Do you build or assemble rifles?

[Sugarbug]

I've heard complaints from a few people about anyone other than smiths using the term "build."

So if you're putting an AR together from components, do you say you're building an AR? To me, that seems to be the accepted verbiage, but there are some who whine about it. "You're not building anything. You're assembling something from already completed parts."

Personally, I'll continue to use BUILD as it is widely understood.

What's your take on it? Do you cringe when you see someone say they are building a rifle?

FWIW:

build
bild/Submit
verb

1. construct (something, typically something large) by putting parts or material together over a period of time.

 

[kyhuntclub]

Yes it bugs me to hear people your the term "building a rifle". Unless you are cambering, headspacing, etc your are not building nothing in my book. You are just a part assembly man.

 

[Killswitch Engage]

Even if your chambering and head spacing your not building if that's your parameters. Did you build the barrel, stock, action, trigger etc or are you fitting them together and assembling? Why people get wrapped up on this stuff boggles me. Who gives a shit either way?

 

[bodywerks]

There's more to a rifle "build" than just threading a tenon and chambering a barrel.
Yes, my gunsmith did most of the lathe work on this rifle, but I made the bolt knob, replaced the bolt head, modified the baffle originally designed to stop the bolt for 223 so that it would cycle 260 rounds, and did all the polishing/modifying of the cocking mechanism to reduce bolt lift. I also did all the stock mods (opened up barrel channel, installed adjustable cheek and butt) and bedded the action. So yes, i think i played an important part in the entirety of this rifle build:

IMO, if all you are doing is installing nuts, bolts, and drift pins, etc then yes, you are merely assembling a rifle. If you are crafting anything to make the rifle whole (sanding, gluing filling, milling, lathing) then you are building a rifle...
PCR/XLR/TAC338 http://i813.photobucket.com/albums/zz53/bodywerks/IMG_20130816_111453_255_zps1b498f0d.jpg http://i813.photobucket.com/albums/zz53/bodywerks/IMG_20130816_111325_951_zps290ebdd0.jpg

 

[Sugarbug]

I think it's a bit nit-picky to really care. The definition of build is to "assemble from parts over time." A broad definition and clearly applicable.

Call it build, call it assemble, whatever you want. No one says "I'm building an AR" and means to say that they're milling the rifle from a block of steel and aluminum...

 

[smschulz]

It's ridiculous to quibble over semantics.
Where do you draw the line?
Do you have to install the barrel extension or just check for headspace?
Do you need to cut the rifling yourself, turn the blank, mine the steel?
C'mon.

 

[Deadshot2]

It's ridiculous to quibble over semantics.
Where do you draw the line?
Do you have to install the barrel extension or just check for headspace?
Do you need to cut the rifling yourself, turn the blank, mine the steel?
C'mon.

I tend to think along these lines too. I don't even get upset when someone refers to a magazine as a "Clip" or a cartridge as a "bullet". I figure that as long as I can understand what they're saying that's all that's important.

 

[E. Bryant]

Usually we don't go through this shit until the wintertime blues start to set in:

http://www.snipershide.com/shooting/bear-pit/159011-rifle-build-rant.html

Anyways, without jumping into the linguistic semantics, here is where I would suggest drawing the distinction - if you fundamentally alter a preponderance of the components (by cost, number, weight - I don't care), then you are "building".

So on my last couple Rem700 projects, I trued the receiver, fitted a PTG bolt, threaded and chambered the barrel, machined the receiver and scope mount for 8-40 screws, and in the case of the one with a traditional stock (as opposed to a chassis), I filled and redid the stock inlet, and then bedded it. That's making some pretty significant alterations to the majority of the components, so I'd call it a build.

If I spin up a new barrel for one of my AI rifles, that's not a build.

If I put a pre-fit barrel on a Savage and drop it into a stock with a bedding block, probably not a build.

Putting together an AR15 - not a build.

Fitting a new fire control group, grip safety, thumb safety, mainspring housing, ejector, extractor, and sights to my 1911 - kinda on the borderline.

Regardless, at the end of the day, I'm not going to feel all superior about what I can do in a relatively comfortable machine shop with a factory-produced receiver and a rifled blank, because you have this sort of thing happening under far more primitive and challenging conditions:

Gunsmithing in Pakistan - The Firearm Blog

Those muthafuckers are building firearms

 

[Sugarbug]

Usually we don't go through this shit until the wintertime blues start to set in:

http://www.snipershide.com/shooting/bear-pit/159011-rifle-build-rant.html

Anyways, without jumping into the linguistic semantics, here is where I would suggest drawing the distinction - if you fundamentally alter a preponderance of the components (by cost, number, weight - I don't care), then you are "building".

