User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 6:52:20 PM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I’m a cop. I don’t have a pending form 1 but I’ve thought about it. How do I arrest myself? I want to do it right the first time. Do I handcuff myself to my bed and email ask the experts? Just don't think about it for more than 80% of a minute at any given time and you should be ok 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 6:52:22 PM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I’m a cop. I don’t have a pending form 1 but I’ve thought about it. How do I arrest myself? I want to do it right the first time. Do I handcuff myself to my bed and email ask the experts? Sounds about right. Shoot your own dog on the way out the door.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 6:53:36 PM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The idea of retroactive removal of approvals seems to invite plenty of legal arguments itself. Has that ever happened? Or rather has that ever happened successfully when it wasn't an actual clerical error that the approval happened or something similar? There are a handful of people out there building f1 cans from scratch but the vast, vast majority of f1 cans have to be solvent traps. Hell, the fact that they are even tossing that about implies a whole level of intent to something that previously was just the realm of being ostensibly about a tax... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: That's some bullshit. I could see them saying 'register now or show us the unused parts' to DM customers without a stamp, but denying/ removing registration from those who already paid, were approved, and manufactured their silencer? Kharn The idea of retroactive removal of approvals seems to invite plenty of legal arguments itself. Has that ever happened? Or rather has that ever happened successfully when it wasn't an actual clerical error that the approval happened or something similar? There are a handful of people out there building f1 cans from scratch but the vast, vast majority of f1 cans have to be solvent traps. Hell, the fact that they are even tossing that about implies a whole level of intent to something that previously was just the realm of being ostensibly about a tax... I think the goal is “Fuck you, you can beat the rap, but we just wanna take you for a ride!” |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 6:55:13 PM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Guys, people are getting denials who have bought zero parts. They aren't on any customer list. Even guys who have only built cans from raw materials with their lathe... they are now getting denied too. The ATF is simply shutting down the entire form 1 suppressor building thing by saying everyfuckingthing is a silencer part if you intended to use it to build a silencer or part. I think their strategy is "Fuck the law, let the gun people fight it in court." If a private party can't form 1 anything, but they allow manufacturers to build them, then they aren't applying the law equally. The form 1 exists to allow private parties to build them. If only manufacturers were allowed to build them, there wouldnt be a form 1, right? Or do manufacturers have to do those too? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 6:55:28 PM EST
[#5]
Isn't the whole point of doing a Form 1 is because it is your intent to build a suppressor?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 6:55:40 PM EST
[#6]
That's weird, my "Pending research" went to "Submitted/in progress" this morning for a form 1 build I submitted on Friday night.
So there's that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 6:56:12 PM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah its happened before. I know several years back one or two people submitted an eform 1 to build a machinegun and were approved (now the site won't even let you apply). ATF eventually saw they screwed up and it was a battle, but ATF won. A member on here got approved to build a form 1 frag grenade. I think he has battled the ATF a few times because they keep saying he can't have it anymore or some BS. I believe he still has it. Member Ben was the first that came to mind on this. I feel like if they could just revoke f1s, they would and then seize it. Given how easy it would be to jam people up by revoking their f1s, I'm sure they didn't just wake up this morning and think it up. The MGs they could at least hide under the hughes amendment to have some basis for, and claim the issuance of the tax stamp was an accident. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 6:57:01 PM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If you buy a silencer as a whole manufactured unit do you still get a rejection? Can't do that on a Form 1. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 6:58:08 PM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's weird, my "Pending research" went to "Submitted/in progress" this morning for a form 1 build I submitted on Friday night. So there's that. That's gov employee for "Ill do the rest of my job next week" |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 6:58:22 PM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't know if it has ever happened but I can think of things they've approved of that they turned around and then disapproved of them. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: That's some bullshit. I could see them saying 'register now or show us the unused parts' to DM customers without a stamp, but denying/ removing registration from those who already paid, were approved, and manufactured their silencer? Kharn The idea of retroactive removal of approvals seems to invite plenty of legal arguments itself. Has that ever happened? Or rather has that ever happened successfully when it wasn't an actual clerical error that the approval happened or something similar? There are a handful of people out there building f1 cans from scratch but the vast, vast majority of f1 cans have to be solvent traps. Hell, the fact that they are even tossing that about implies a whole level of intent to something that previously was just the realm of being ostensibly about a tax... I don't know if it has ever happened but I can think of things they've approved of that they turned around and then disapproved of them. Even pre-samples that were accidentally approved for transfer to individuals were previously allowed to remain in that person's possession until death, then it had to transfer to a dealer. Agencies are allowed to exercise discretion. They're choosing to be asshats. Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 6:59:16 PM EST
[#11]
