The "ghost gun" advantage.

[JohnKSa]

I believe the state is still required to provide the proof.

I figured that the progression was obvious but I'll go step by step.

The term "association" is very general. A group of individuals who voluntarily enter into an agreement to accomplish a purpose is an association.

So if you and your friend enter into an agreement to accomplish a purpose (i.e. lend me your tools so I can finish my 80% receiver), you qualify as an "association" under the general definition. There is no need for money to change hands, there is no need for your friend to be a business. The only proof the state would have to provide is that your friend lent you tools with the general understanding of what you were going to do with them.

Now the ball is in your court to prove that you and your friend aren't an "association" and that gets me to the question I asked in the previous post. How would you go about proving that you weren't an association?

As far as I can see, the only way for this to work out in your favor is if you have some way to refute any evidence the state has that your friend knew what you were going to do with the tools he lent you.

 

[johnwilliamson062]

If you want to design association that broadly I guess I just have to give up the idea in general. I don't see how I can purchase tools without forming an association with someone using your definition.
I could start with chipping flint and work up to a drill press, but at some point I am probably going to need a book and use of a library card would almost certainly form an association as defined.

At the end of the day ATFE has to tie it into "...engaged in the business..."
No one wants the legal heat so they are getting away with how broad they are defining "...engaged in the business..." as pertains to associations right now.

ATFE is using these rulings to shut down the use of business equipment because they can bully the business owners. No shop owner making car parts wants to go bankrupt fighting a legal battle because (s)he allowed his/her toolmaker to finish an 80% receiver on their own time after hours. And (s)he goes bankrupt even if (s)he wins.
Shut down makerspaces with the same leverage.

 

[Frank Ettin]

If you want to design association that broadly....

The term "association" can indeed apply that broadly.

The thing is that there are a number of open questions left by the ATF ruling. Until those questions are answered definitively, if they ever are, anyone building a gun for his own use relying on borrowed tools is in largely uncharted territory and exposing himself to considerable legal risk. And I suspect that no one really sees enough potential upside to be anxious to have his day in court for the purpose of clarifying the rules.

 

[JohnKSa]

If you want to design association that broadly...

First of all, it's not my definition. Second, what I want has nothing to do with anything.

I don't see how I can purchase tools without forming an association with someone using your definition.

I realize that you're being sarcastic, but I'll go ahead and give you a straight answer anyway.

The issue of whether or not there is an association specifically relates to getting help or using someone else's tools or machinery.

If the tools are actually yours--if, for example you were to actually purchase them and then use them yourself without any appreciable amount of help from someone else--then the issue of whether or not there is an association is moot.

At the end of the day ATFE has to tie it into "...engaged in the business..."

All they have to do is show that you didn't actually make the gun yourself. If they can show that then they have evidence that someone is avoiding the manufacturing license, marking, and recordkeeping requirements of the GCA.

ATFE is using these rulings to shut down the use of business equipment because they can bully the business owners.

It's not bullying for the BATF to enforce a reasonable definition of "manufacture". And realistically, this isn't so much an issue of BATF trying to redefine the term "manufacture" to be more restrictive as it is an issue of people trying to dramatically expand the limits of what "manufacture" means.

This is really VERY simple in spite of efforts to make it otherwise. The law specifically allows people to manufacture firearms for their own personal use. Of course people who want to manufacture a firearm will need to acquire the skills and tools required to perform the manufacturing process.

People who aren't actually interested in manufacturing a firearm need to understand that this law does not apply to them. And they need to understand that if they attempt to use this law to avoid the manufacturing license, marking, and recordkeeping requirements of the GCA, that they, and/or anyone who helps them, are very likely violating federal law.

 

[5whiskey]

People who aren't actually interested in manufacturing a firearm need to understand that this law does not apply to them. And they need to understand that if they attempt to use this law to avoid the manufacturing license, marking, and recordkeeping requirements of the GCA, that they, and/or anyone who helps them, are very likely violating federal law.