So on my last couple Rem700 projects, I trued the receiver, fitted a PTG bolt, threaded and chambered the barrel, machined the receiver and scope mount for 8-40 screws, and in the case of the one with a traditional stock (as opposed to a chassis), I filled and redid the stock inlet, and then bedded it. That's making some pretty significant alterations to the majority of the components, so I'd call it a build.

If I spin up a new barrel for one of my AI rifles, that's not a build.

If I put a pre-fit barrel on a Savage and drop it into a stock with a bedding block, probably not a build.

Putting together an AR15 - not a build.

Fitting a new fire control group, grip safety, thumb safety, mainspring housing, ejector, extractor, and sights to my 1911 - kinda on the borderline.

Regardless, at the end of the day, I'm not going to feel all superior about what I can do in a relatively comfortable machine shop with a factory-produced receiver and a rifled blank, because you have this sort of thing happening under far more primitive and challenging conditions:

Gunsmithing in Pakistan - The Firearm Blog

Those muthafuckers are building firearms

Rofl. I did a search thinking that there was a thread like that in existence somewhere on here, but couldn't find it. Searching "build" brings up pretty much every firearm related thread on the hide... kind of proves my point.

 

[pawprint2]

In real life-the builder is the guy that manufactures the part of the weapon that makes it a small arm. With a few exceptions-one off home builds etc., the Manufacturer of the firearm has a BATF License allowing him to build firearms, Remington is a good example. Small shops that build only actions, would be another, as the action (bolt action in this example) is considered a firearm, usually a rifle. Federal tax is paid on the new weapon, usually given a serial number and the name of the mfg is etched on the weapon (or on a piece of metal attached to a polymer frame, as in a Glock. All the regs can be found via the BATFE. Those that modify weapons are not paying the excise tax once again, as in the eyes of the law, it is still the same weapon with some new stuff added. If you can buy it without ID, mail order etc. it is not a firearm. Those adding barrels, stocks, triggers, sights, cool paint jobs, etc. are not building or manufacturing small arms, they are modifying legally manufactured firearms, one built by a licensed mfg, and the fed tax has already been paid. Of course this isn't my def, but rather that of the Fed, those with the power to declare what is and isn't a firearm-and what class firearm, what is and isn't a legal modification etc. This Def may in fact change in Mexico, or North Korea, but here in the US, I believe the Fed is the authority on what is and isn't. There are those that like the term, build, I guess it sounds macho, or more so than, modification, or parts adding, etc. Those that like to use the word "build" are very likely the same guys that add some wheels, headers, maybe some heads to a old Camero and call it "building" a Hot-Rod. Smoke pole, shooting a few pills, tactical, etc., are also very likely the type of words pouring off their tongues, but hey, that's why it comes in 31 flavors!

 

[Jackimho]

I think it has to do with the whole process of "building" the rifle, here's mine:

First I design what I'm planning on "building" with old fashioned crayons and construction paper. I'm not a very good artist, so once I have an initial plan on paper, I spend a few hours cutting the parts out of paper and use glue sticks to construct a non-functioning prototype. I also have an insatiable taste for glue sticks (especially the purple ones), so I usually don't have enough glue to finish the prototype so I abondon that. I then whittle the parts out of wood and try to dry fit it all together. Again, I'm about as good at whittling as I am an artist, so nothing ever fits, but at least I try. I then go to the computer to design it using AutoCAD, but that's really hard, so I give up after 20 minutes or so.

At that point, I've exhausted my design options, so I just jump right into the "building" of the rifle. Since I only have a drill and a few drill bits, I usually end up with a block of steel with a few holes in it - not deep holes mind you, those take a long time to drill and I don't have all day. After that, I usually take a nap, because I've worked pretty hard and I deserve it. When I wake up, I have a power snack of Doritos and two cans of Red Bull, then jump right back into "building".

From there, I give up on fabricating my own parts and just buy pre-built (fabricated) parts off the internet and assemble them into a functioning rifle myself. Also, now that I've "assembled" a second rifle, I feel that fits the definition of "manufacturing" my own rifles because I could just keep building more and more, so I just tell people that I "manufacture" my own when people ask me. In my opinion, anything short of that doesn't count as "building" a rifle. Even the smallest child could sneeze on a pile of parts and end up with a functioning rifle, but that doesn't mean he's earned the right to say he "built" it, that's just outrageous.

