12 PM EDT

[#41]

Guys, this is a technical forum. Discussion of issues is welcome, using facts to support your position. Insults accomplish nothing, and will not be tolerated.

Posted: 6/2/2008 7:15:31 AM EDT

[#42]

Let's Cool off and take a look at what we know...

The markings needed on the firearm are:
1) Serial Number
2) Maker's Name
3) Maker's City
4) Maker's State
5) Caliber

The ATF letter simply stated that all required markings must be conspicuously visible and that the serial number is the only marking that MUST be placed on the reciever.
The letter DID NOT say that the other required information could be placed anywhere else... only that they need not be on the reciever.

Where the other markings are allowed to be located is dictated in 27 CFR 479.102 as the frame, receiver, or barrel.
The ATF letter just reaffirms they do not need to be on the reciever.

Nowhere is trigger guard defined or implicated. Unless you confidently believe the trigger guard to be "part of the reciever" it should not have any required markigns on it.
The trigger guard, being removable and mutually exclusive from the technical specifics of the firearm, is as much a part of the reciever as the stock or pistol grip.
In other words, it's not part of the reciever, IMO. You maybe looking for something that just isn't there.

Nowhere in that ATF letter do I interpret it as saying, "Required markings (aside from the serial number) are acceptable on the trigger guard."
However, your letter does not disquilify the term trigger guard either. But 27 CFR 479.102 doesn't mention trigger guard either and the ATF letter holds less merit IMO.
However it's your gamble, not mine. Best of luck to you.

Posted: 6/2/2008 10:57:42 AM EDT

[#43]

I don't know if this helps anyone, but I called the ATF to ask this specific question about the legality of engraving on the trigger guard. The two different people I initially spoke with (the lady who answered the phone, and Jason Freshauer who is an examiner I believe) were unsure and I was eventually transferred to the Firearms Technical Branch. The man I spoke with there named Max referenced the barrel/frame/receiver rule and said that the trigger guard is not acceptable.

Posted: 6/2/2008 11:42:08 AM EDT

[#44]

From this thread I conclude nobody has actually read 479.102 yet. No surprise.

Posted: 6/2/2008 3:58:42 PM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
From this thread I conclude nobody has actually read 479.102 yet. No surprise.

I've not only read them, I posted a copy of them in this thread, taken directly from a website published by the Federal Government.

Apparently that makes me "butthurt" to some of the idiots participating in this thread.

Posted: 6/2/2008 4:53:31 PM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
Let's Cool off and take a look at what we know...

The markings needed on the firearm are:
1) Serial Number
2) Maker's Name
3) Maker's City
4) Maker's State
5) Caliber

The ATF letter simply stated that all required markings must be conspicuously visible and that the serial number is the only marking that MUST be placed on the reciever.
The letter DID NOT say that the other required information could be placed anywhere else... only that they need not be on the reciever.

Where the other markings are allowed to be located is dictated in 27 CFR 479.102 as the frame, receiver, or barrel.
The ATF letter just reaffirms they do not need to be on the reciever.

Nowhere is trigger guard defined or implicated. Unless you confidently believe the trigger guard to be "part of the reciever" it should not have any required markigns on it.
The trigger guard, being removable and mutually exclusive from the technical specifics of the firearm, is as much a part of the reciever as the stock or pistol grip.
In other words, it's not part of the reciever, IMO. You maybe looking for something that just isn't there.

Nowhere in that ATF letter do I interpret it as saying, "Required markings (aside from the serial number) are acceptable on the trigger guard."
However, your letter does not disquilify the term trigger guard either. But 27 CFR 479.102 doesn't mention trigger guard either and the ATF letter holds less merit IMO.
However it's your gamble, not mine. Best of luck to you.

That's exactly the way I see it. Unless you have a letter from the BATFE specifically stating that "Engraving the manufacturer's name and address on an AR-15's removable trigger guard is perfectly acceptible" then I wouldn't do it. Actually I wouldn't even do it then unless the letter was specifically addressed to me but then again, I don't have any problem with just putting the markings on the front of the mag well. I don't know why everybody works so hard at trying to "hide" them?

Posted: 6/2/2008 5:10:13 PM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:

I don't know why everybody works so hard at trying to "hide" them?

Some folks are concerned about resale value of their SBR'd lower

Posted: 6/3/2008 8:21:48 AM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:

Quoted:

I don't know why everybody works so hard at trying to "hide" them?

Some folks are concerned about resale value of their SBR'd lower

Then those folks should buy a "factory" SBR and be done with it.

Posted: 6/3/2008 6:12:47 PM EDT

[#49]

The trigger guard marking is not intended to 'hide' the marking it just allows for a more simple way to apply the required SBR marking on an AR-15. You people need to quit playing armchair lawyer with the over-analytical assessments and try to realize that it helps the AR15 community comply with the law. NO one is trying to 'pull one over on the Feds' here. It is in the spirit of the law, not hidden under the handguards or elsewhere- like many firearms were marked before 2002. (And probably after as well.) The TG marking is plainly visible, and is not any different than a manufacturer marking the name, model, caliber and city state info on the slide of a pistol. Please explain how Colt, Beretta and 95% of all the pistols mfg's are marking this way and still conform verbatim to the regs. They do NOT and yet no one has any problem. If your going to use the variance clause to defend it then keep in mind that EVERY mfg would need a variance letter for EVERY model pistol. No one even understood what I was asking when I spoke with several mfgs/FFL 07s regarding slide markings.

So according to several people on this thread the following is true:

A) You must comply with 27 CFR (479.102) exactly to the letter, the despite ATF letter posted the regs do not allow marking ANYWHERE but barrel,receiver, frame

THEREFORE

B) Almost every pistol mfg is not in compliance, book 'em Dano.

You can't have it both ways, guys.

Posted: 6/3/2008 6:54:11 PM EDT

[#50]

Every pistol I own besides my M&P 40 is marked on the frame, in fact I believe the
M&P 40 is the first pistol I have owned that was marked on the slide other than the
billboard stamping on the side that is common.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Engraving on Trigger Gaurd? (Page 1 of 2)

Armory » General NFA Questions

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us