It's a crime for any of us to have to live under the ATF.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 6:59:28 PM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's gov employee for "Ill do the rest of my job next week" 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:00:20 PM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Member Ben was the first that came to mind on this. I feel like if they could just revoke f1s, they would and then seize it. Given how easy it would be to jam people up by revoking their f1s, I'm sure they didn't just wake up this morning and think it up. The MGs they could at least hide under the hughes amendment to have some basis for, and claim the issuance of the tax stamp was an accident. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Yeah its happened before. I know several years back one or two people submitted an eform 1 to build a machinegun and were approved (now the site won't even let you apply). ATF eventually saw they screwed up and it was a battle, but ATF won. A member on here got approved to build a form 1 frag grenade. I think he has battled the ATF a few times because they keep saying he can't have it anymore or some BS. I believe he still has it. Member Ben was the first that came to mind on this. I feel like if they could just revoke f1s, they would and then seize it. Given how easy it would be to jam people up by revoking their f1s, I'm sure they didn't just wake up this morning and think it up. The MGs they could at least hide under the hughes amendment to have some basis for, and claim the issuance of the tax stamp was an accident. Yeah no doubt, I thought the same too until very recently. I really think key to all of this is the vague definition of a silencer. It gives them a lot of leeway to basically do whatever they want with form 1 cans. If someone chooses to fight it in court, it would be interesting to see how it plays out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:00:37 PM EST
[#14]
Tag for impending fuckery. Again.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:00:59 PM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah its happened before. I know several years back one or two people submitted an eform 1 to build a machinegun and were approved (now the site won't even let you apply). ATF eventually saw they screwed up and it was a battle, but ATF won. A member on here got approved to build a form 1 frag grenade. I think he has battled the ATF a few times because they keep saying he can't have it anymore or some BS. I believe he still has it. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: That's some bullshit. I could see them saying 'register now or show us the unused parts' to DM customers without a stamp, but denying/ removing registration from those who already paid, were approved, and manufactured their silencer? Kharn The idea of retroactive removal of approvals seems to invite plenty of legal arguments itself. Has that ever happened? Or rather has that ever happened successfully when it wasn't an actual clerical error that the approval happened or something similar? There are a handful of people out there building f1 cans from scratch but the vast, vast majority of f1 cans have to be solvent traps. Hell, the fact that they are even tossing that about implies a whole level of intent to something that previously was just the realm of being ostensibly about a tax... I don't know if it has ever happened but I can think of things they've approved of that they turned around and then disapproved of them. Yeah its happened before. I know several years back one or two people submitted an eform 1 to build a machinegun and were approved (now the site won't even let you apply). ATF eventually saw they screwed up and it was a battle, but ATF won. A member on here got approved to build a form 1 frag grenade. I think he has battled the ATF a few times because they keep saying he can't have it anymore or some BS. I believe he still has it. Good point, I had forgotten about that. One of the guys was from PA as well. https://blog.princelaw.com/2014/09/11/did-atf-approve-your-making-of-a-new-machinegun-and-then-rescind-it-contact-us-to-discuss/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:01:46 PM EST
[#16]
Show me the man and I'll show you the crime.
My buds keep asking me why I don't want to mess with the NFA. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:03:25 PM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Member Ben was the first that came to mind on this. I feel like if they could just revoke f1s, they would and then seize it. Given how easy it would be to jam people up by revoking their f1s, I'm sure they didn't just wake up this morning and think it up. The MGs they could at least hide under the hughes amendment to have some basis for, and claim the issuance of the tax stamp was an accident. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Yeah its happened before. I know several years back one or two people submitted an eform 1 to build a machinegun and were approved (now the site won't even let you apply). ATF eventually saw they screwed up and it was a battle, but ATF won. A member on here got approved to build a form 1 frag grenade. I think he has battled the ATF a few times because they keep saying he can't have it anymore or some BS. I believe he still has it. Member Ben was the first that came to mind on this. I feel like if they could just revoke f1s, they would and then seize it. Given how easy it would be to jam people up by revoking their f1s, I'm sure they didn't just wake up this morning and think it up. The MGs they could at least hide under the hughes amendment to have some basis for, and claim the issuance of the tax stamp was an accident. And how many people would notice the email saying it had been revoked vs been caught in a spam filter or it not even being an email, just a note on their form on the portal they never check again after printing the PDF. Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:06:05 PM EST
[#18]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:07:00 PM EST
[#19]
The ATF along with the rest of the DOJ are declaring everyone who doesn't go along a future felon / enemy of cause.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:07:47 PM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah its happened before. I know several years back one or two people submitted an eform 1 to build a machinegun and were approved (now the site won't even let you apply). ATF eventually saw they screwed up and it was a battle, but ATF won. A member on here got approved to build a form 1 frag grenade. I think he has battled the ATF a few times because they keep saying he can't have it anymore or some BS. I believe he still has it. That was something that was banned though and a screw up by new reviewer. This is a legal tax that has been paid. Completely different. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:08:54 PM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think their strategy is "Fuck the law, let the gun people fight it in court." If a private party can't form 1 anything, but they allow manufacturers to build them, then they aren't applying the law equally. The form 1 exists to allow private parties to build them. If only manufacturers were allowed to build them, there wouldnt be a form 1, right? Or do manufacturers have to do those too? They do not use a form 1. Form 1 is only for non licensed people. