ATF Raids Store for Gun Owner Names, Overrides Court Order

[Fenixgoon]

It's going to be illegal either way. The distinction is between what would be seen as raw material and a completed unit, and casting a proper lower around a mold and not removing it does not give you an 80% lower. It'd be like saying that if you sand-cast an engine block that the block is only 80% manufactured as long as you don't knock the sand out. Just because the block didn't exist before the sand and it has never existed separate from it doesn't mean you've cast a metal ingot and not an engine block.

According to builders the material is of a different consistency than the frame, so the casting of the frame around it is going to be the manufacture of a firearm. They have the pattern of a >80% lower, they inject it with a proper material to make a lower, that's a firearm.
I mean, really:

you still have to mill out the 20% part. it's not like you can just pull it off like the pop top on a soup can or knock the sand off a sand casting.

it's a different manufacturing process. most lowers seem to be forged (from my brief survey of the interwebs) - start with a hunk of metal, bash it into a rough shape to get proper work and grain flow, and then machine to final dimensions.

if you cast the lower as two pieces instead of forging it as one, what difference does it make? at the end of the day, you still have to perform all the same machining operations to get from 80% to the final product.

 

[CZroe]

There's a difference: motorcycles don't require a background check for purchase.

Your analogy falls flat on its face unless you believe that the majority of gun control laws in this country are not valid. Don't get me wrong, I also feel that "shall not be infringed" isn't given the legal deference it deserves however case law is pretty clear: these sorts of regulations are well-founded and legal.

By your own admission, this isn't your area of expertise. As I said before, the requirements are clear: unmilled. The EP product doesn't mean any reasonable form of that definition.

You are way off base. You said that "hypothetically," you didn't make a thing if you bought that. I said that you did in the same way as building a motorcycle or a computer. The legal definition of 80% has nothing to do with that nor would being in a condition that doesn't require background checks for purchase. Neither is the distinction for having made it yourself. Last I checked, I didn't have to mill a thing to build my own PC. Even if these were 99%, you still built your own gun by buying and assembling it.

The legal distinction is not the one I'm taking issue with here, it's the assertion that people simply popped a piece of plastic out and had a complete gun. I made that clear and yet you continued with your analogies about what makes a butcher and what-not.

 

[HumblePie]

It's going to be illegal either way. The distinction is between what would be seen as raw material and a completed unit, and casting a proper lower around a mold and not removing it does not give you an 80% lower. It'd be like saying that if you sand-cast an engine block that the block is only 80% manufactured as long as you don't knock the sand out. Just because the block didn't exist before the sand and it has never existed separate from it doesn't mean you've cast a metal ingot and not an engine block.

According to builders the material is of a different consistency than the frame, so the casting of the frame around it is going to be the manufacture of a firearm. They have the pattern of a >80% lower, they inject it with a proper material to make a lower, that's a firearm.
I mean, really:

It doesn't matter that the white plastic is a different and easier to drilled out consistency than the black plastic. The white plastic is injected as liquid plastic into a mold first. Then inserted into a second mold. The black plastic is injected and it hardens while bonding with the white plastic in the mold at the center. When the black plastic is hardening, it is bonded and formed as a single piece with the white plastic. At no time during the making of that lower is the black plastic ever in a condition where it is a complete 100% lower. That was the assertion by the ATF and it was wrong when it raided the EP armory and later cleared it. Just because you can't comprehend how it's manufactured doesn't mean it is being made in a way that isn't compliant with producing non-100% lowers.

True however 80% receivers have been around for a long time.

Why do you think no one else has tried this? Simple, its not compliant.

A "raid" isn't a guilty verdict. The ATF and government agencies raid shit all the time and are wrong for doing so. Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. There are plenty of egregious examples of this done in the past. Many of which has been posted on these boards.

 

[TerryMathews]

It doesn't matter that the white plastic is a different and easier to drilled out consistency than the black plastic. The white plastic is injected as liquid plastic into a mold first. Then inserted into a second mold. The black plastic is injected and it hardens while bonding with the white plastic in the mold at the center. When the black plastic is hardening, it is bonded and formed as a single piece with the white plastic. At no time during the making of that lower is the black plastic ever in a condition where it is a complete 100% lower. That was the assertion by the ATF and it was wrong when it raided the EP armory and later cleared it. Just because you can't comprehend how it's manufactured doesn't mean it is being made in a way that isn't compliant with producing non-100% lowers.




A "raid" isn't a guilty verdict. The ATF and government agencies raid shit all the time and are wrong for doing so. Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. There are plenty of egregious examples of this done in the past. Many of which has been posted on these boards.

I do understand how the EP lowers are made.

They have not been cleared yet.

