Just in time for Christmas: ATF Deputy Director Kenneth Melson as the Grinch. "Idle bureaucrats are the devil's playthings."So, the ATF doubles down on stupidity with this ruling from the Grinch. I can't wait to see the PR consequences of this one, and, better, what the GOP oversight committees dig out about the hows and whys of the agency covering for the oversteps of a moronic field supervisor. I love it. What I'd love even more is to watch while Melson takes his life in his own hands and actually SHOOTS one of these ATF-modified Airsofts while holding it. Odds of Melson becoming an ex-Grinch? Substantial, I should think.
Mike
III
U.S. Department of Justice
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives
Office of the Director
Washington, DC 20226
18 U.S.C. 921(a)(3): DEFINITIONS (FIREARM)
27 CFR 478.11: DEFINITIONS (FIREARM FRAME OR RECEIVER)
Air gun (i.e., a gun that expels a projectile using compressed air, carbon dioxide, propane, or similar gas) replicas of AR/M-16 variant firearms that provide housing for a hammer and firing mechanism with substantially the same design as AR/M-16 variant firearm receivers, and mounting points for attaching an upper assembly containing a barrel and bolt, are "firearm frames or receivers," and are, therefore, "firearms," as that term is defined by 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(3)(B), and its implementing
regulation, 27 CFR 478.11.
ATF Rul. 2010-4
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has received requests for evaluation and classification of air gun replicas of AR/M-16 variant firearms. Specifically, ATF was asked whether these air guns are considered "firearms" under Federal law.
The M-16 is a military style combat machinegun. The AR style firearm is a semi-automatic version of the M-16, and both are produced using a variety of model designations. ATF evaluated two air gun replicas of AR/M-16 variant firearms. These particular air guns are manufactured with non-ferrous metal and duplicate the appearance of various types of AR and M-16 rifles. They are designed to expel projectiles using compressed air, carbon dioxide, propane, or similar gas.
The first sample ATF examined was an air gun replica of an M-16 rifle that has the physical features of an M-16 firearm. It has all M-16 fire-control assembly pin holes formed or indexed for fire-control components (i.e., hammer, trigger, disconnector, selector lever, and machinegun sear). It utilizes fire-control components that differ only slightly in design from M-16 fire-control components. The receiver of this air gun is identical to an M-16 receiver, except for two features. The slot for the bolt-stop has been altered to make room for a proprietary bolt-stop by reducing the height of the wall separating the fire control cavity from the magazine well. Also, the ledge has been removed from the fire-control cavity upon which an M-16 machinegun sear would normally sit.
In conducting the evaluation of sample #1, the upper assembly was removed, the existing bolt-stop was removed to allow movement of the hammer, and an M-16 upper assembly was installed. A test fire was then performed with the original automatic fire sear, and the test demonstrated that the sample was capable of firing a conventional .223 caliber cartridge semi-automatically, expelling a projectile by the
action of an explosive. The original automatic fire sear was then replaced with an M-16 machinegun sear. A second test firing was performed, and the test demonstrated that the sample was capable of firing semi-automatically, expelling a projectile by the action of an explosive. Sample #1 did not expel more than one projectile by a single function of the trigger and is not a "machinegun" as defined in 26 U.S.C. 5845(b).
The second sample ATF examined was an air gun replica of an M-16 rifle that has the physical features of an M-16 firearm. It has all M-16 fire-control assembly pin holes formed or indexed, and utilizes a proprietary drop-in fire-control mechanism that did not include an automatic-fire sear. The receiver of this air gun is identical to an M-16 receiver, except for two dimensions. The length between the
takedown pins is approximately 1/8 longer than on an M-16 receiver, and the width of the fire-control cavity is approximately 0.31 greater than an M-16 receiver.
ATF conducted a test of this air gun. In conducting the evaluation of this sample, the upper assembly was removed, the proprietary drop-in fire-control mechanism was removed, the proprietary bolt-stop was removed, the indexed pin holes were drilled to allow installation of M-16 fire-control components, and an M-16 upper assembly was installed. A test fire was then performed, and the test demonstrated that the
sample was capable of firing semi-automatically, expelling a projectile by the action of an explosive.
The Gun Control Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(3), and its implementing regulation, 27 CFR 478.11, define the term "firearm," in part, as "any weapon...including a starter gun...which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; (B) the frame or receiver of any such weapon..." Under 27 CFR 478.11, the term "firearm frame or receiver" is defined as "[t]hat part of a firearm which provides housing for the hammer, bolt or breechblock,
and firing mechanism, and which is usually threaded at its forward portion to receive the barrel."