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:10:10 PM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah no doubt, I thought the same too until very recently. I really think key to all of this is the vague definition of a silencer. It gives them a lot of leeway to basically do whatever they want with form 1 cans. If someone chooses to fight it in court, it would be interesting to see how it plays out. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Yeah its happened before. I know several years back one or two people submitted an eform 1 to build a machinegun and were approved (now the site won't even let you apply). ATF eventually saw they screwed up and it was a battle, but ATF won. A member on here got approved to build a form 1 frag grenade. I think he has battled the ATF a few times because they keep saying he can't have it anymore or some BS. I believe he still has it. Member Ben was the first that came to mind on this. I feel like if they could just revoke f1s, they would and then seize it. Given how easy it would be to jam people up by revoking their f1s, I'm sure they didn't just wake up this morning and think it up. The MGs they could at least hide under the hughes amendment to have some basis for, and claim the issuance of the tax stamp was an accident. Yeah no doubt, I thought the same too until very recently. I really think key to all of this is the vague definition of a silencer. It gives them a lot of leeway to basically do whatever they want with form 1 cans. If someone chooses to fight it in court, it would be interesting to see how it plays out. Someone should introduce a law into congress defining a silencer as a completely assembled, functioning device that makes a gunshot completely inaudible. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:10:42 PM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Where are you seeing "mass rejection"? How could they already know what you have in your possession? You can file a form 1 with no parts at all. This right here, I'm seeing one rejection letter |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:10:49 PM EST
[#24]
Nothing surprises me anymore.
By that definition you can never make a form 1 can, because anything you intended to use is an unregistered silencer part. I hate these fucking cunts Quote HistoryQuoted: This right here, I'm seeing one rejection letter Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Where are you seeing "mass rejection"? How could they already know what you have in your possession? You can file a form 1 with no parts at all. This right here, I'm seeing one rejection letter Many people reporting this on r/NFA. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:14:03 PM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Don't forget that a shoe string can be an unregistered machine machinegun. If they say so... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: hmmm interesting so a block of steel or metal pipe IS a silencer just from INTENT? Don't forget that a shoe string can be an unregistered machine machinegun. If they say so... https://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/2010/01/25/shoestring-machine-gun/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:14:57 PM EST
[#26]
Time for letters to pro 2A senators and congress critters?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:16:03 PM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I’m a cop. I don’t have a pending form 1 but I’ve thought about it. How do I arrest myself? I want to do it right the first time. Do I handcuff myself to my bed and email ask the experts? First, you have to shoot your dog. If you don't have a dog, shoot the neighbor's dog. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:17:28 PM EST
[#28]
Damn what about guys that can actually machine parts, have machines, and bar stock laying around?
LMFAO ATF can go eat a bag of dicks. I don't even own a suppressor. I do however own the knowledge of how to use Mastercam, solid works, and being a machinist. Fuck them. At the minimum SBR's and Suppressor's need to be taken off the NFA. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:18:07 PM EST
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Someone should introduce a law into congress defining a silencer as a completely assembled, functioning device that makes a gunshot completely inaudible. Completely? Such a device does not exist. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:18:08 PM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: FBATFE. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:18:24 PM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This right here, I'm seeing one rejection letter Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Where are you seeing "mass rejection"? How could they already know what you have in your possession? You can file a form 1 with no parts at all. This right here, I'm seeing one rejection letter I got the exact same "letter" at the end of my form 1 application today. Many others in the Silencer sub forum. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:19:22 PM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Completely? Such a device does not exist. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Someone should introduce a law into congress defining a silencer as a completely assembled, functioning device that makes a gunshot completely inaudible. Completely? Such a device does not exist. I think that's his point! |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:20:31 PM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Someone should introduce a law into congress defining a silencer as a completely assembled, functioning device that makes a gunshot completely inaudible. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Yeah its happened before. I know several years back one or two people submitted an eform 1 to build a machinegun and were approved (now the site won't even let you apply). ATF eventually saw they screwed up and it was a battle, but ATF won. A member on here got approved to build a form 1 frag grenade. I think he has battled the ATF a few times because they keep saying he can't have it anymore or some BS. I believe he still has it. Member Ben was the first that came to mind on this. I feel like if they could just revoke f1s, they would and then seize it. Given how easy it would be to jam people up by revoking their f1s, I'm sure they didn't just wake up this morning and think it up. The MGs they could at least hide under the hughes amendment to have some basis for, and claim the issuance of the tax stamp was an accident. Yeah no doubt, I thought the same too until very recently. I really think key to all of this is the vague definition of a silencer. It gives them a lot of leeway to basically do whatever they want with form 1 cans. If someone chooses to fight it in court, it would be interesting to see how it plays out. Someone should introduce a law into congress defining a silencer as a completely assembled, functioning device that makes a gunshot completely inaudible. They did H.R.95 - Hearing Protection Act S.49 - Firearms Owners' Protection Act |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:20:40 PM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Completely? Such a device does not exist. Viable microstamping technology doesnt exist either but that doesnt stop the state of california from mandating it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:21:07 PM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think their strategy is "Fuck the law, let the gun people fight it in court." Thats the MO for this administration. Use agencies to do whatever the fuck they want without any regard for the Constitution or the Administrative Procedures Act and let the victims of their stupidity and laziness deal with it. "Eviction moratorium? Sure, that sounds good. Let the ah...