This is the takeaway. The personal use manufacturing exemption wasn't created for the purpose of us having the ability to make a "ghost gun." I'm sure that exemption created much angst and gnashing of teeth when the law was authored, but we have it and should be thankful that some lawmakers stuck to their guns. Alas, the purpose was for the hobbyist to create something without violating the law. Not for a legion of non-hobbyists to skip the 4473 paper trail. We should be happy the exemption is there instead of complain that it is as restrictive as it is.

 

[the possum]

Getting back to the OP-

I'd kind of like to have an AK so I asked him about making one. He said he'd be glad to help me. I could even use his shop. So I asked about price. He said about $600 bucks to which my response was that I could buy a whole AK for that. He told me you don't save $$$ on this kind of gun. The only advantage is that there is no paper trail. Seriously?

Right now prices have fallen through the floor on those guns people would panic over. You can buy a basic AR for $400 now. So yeah, I really don't see how you can save any money, and if you're gonna put in all the time and work, he's probably also figuring on using decent parts. And as others mentioned, an AK is not quite as straightforward as an AR.

I live in IL and the state police are NOT supposed to keep records of the back ground checks and who bought what. Someone at a very high level of state gov. would breaking the law in a heavy duty way for the State Police to have record of gun ownership. (Not that it couldn't happen, but this would be very serious law violation!) Granted I have to have a FOID card, but that doesn't tell them what guns I own, or even if I own any guns at all. However; my buddy says that IL gun dealers have to keep records of who bought what. Really?

So two questions:

1. Do IL gun dealers have to keep records of every sale? A list of who owns guns bought from their shop?

They're not supposed to, but in practice you can assume they have (or can easily get) a list of every gun you've bought from an FFL.

I wish I could find it back now, but I'm pretty sure it was Otis McDonald (of the famous McDonald vs. Chicago Supreme Court Case) who talked about getting his guns confiscated. He said the police showed up at his door with a list of every gun he'd ever bought.

Note that they were not tracing the serial number of a particular gun(s) like others have mentioned in this thread. It's possible he only ever bought anything from 1 or 2 gun shops, so maybe they followed his form 4473's and subpoenaed all the records from those shops. I don't know. But he was convinced they had a secret registration database, and even if he was technically wrong, does it really matter if they can track down everything you own within a couple days?

Something similar was published on the Firearm Blog:
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/01/06/run-in-atf/

About 15 minutes later John and another agent (let’s call him Nick) pulled up in two sedans. They were both in plain clothes, both introduced themselves kindly, and both provided credentials and business cards before I let them in. I sat the two men down in my office as I was legitimately curious as to what was going on. The men had lists of every firearm I had ever received from an FFL where I had done multiple long guns/hand guns.

And as others have mentioned, FFL's must keep detailed records of everything sold, and those records get turned over to the BATFE when the shop closes.

In Illinois we have the FOID card, so they pretty much know you've got guns. The issue is whether they know about that last particular item hidden under the floorboards. And if it ever comes to that, I would not want to involve a "shooting buddy" in the mess. Think about what you'd be asking of him, if authorities ever came knocking and demanded to know who he helped build guns. No, I'd much rather just buy a ready-built gun off a stranger with no paperwork, or build something completely on my own that no one else knows about.

 

[ATN082268]

Note that they were not tracing the serial number of a particular gun(s) like others have mentioned in this thread. It's possible he only ever bought anything from 1 or 2 gun shops, so maybe they followed his form 4473's and subpoenaed all the records from those shops. I don't know. But he was convinced they had a secret registration database, and even if he was technically wrong, does it really matter if they can track down everything you own within a couple days?

If a person only had firearms purchased from FFL(s), it would be incredibly easy to obtain the information from the 4473s for all the guns a person owns. Technically 4473s aren't a database in that all the information isn't compiled onto one list but that is kind of hair splitting if all the information can be retrieved when necessary. That is why the anti-gun types drool about stuff like closing the gun show "loophole" as that would largely complete their gun registration scheme by also covering all private (non-FFL) gun transfers.

 

[johnwilliamson062]

Im busy this week, but if I have time next week I will send a request for clarification to ATFE in regard to borrowing tools.

