ATF Has Published Proposed New Receiver Definition and Homemade Guns Rule…FPC Urges You to Comment

Today, the ATF finally got around to publishing their proposed new rules that would change the definition of a firearm frame or receiver, address the serialization and background check requirements of “home completed” or “readily” completable firearm kits, and would kill off the 80% receiver business.

With the publication of the proposed rules in the federal register, the 90-day public comment period clock has started and the Firearms Policy Coalition would like you to make your voice heard by our benevolent overseers.

From the Firearms Policy Coalition . . .

Today, the Department of Justice published the notice of proposed rulemaking and request for public comment on ATF Rule 2021R-05, entitled “Definition of ‘Frame or Receiver’ and Identification of Firearms.” Individuals can access the Rule and take action to oppose it at StopATF.org. FPC previously issued a statement in response to the announcement of the proposed rule earlier in May.

According to the Department of Justice, the new rule was partly constructed to close a so-called “regulatory loophole associated with . . . un-serialized privately made firearms.” After an initial review of the finalized notice of proposed rulemaking, FPC Law noted that ATF Rule 2021R-05 would, if codified, severely infringe and burden the right of law-abiding Americans to keep and bear arms, as well as give the ATF new powers beyond the law enacted by Congress, particularly with respect to self-built firearms.

Moreover, the ATF’s unconstitutional and unlawful proposed rule 2021R-05 would: 

• • Broadly redefine “firearm frame or receiver” and “frame or receiver” to expand the number and types of items that ATF would consider regulated firearms;
  • Amend ATF’s definitions of “firearm” and “gunsmith” to give the federal government more control over guns, gun owners, and those who provide critical services;
  • Codify new definitions of terms such as “complete weapon,” “complete muffler or silencer device,” “privately made firearm,” and “readily” for purposes of law enforcement and prosecution, and put people in much greater legal risk;
  • Radically change ATF’s regulations on firearm marking/engraving and recordkeeping; and,
  • Allow the ATF to grant itself legal authority to issue new anti-2A rules and regulations outside of the APA regulatory process.

“Just as we did when ATF proposed a rule to change the definition of ‘machinegun,’ FPC will utilize every available resource to thoroughly analyze the proposed rule, fully participate in the rulemaking process, and take aggressive legal action to defend our members and the People if ATF adopts an unlawful rule,” said Adam Kraut, FPC’s Senior Director of Legal Operations. 

To submit a comment to the ATF in opposition to the proposed Rule, please visit StopATF.org. Individuals and affected parties who are interested in becoming a potential plaintiff for FPC legal action should visit FPCPlaintiff.org.

Individuals that are interested in joining FPC in the fight against tyranny can become a member of the FPC Grassroots Army for just $25 at JoinFPC.org.

Firearms Policy Coalition and its FPC Law team are the nation’s next-generation advocates leading the Second Amendment litigation and research space. Some FPC legal actions include:

• • A brief supporting certiorari in NYSRPA v. Bruen, which was granted by the U.S. Supreme Court
  • A challenge to Tennessee’s ban on handgun carry by adults under 21 (Basset v. Slatery)
  • A challenge to Maryland’s ban on handgun carry (Call v. Jones) 
  • A challenge to New Jersey’s ban on handgun carry (Bennett v. Davis)
  • A challenge to New York City’s ban on handgun carry (Greco v. New York City)
  • A challenge to Pennsylvania’s ban on handgun carry by adults under 21 (Lara v. Evanchick)
  • A challenge to the federal ban on the sale of handguns and handgun ammunition to adults under 21 years of age (Reese v. ATF)
  • A challenge to Maryland’s ban on so-called “assault weapons” (Bianchi v. Frosh)
  • Challenge to California’s ban on so-called “assault weapons” (Miller v. Calif. Att’y General) 
  • A challenge to California’s handgun “roster”, microstamping, and self-manufacturing ban laws (Renna v. Bonta)
  • A challenge to Pennsylvania’s laws completely denying the right to carry to individuals who were previously granted relief from prior non-violent convictions and are not currently prohibited from possessing firearms (Suarez v. Evanchick)

For more on these cases and other legal action initiatives, visit FPCLegal.org and follow FPC on Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube.

Firearms Policy Coalition (firearmspolicy.org), a 501(c)4 nonprofit organization, exists to create a world of maximal human liberty, defend constitutional rights, advance individual liberty, and restore freedom. FPC’s efforts are focused on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and adjacent issues including freedom of speech, due process, unlawful searches and seizures, separation of powers, asset forfeitures, privacy, encryption, and limited government. The FPC team are next-generation advocates working to achieve the Organization’s strategic objectives through litigation, research, scholarly publications, amicus briefing, legislative and regulatory action, grassroots activism, education, outreach, and other programs. FPC Law (FPCLaw.org), the nation’s largest public interest legal team focused on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, lead the Second Amendment litigation and research space.