[pulls random card from the alphabet agency deck] ..yeah, the CDC ...they can issue it and the landlords can fight it out." "Vax mandate? Sure, that sounds good too. Let ummm...[pulls another random card from the alphabet agency deck] ..yeah, OSHA ...they can issue it and let employers and employees fight it out." |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:21:20 PM EST
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This right here, I'm seeing one rejection letter It’s all over the internet today with hundreds posting they were denied. Heck get out of GD and go into the form silencer tech discussion |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:21:33 PM EST
[#37]
So the new 80% rules are gonna cover silencers I guess?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:21:59 PM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This right here, I'm seeing one rejection letter Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Where are you seeing "mass rejection"? How could they already know what you have in your possession? You can file a form 1 with no parts at all. This right here, I'm seeing one rejection letter Lots of people got these rejections today. You are seeing one because that is all the OP provided as an example..imagine that lol https://www.ar15.com/forums/Armory/eForm-1-denied/55-533248/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Form1/comments/t3pb10/can_someone_help_me_make_sense_of_this_i_filed/ https://www.reddit.com/r/NFA/comments/t3s0or/form_1_mass_disapproval_thread/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:22:13 PM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Time for letters to pro 2A senators and congress critters? What good would that do? Maybe they can file an utterly useless bill. It won't stop unless the courts put a stop to it, and that seems unlikely at best. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:22:50 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Completely? Such a device does not exist. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Someone should introduce a law into congress defining a silencer as a completely assembled, functioning device that makes a gunshot completely inaudible. Completely? Such a device does not exist. Exactly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:23:44 PM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Completely? Such a device does not exist. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Someone should introduce a law into congress defining a silencer as a completely assembled, functioning device that makes a gunshot completely inaudible. Completely? Such a device does not exist. I think thats the idea. The only thing regulated as a silencer is something that is impossible to make. Everything else is unrestricted
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:23:52 PM EST
[#42]
nuts
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:25:43 PM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think thats the idea. The only thing regulated as a silencer is something that is impossible to make. Everything else is unrestricted Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Someone should introduce a law into congress defining a silencer as a completely assembled, functioning device that makes a gunshot completely inaudible. Completely? Such a device does not exist. I think thats the idea. The only thing regulated as a silencer is something that is impossible to make. Everything else is unrestricted |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:26:36 PM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Exactly. The regulated thing would not exist therefore suppressors would be out of the NFA. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Someone should introduce a law into congress defining a silencer as a completely assembled, functioning device that makes a gunshot completely inaudible. Completely? Such a device does not exist. I think thats the idea. The only thing regulated as a silencer is something that is impossible to make. Everything else is unrestricted I believe it would be more accurate to say silencers would stay in the NFA, but suppressors would be fair game haha |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:28:55 PM EST
[#45]
So they were told to get clean the backlog because it made them look bad as they go into the arm brace regulation somthey mass denied thousands of applications to clear the backlog?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:31:40 PM EST
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think thats the idea. The only thing regulated as a silencer is something that is impossible to make. Everything else is unrestricted The constant quest for increased quietude would enter an incredible arms race until Jesse James debuts his new dildonator 5000 super silencer that reverses universal entropy and generates negative decibel readings. 500 ATF agents who have been waiting for that moment suddenly materialize and haul him off to prison for designing a silencer that is actually silent. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:37:05 PM EST
[#47]
Uggghhhh. Perhaps having communist motherfuckers running things means the agency could be expected to look for ways to fuck you over?
Quick. Ask permission harder and with more reverence. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:39:28 PM EST
[#48]
So when is the pistol brace ruling coming out. Same logic will apply... You can not manufacture and SBR out of a braced pistol because the braced pistol is already an SBR...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:40:40 PM EST
[#49]
What a disgusting organization.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 7:40:55 PM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How do they know you have or will buy parts? My Form1 was approved on 12/30 after 14 days. Mr ATF!! 
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