 

[JohnKSa]

But he was convinced they had a secret registration database, and even if he was technically wrong, does it really matter if they can track down everything you own within a couple days?

Focusing the resources of the BATF on a single person and, over the course of a few days, being able to track down all (or most) of the guns that person has purchased via 4473 is tremendously different from being able to type in a person's name and instantly finding a list of the guns they own. The latter is registration, the former is not.

They're not supposed to, but in practice you can assume they have (or can easily get) a list of every gun you've bought from an FFL.

I would say that they can get it, I doubt it will be anything approaching easy in the general case.

The men had lists of every firearm I had ever received from an FFL where I had done multiple long guns/hand guns.

The highlighted portion is very important. If a person buys multiple firearms at once, that is reported directly to the BATF, unlike normal firearm purchases.

https://www.atf.gov/resource-center...firearms-sales-or-other-disposition-reporting

 

[44 AMP]

One thing to keep in mind is that the information on the 4473 that links a gun to you by serial # is NOT given to the federal govt to put in a database, they have to go LOOK for it.

Your state may have their own rules but that's your state. Your state may hand over the information to the Fed, I have no idea, but I would expect that the Fed would have to request it.

No instant background check over the phone by an FFL that I have been involved with has EVER given the gun serial#. Your/my personal info (DOB, address etc) and either "handgun or long gun". Only that, never the gun serial #.

SO, the Fed knows you bought a gun, and they know if its a handgun, or not. And that's it. For further info, they have to go LOOK at the dealers PHYSICAL records. They have to go the shop and look at the papers. They can, and do this, easily enough, if they have a reason. But they don't get to just push a button and get a list of what you bought by serial #.

However, once they HAVE that list, I think they would save it, somewhere they can get it with a push of a button, or mouseclick.

I find the information about how the Fed is ruling on what tools you can use to build your own gun to be ....entertaining, and you know the only reason they even exist now is because of idiots baiting the Fed with the whole "ghost gun" foolishness.

Foolishness, because we were fine, and largely left alone by the ATF if we were only making firearms for personal use. The only real concern was how many one could make before the Fed felt you needed a manufacturer's license. The Fed didn't care WHO'S tools you used, only if you were doing it for sale or not.

Of course, this was also in the days when you had to have machine tool operating skills, or a LOT of determination and patience with a file.

Emotional children, discovering the tech that let them make (SOME) gun parts via a 3d printer, dancing and capering about (on the internet, particularly) with tongues stuck out, thumbs in their ears wiggling their fingers at the ATF and chanting "neener neener, we can make ghost guns!" was a rather STUPID thing to do, in my opinion. THANKS SO MUCH, fellahs.

If you're doing it for the joy of building your own gun, fine. Wonderful, even.
If you're doing it so its not registered to you, (check your LOCAL laws carefully, as well!) it seems to me that it would be simpler, and maybe cheaper to just buy a used gun from a private seller. (where legal)

There are still many places in the country where its not only still legal, but encouraged. Sadly not as many as there used to be...

 

[JoeSixpack]

Hmm the reporting of multiple rifles I think started back in fast 'n furious.. which is kinda ironic since the ATF was the one pushing dealers to sale even when they thought something was wrong.

But I thought the number was 4 or so. not 2.. but damn.
Kinda ridiculous I've bought multiple guns at a time, heck I've bought multiple of the SAME gun at the same time.. sometimes when you find a god deal you just gotta get more then one.

Even though they'd be exempt how many people who went in to buy a mosin when they was 50-60 bucks bought several at once? I bet a lot of owners did that.

Imagine couples buying multiple of the same gun so they have "pairs".. and they see that as a sign of trafficking? way too low a number to indicate that imo.

 

[44 AMP]

The ATF requirement for FFL dealers reporting multiple same day sales (and anything more than ONE is "multiple) goes back well before "fast & furious".

Yes, the idea is to help them spot traffickers, particularly the kind that buys several guns at one shop, and does the same thing at the shop across town the next week. Guys that buy 3 or 4 ONCE, or once or twice a year, aren't the people they are looking for, but to find the ones they are looking for, they need all the data to sort through.