 

[TerryMathews]

You are way off base. You said that "hypothetically," you didn't make a thing if you bought that. I said that you did in the same way as building a motorcycle or a computer. The legal definition of 80% has nothing to do with that nor would being in a condition that doesn't require background checks for purchase. Neither is the distinction for having made it yourself. Last I checked, I didn't have to mill a thing to build my own PC. Even if these were 99%, you still built your own gun by buying and assembling it.

The legal distinction is not the one I'm taking issue with here, it's the assertion that people simply popped a piece of plastic out and had a complete gun. I made that clear and yet you continued with your analogies about what makes a butcher and what-not.

When you are dealing with guns, the legal definition is the only one that matters.

 

[boomerang]

So, did EP Armory have a determination letter from the ATF or not? If not, it would be a bad decision to sell these and I would place blame squarely on them. My understanding is that the ATF is not a difficult organization to deal with in regards to determination letters.

Also, as a side note, I am not the most knowledgeable on the subject but the cost savings I've seen on a completely machined lower versus an 80% lower is too minimal for me to want to go through the hassle of doing the work required. This, as a retired die maker. I understand there is a crowd that takes pride in putting together the least expensive AR, but personally, I would spend the extra few bucks to not have to mill and drill a lower. I'd be happy to just put parts in it.

 

[TerryMathews]

So, did EP Armory have a determination letter from the ATF or not? If not, it would be a bad decision to sell these and I would place blame squarely on them. My understanding is that the ATF is not a difficult organization to deal with in regards to determination letters.

Also, as a side note, I am not the most knowledgeable on the subject but the cost savings I've seen on a completely machined lower versus an 80% lower is too minimal for me to want to go through the hassle of doing the work required. This, as a retired die maker. I understand there is a crowd that takes pride in putting together the least expensive AR, but personally, I would spend the extra few bucks to not have to mill and drill a lower. I'd be happy to just put parts in it.

As far as I know, no one knows if they have a letter or what it says. EPA states they have a letter but I haven't seen where they posted it yet.

Ive got some experience with this part of the BATFE. They don't normally go unless they have their ducks in a row. If you want to see how the BATFE handles revoking a determination letter, look up the Atkins Accelerator.

 

[TreVader]

Maybe you think that because you don't even know the full name?

ATF(E). Now that you have all of the information, you can re-think your statement and get back to us.

By the way, the other ATF scandal going on is getting much more interesting, but it probably deserves its own thread.

Lol congrats OP called the ATF and I'm not a big enough douchebag to correct spelling on a forum. But look who is a big enough douchebag? GOOD FOR YOU!


Seriously its always nice to see the disabled contribute to society. Gold star for you

 

[TreVader]

Many violent street gangs offer services to earn loyalty. Just like a pimp offers his protection to a prostitute: it isn't free and it doesn't break the analogy.

Rearlly? Please point me to the nearest Crip disaster aid center. Or just show me some of the work they've done rebuilding cities. I'm waiting.

 

[CZroe]

I do understand how the EP lowers are made.

They have not been cleared yet.

That's not the way freedom works. Laws don't specify what is legal, they specify what is illegal. If it isn't addressed by the law yet, it's legal. Otherwise, it's guilty until proven innocent. Not being cleared yet is not reason to raid the shop and hunt down all the buyers.

When you are dealing with guns, the legal definition is the only one that matters.

It was YOUR analogy (butcher).

It was you saying that it was ridiculous because you weren't building anything by just removing the plastic. The law isn't judging what level of assembly vs. machining is worthy of ridicule: that was all you.

If I buy a seat, bicycle frame, sprocket, pedals, wheels, tires, chain, brakes, neck, grips, and handlebars, and then assemble them then I have built my own custom bicycle even without machining a thing. There's nothing "ridiculous" about it. Not only does this lower equate to a bicycle frame, it equates to an unfinished one that still needs work in addition to all the other parts. It's much more involved than the bicycle or PC examples and yet you still stooped to "ridicule" the notion that it was unfinished or that the finished product was not made by the user. Pop out the stuff and you have a finished gun in the eyes of the law, but that's only one step on the way to finishing the gun for the user. Don't belittle that. There's a lot more to it. A gun with no trigger or barrel or stock is not finished and the process should not be laughed away as ridiculous.

 

[CZroe]

Rearlly? Please point me to the nearest Crip disaster aid center. Or just show me some of the work they've done rebuilding cities. I'm waiting.

Yes, "rearlly." You must know about Crips vs. Bloods, right? Half the reason people join gangs is for protection from other gangs. The point was that gangs can win the loyalty of neighborhoods with such "programs" and "services" just like governments can win the loyalty of citizens. Got it? Just because they've done something for you doesn't mean you give up your freedoms.

 

[TerryMathews]

Pop out the stuff and you have a finished gun in the eyes of the law, but that's only one step on the way to finishing the gun for the user. Don't belittle that. There's a lot more to it. A gun with no trigger or barrel or stock is not finished and the process should not be laughed away as ridiculous.