The air gun replicas of AR/M-16 variant firearms examined have the appearance, dimensions, and substantially the same design as AR/M-16 variant firearm receivers and completed weapons. The air gun replicas provide housing for a hammer and firing mechanism, and mounting points for attaching an upper assembly containing a barrel and bolt. Because the air gun replicas provide housing with substantially the same design as AR/M-16 variant firearm receivers, they incorporate firearm receivers. Moreover, though not necessary for classification, once the upper assemblies (and, in the second sample, fire-control components) were installed and test fired, they both expelled projectiles by the action of an explosive. Because the air gun replicas of the AR/M-16 variant firearms incorporate firearm receivers, they are "firearms," as defined by the Gun Control Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(3), and its
implementing regulation, 27 CFR 478.11.
Held, air gun (i.e., a gun that expels a projectile using compressed air, carbon dioxide, propane, or similar gas) replicas of AR/M-16 variant firearms that provide housing for a hammer and firing mechanism with substantially the same design as AR/M-16 variant firearm receivers, and mounting points for attaching an upper assembly containing a barrel and bolt, are "firearm frames or receivers," and are, therefore, "firearms," as that term is defined by 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(3)(B), and its
implementing regulation, 27 CFR 478.11.
To the extent this ruling is inconsistent with any prior classifications, they are hereby superseded.
Date approved: November 5, 2010
Kenneth E. Melson
Deputy Director
Over at TheHighRoad, "Spec ops Grunt" from Broken Arrow, Oklahoma comments: "Idle bureaucrats are the devil's playthings."
Exactly.
11 comments:
"The M-16 is a military style combat machinegun. "
Really?
This is getting exciting. Disenfranchising all those young toy-gun gamers who have no political knowledge or beliefs, or, better yet, are Left-leaning...
"Bwaaains!"
"Oh, sowwy, ATF, you'wah fwesh owt. I'll twy someone else."
Now I'm no expert, but I'm fairly certain that my M16 wasn't a machinegun...
31B
The Gun Control Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(3), and its implementing regulation, 27 CFR 478.11, define the term "firearm," in part, as "any weapon...including a starter gun...which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive;
I hate to be all hair splitty. But i thought gunpowder was a,(flammable solid). Not an,(explosive).
They might have redefined it. But i know the handling and storage of gunpowder is completely different from blackpowder. Which is considered an explosive.....mthead III
So, if you make a AR lower, that is interchangeable with every other AR lower, and that can be used without modification with any AR upper - including an M16 upper - BATF will consider it an AR lower, and treat it as a firearm as they do every other AR lower, even if you originally ship it with a Airsoft upper.
What a surprise.
Except that these lowers aren't, in fact "interchangeable" - until the feds redrill a couple of holes and modify the mnagazine chamber, etc. Of course I can take a solid block of plastic or metal and stick it in a mill and produce an AR lower, so I guess those plastic and metal blocks are also AR lowers at least according to them.
When the next Revolutionary War comes I hope and pray that those poor stupid bastards on the other side are using converted Airsoft weapons. If so it won't last long.
Ree-frickin-dickahlusss...
Aluminum tent poles, bamboo walking canes, cellulose foam pool noodles. All potential AR lowers.
Stop the madness.
Any of those airsoft lowers really made of metal? How much punishment does an AR lower actually take?
Might be a source of backup parts.
Related story: The EPA acting in conjunction with Obama's General Motors, just ran a test which resulted in a new 'gas guzzler tax' being passed to all Ford automobiles.
By merely taking a Ford Focus, they found that by removing the front seat, removing the transverse four cylinder engine and firewall, and welding extensions to the frame and slightly modifying the steering linkage, an old, 4bbl carbureted 454 GMC high torque tow truck engine could be made to fit into the space, thus rendering the Focus a EPA city rating of 8 miles per gallon. Thus, prices on the little Ford, due to its potential use as a gas guzzler, will be raised by an extra twelve thousand dollars to cover taxes and carbon offsets/
Better buy a Chevy from the government. Like you're intended to. THEY know what's best for you@
So far, no word on what criminal penalties await kids who use 6 foot lengths of PVC tubing to launch bottle rockets, pretending that they are bazookas or RPGs.
Post a Comment