I am gonna love to see what happens when the BATF tries to regulate things that are not even firearms yet. 80% receivers are just chunks of metal, and nothing the BATF says or does can change that. Hell, even fully completed AR lowers and polymer 80 frames are not receivers, as neither meet the four part definition of same IAW published regulations. Granted, the BATF can try to change that regulation, but they are gonna stir up a shitstorm if they do.
I don't trust the courts to help us, but the ATF backed down from a previous case about ghost guns when the defendant started questioning the definition of a receiver. Since neither an AR lower nor upper contains the bolt and fire control group, they are not definitionally firearms when seperate. The same goes for every semi-auto pistol frame.
That 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.
I am gonna love to see what happens when the BATF tries to regulate things that are not even firearms yet. 80% receivers are just chunks of metal, and nothing the BATF says or does can change that. Hell, even fully completed AR lowers and polymer 80 frames are not receivers, as neither meet the four part definition of same IAW published regulations. Granted, the BATF can try to change that regulation, but they are gonna stir up a shitstorm if they do.
Regardless, I will not comply.
I don't trust the courts to help us, but the ATF backed down from a previous case about ghost guns when the defendant started questioning the definition of a receiver. Since neither an AR lower nor upper contains the bolt and fire control group, they are not definitionally firearms when seperate. The same goes for every semi-auto pistol frame.
-Title 27, Chapter II, Subchapter B, Part 478, Subpart B, §478.11