Incorrect. If it can be popped out, it is a finished firearm in the eyes of the law. It seems to me your argument is really that the BATFE shouldn't be able to regulate firearm sales the way they currently do. As I said before, there is some merit to that argument but there is a ton of legal precedent that they are within their authority to do the things they do.

You really have no idea how this system works. My advice to you would be to learn more about how the BATFE rules work before you try to build a firearm.

 

[CZroe]

Incorrect. If it can be popped out, it is a finished firearm in the eyes of the law. It seems to me your argument is really that the BATFE shouldn't be able to regulate firearm sales the way they currently do. As I said before, there is some merit to that argument but there is a ton of legal precedent that they are within their authority to do the things they do.

You really have no idea how this system works. My advice to you would be to learn more about how the BATFE rules work before you try to build a firearm.

You insinuated that it was that easy. It isn't particularly because it doesn't pop out. It's not as "ridiculously" simple as you imply. It's absurd to say that you "simply remove" the white plastic as if it simply pops out.

 

[DominionSeraph]

That's not the way freedom works. Laws don't specify what is legal, they specify what is illegal. If it isn't addressed by the law yet, it's legal. Otherwise, it's guilty until proven innocent.

Wow.
I hope you've got your grade school teaching hat, Terry.

 

[TerryMathews]

You insinuated that it was that easy. It isn't particularly because it doesn't pop out. It's not as "ridiculously" simple as you imply. It's absurd to say that you "simply remove" the white plastic as if it simply pops out.

BATFE rules aren't easy/hard, they are about having the skills and tooling to manufacture.

The idea behind allowing 80% receivers in the first place is that the people who are capable of completing the other 20% of the work are supposed to be able to complete one of these from scratch. This is a shortcut for people who would find it economically infeasible to build from whole cloth, so to speak.

And I'm not sold on the idea that it won't just pop out given proper persuasion (temp, impact force, or vibration). That said, I'm just going by videos I watched after reading this story. I only manufacture from pieces I know are legal, I don't need the BATFE paying me a visit.

 

[Agent11]

It's ridiculous.

 

[MongGrel]

Personally, I've known a few ATF guys over time, and some of the hardest working dedicated guys out there.

They usually don't do things for no reason.

 

[etrigan420]

you still have to mill out the 20% part. it's not like you can just pull it off like the pop top on a soup can or knock the sand off a sand casting.

it's a different manufacturing process. most lowers seem to be forged (from my brief survey of the interwebs) - start with a hunk of metal, bash it into a rough shape to get proper work and grain flow, and then machine to final dimensions.

if you cast the lower as two pieces instead of forging it as one, what difference does it make? at the end of the day, you still have to perform all the same machining operations to get from 80% to the final product.

I think the issue hinges on this:

If I have a "plug(s)", and then manufacture a lower *around* that plug, what percentage of a lower did I just manufacture?

Whether that makes a difference to you, me, or any other rational thinking individual has little to no bearing on whether that makes a difference to the BATFE...

 

[irishScott]

Personally, I've known a few ATF guys over time, and some of the hardest working dedicated guys out there.

They usually don't do things for no reason.

No, apparently they do things for very stupid reasons. I'm sure the field agents are a decent bunch overall, it's the leadership (or lack thereof) that's completely fucked.

 

[TreVader]

Yes, "rearlly." You must know about Crips vs. Bloods, right? Half the reason people join gangs is for protection from other gangs. The point was that gangs can win the loyalty of neighborhoods with such "programs" and "services" just like governments can win the loyalty of citizens. Got it? Just because they've done something for you doesn't mean you give up your freedoms.

Looks like there's more than one guy who's a big enough douchebag to correct spelling on a forum!



Seriously get a life. Pointing out a typo on a forum post doesn't make your garbage arguments any better. Your calling whatever the hell the crips do "service" is a great example of how your political worldview is skewed by television and whatever ridiculous media you consume. Gangs don't "service" anybody, PERIOD. They're criminal businesses for profit.

 

[TreVader]

Wow.
I hope you've got your grade school teaching hat, Terry.

Everything is black and white with these people… if it's not legal it's illegal, it's either evil or good, there's no grey area.



Seriously (some) conservatives operate with the worldview similar to the average 5yo.

 

[MongGrel]

No, apparently they do things for very stupid reasons. I'm sure the field agents are a decent bunch overall, it's the leadership (or lack thereof) that's completely fucked.

Well, quite honestly you could be right there.

Basically, it will get sorted out one way or another now I suppose...

They usually are very far from doing things stupidly.

 

[TerryMathews]

Seriously (some) conservatives operate with the worldview similar to the average 5yo.

Exact same thing can be said of (some) liberals.

Stupid doesn't follow political affiliations, no matter how much you wish it would.