 

[DarnYankeeUSMC]

Do you build a house or assemble a house?
Under the hood of your car/truck/whatever is it an engine or a motor? if you say engine you had best not put motor oil in it.
There are plenty of things to get mentally tweaked over but potatoes and tomatoes will lead to a shortened life.

 

[armorpl8chikn]

I use the term, at the same time I hate the term. Guys who put a stock and a scope on a rifle and call it a build....those are the ones who piss me off the most. Everything else is relative. Technically I guess I didn't build my house, if putting together pieces until you have a complete unit isn't building. I think it is at some point a futile exercise in semantics. Then again, I hate people who hired contractors, and tell everyone "WE" built our own house.

 

[Parsons]

My problem is back home in WV you have all these guys that say they "build" guns. Well in reality they are just putting a lower parts kit into an AR receiver and going around telling everyone they build guns. This drives my nuts. An AR is a lego gun to me. Anyone can build one and make it shoot. Yes there are somethings that a lot of people that just throw them together don't do that may or may not really increase accuracy.

 

[Nisils14]

Build, assemble, construct, put together, jerry rig, jimmy up, etc. Who cares? That's like saying So and So didn't build an engine because they didn't go to the foundry and forge every part them self. I just built an AR, but it wouldn't make me a gunsmith. Even though some projects can lack difficulty, it doesn't make it any less of a "build" imo. I think parts selection, assembling and designing in some cases is all part of building something.

 

[Killer Spade 13]

So, if you buy lumber that's already been cut to size, shingles that have already been made, and carpet that has already been milled, you put it all together in the form of a house, have you not "built" a house?

According to some philosophies, one must cut down the tree, saw it into finished, make the nails from raw steel, etc. in order to say that one had "built" a house.

 

[woojos]

I'd call it a build if I was doing something where if I screwed up, I'd have to rebuy parts or start over. Generally this would include cutting metal or wood or other materials.

Assembly is putting the finished pieces together. If you screw up, you just try again.

 

[Cartman]

<iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/iMq73envOKU" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" width="560"></iframe>

___________________________________________________________________

 

[Killer Spade 13]

I'd call it a build if I was doing something where if I screwed up, I'd have to rebuy parts or start over. Generally this would include cutting metal or wood or other materials.

Assembly is putting the finished pieces together. If you screw up, you just try again.

You COULD cross-thread a bolt or screw.

 

[Switchblade]

Build = Work to fabricate custom parts or to redesign old parts to make them better

Assemble = What most here do, essentially bolt it on or put it together

 

[Changed]

You build a house. The components are manufactured.
You build a rifle with manufactured components. If you manufactured some of the components you still built the rifle.

 

[ORD]

You know...if people would spend half as much time actually SHOOTING as opposed to debating the relatively meaningless semantics of whether a rifle is "built" or whether it is "assembled"...the world would be a far better place and there would be a whole lot more "precision marksmen" among us!





Rant off...please continue with your debate!

 

[milo 2.0]

You know...if people would spend half as much time actually SHOOTING as opposed to debating the relatively meaningless semantics of whether a rifle is "built" or whether it is "assembled"...the world would be a far better place and there would be a whole lot more "precision marksmen" among us!

Rant off...please continue with your debate!

That's funny. Now let's discuss, custom, semi-custom, and how switching parts designates custom.

 

[Deadshot2]

You know...if people would spend half as much time actually SHOOTING as opposed to debating the relatively meaningless semantics of whether a rifle is "built" or whether it is "assembled"...the world would be a far better place and there would be a whole lot more "precision marksmen" among us!





Rant off...please continue with your debate!

There's an ammunition shortage don't you know. That's why the "build/assemble" discussion started early this year. Less ammo = Less range time and more time to talk unimportant shit.

 

[ORD]

There's an ammunition shortage don't you know. That's why the "build/assemble" discussion started early this year. Less ammo = Less range time and more time to talk unimportant shit.

If "an ammunition shortage" is the true measure of why so-called "unimportant shit" has been discussed more frequently (on the Hide and elsewhere), then I'd humbly suggest that the ammo shortage has been ongoing for FAR longer than earlier this year when the initial discussion started (like maybe a couple years or more now)!!

 

[Graham]

I don't build, or assemble. I call Moon, tell him what I want to accomplish, and he sends me a rifle.

 

[skinnj1]

Meh- I 've "built " ar's like legos and ive made ar's where I made almost everything myself http://www.snipershide.com/shooting...s/114195-home-made-billet-ar.html#post1662225 , if your happy with what you get at the end, good on you

there is another billet reciever in the picture that didn't know it yet...

 

[pawprint2]

So, if you buy lumber that's already been cut to size, shingles that have already been made, and carpet that has already been milled, you put it all together in the form of a house, have you not "built" a house?

According to some philosophies, one must cut down the tree, saw it into finished, make the nails from raw steel, etc. in order to say that one had "built" a house.

I would say in your above example, yes indeed you have build a house!! Great analogy, by the way! However; I believe you can build a house without a contractors license etc. in many locations in the US. Kind of like making Whiskey, or Explosives etc. Firearms require a special License, and just like Whiskey they have a Fed Tax, I'm still holding strong with the Fed Law on this, those that have the license (with a few exceptions-one of a kind home built etc, see the regs) and pay the tax have manufactured-or built a firearm, those not requiring and new Fed Tax, just modified an existing-tax having been paid on it-firearm, thus they "modified", not manufactured (built the fire arm). If the BATFE along with the IRS suddenly appeared with papers demanding the payment of firearms excise tax on every firearms "built" by gun smiths(for the past 7 years), you would hear in loud screams, how they are only modifying existing firearms, and they do not owe the tax, nor do their customers. In North Korea the North Korean govt. can decide what is a firearm, but here in the USA, I believe our govt still has that power (unless we've made a deal with UN that I'm not aware of). Finally, here in Tennessee, home of great shooting and great whiskey, I believe if you took a bottle of Jack and poured it into a fancy-crystal server, while you've modified the package, you would not be the whiskey maker, and I don't think you'd be charged with mfg of illegal alcohol. Bartenders Mix drinks, they do not mfg Spirts, even though they take existing parts and mix them together. I'm fairly sure no bartender in Tennessee is required to have a license to mfg Spirts (distillers license), the (Fed Tax) was already paid by the true manufacturer-therefore he [the bartender] is just a modifier, not a manufacturer.

 

[Creature]

As far as ARs are concerned, if you instal the barrel, delta ring assembly, handguard, and parts kits in the upper and lower I would consider that "building." If you are attaching a upper to lower, NOT building.

 

[skinnj1]

Pawprint 2 - please see link to my post above, ANYONE not prohibited from owning a firearm can make a receiver w/o license ( unlike whiskey) they just can't make it with the intent to sell it as per GCA 1968, it is also a FAQ on BATFE website.

 

[DarnYankeeUSMC]

Do they build them at the factory or assemble them? Po tay toe Pah tah toe. If the parts are manufactured off site then they are assembling them?

 

[pawprint2]

Do they build them at the factory or assemble them? Po tay toe Pah tah toe. If the parts are manufactured off site then they are assembling them?

Yes, that is correct, the manufacturer is licensed to do so, the tax is only paid once. Hope this helps. In the post regarding a house being "built" from 100% precut/fitted parts, the question was asked, "did you build a house", as you know I 100% agreed that you built a house, however, in most locations you now pay a tax on a building (property tax) that was different from the undeveloped land. if on the other hand purchased all the parts and stored them on your property, there would not be a new property tax on a building, they had to be assembled. Each form of tax has its own guide lines, firearms are different. In my town for example: you will pay one time for a sewer hook up, on a new home, if you have a plumbing problem, or make alterations to your home, you are NOT charged for a new sewer hook up, as you have already paid for it once. My point is, the builder or manufacturer under the US law pays the excise tax, it is not charged again A new paintjob, or trigger job, or when a new barrel is installed, no federal tax in levied, as these are nothing more (in the eyes of the BATF)as a modification to an legally owned, and tax having been paid (with the few exceptions like the home build) on the receiver weapon. If one listens to some of the posters, their "builds" should include a new tax, and a license to mfg! I hope they are not listened to-or a license to mfg and a new excise tax could be required to paint skulls on a rifle, or put on a new bolt handle, to install a new trigger etc., please don't give the gun grabbing taxers an excuse! Manufacturer (builders) pay the tax, once, everything else is a modification, or assembly.

 

[pawprint2]

Pawprint 2 - please see link to my post above, ANYONE not prohibited from owning a firearm can make a receiver w/o license ( unlike whiskey) they just can't make it with the intent to sell it as per GCA 1968, it is also a FAQ on BATFE website.

I did mention this in post #10 of this string. BTW, those that build a receiver at home (legally) are in my opinion BUILDING a firearm! And, if you look at the work done by some of the guys on this board (DIY) section, you wish you could buy as good as some of these guys make! True gun builders. I get a kick out of the "I'm announcing a build!!!!", I'm going to screw in a new tube to my BLANK receiver and screw on a new BLANK trigger, then drop the whole thing into a BLANK stock, I really have never considered this a build, as the receiver is the firearm (unless the law has changed) everything else is a modification.

 

[kraigWY]

So if I buy 6 model 70 actions, add barrels, chamber & head space, add a stock, sights, etc, do I put it together or build it, or what different does it make?

Just a couple

 

[skinnj1]

Yes, that is correct, the manufacturer is licensed to do so, the tax is only paid once. Hope this helps. In the post regarding a house being "built" from 100% precut/fitted parts, the question was asked, "did you build a house", as you know I 100% agreed that you built a house, however, in most locations you now pay a tax on a building (property tax) that was different from the undeveloped land. if on the other hand purchased all the parts and stored them on your property, there would not be a new property tax on a building, they had to be assembled. Each form of tax has its own guide lines, firearms are different. In my town for example: you will pay one time for a sewer hook up, on a new home, if you have a plumbing problem, or make alterations to your home, you are NOT charged for a new sewer hook up, as you have already paid for it once. My point is, the builder or manufacturer under the US law pays the excise tax, it is not charged again A new paintjob, or trigger job, or when a new barrel is installed, no federal tax in levied, as these are nothing more (in the eyes of the BATF)as a modification to an legally owned, and tax having been paid (with the few exceptions like the home build) on the receiver weapon. If one listens to some of the posters, their "builds" should include a new tax, and a license to mfg! I hope they are not listened to-or a license to mfg and a new excise tax could be required to paint skulls on a rifle, or put on a new bolt handle, to install a new trigger etc., please don't give the gun grabbing taxers an excuse! Manufacturer (builders) pay the tax, once, everything else is a modification, or assembly.

Not so much,several of your posts go on about FET with not all of the info being correct (I'll redily concede the Tech Branch has changed their position on this several times so they have both agreed and disagreed with you...). Excise tax can an does get charged more than once. See TTB | FAET FAQs for a better understanding of excise taxes or http://www.ttb.gov/applications/pdf/gunsmith-letter-revised.pdf.Currently, if a gunsmith works on a M700 rem and fits a stock and a Krieger barrel to it and refinishes it may or may not be a FET taxable manufacturing event- depends on who buys/supplies the parts (gunsmith or customer) and even if gunsmith buys it all (tax eligible) there is a 50 firearm exemption- the BATFE has byzantine rulings and has often left those in the industry confused with what damn license they need even... ATF's definition of taxable events centers around reselling, most of the people who proclaim "builds" on this sight are exempt from your or the BATFE's logic.


FWIW to this discussion -I've got old DPMS catalogs where they would not sell customers parts kits plus lowers in the same order because that would be a FET incurring event in their opinion.

KraigWY- I don't care what you call it, I like model 70's, especially match rifles....

In my example above I machined from raw materials the upper, the lower, the stock, the hand gaurd, the barrel nut, and turned and chambered the barrel blank is it less of a "build" cause I bought a bcg, gas block, gast tube, barrel extension, buffer and spring, when does it stop being a "build"- FWIW this is a damn sight higher percentage of parts made by one entity than most any commercially manufactured AR- subcontractors are the rule of the day in this portion of the industry

 

[pawprint2]

Please be more specific, what part of my "several posts" regarding the paying of the FET is wrong? And could you give me an example in the US code where the excise tax would be paid TWICE, in other words, double? Where can I find info regarding the gunsmith needing to pay a new (essentially doubling the original fee) FET because he fitted a barrel, or painted some skulls, or what ever, to a Rem 700, where the TAX has been paid? The tax is only paid once. Yes, there are exceptions, such as converting a firearm to a class III weapon (with the administrators okay, with letter). I have also pointed out, from the start there are other exceptions, such as home built etc., however; for ease of discussion, and keeping to the point of the conversation, is painting a stock, putting on a bipod, screwing on a new barrel, putting on an after market trigger etc. manufacturing a weapon? I think not, the BATFE thinks not, if so there would be a new FET tax, you can count on it. Over the years, some sellers have passed the FET on to the dealers, as a separate charge, this was listed on their invoice, it still boils down to only one legal entity is required to pay the tax. If you are building a firearm, at home, you can and usually will be tax exempt, however; if you are building firearms for sale, you'll need a license to mfg, and the FET will be collected. If you are painting rifles, installing triggers etc., I am not aware of a single ruling that requires these businesses to pay a new FET (again doubling the original), or even to acquire a license to manufacture. But as you have a better understanding of the current laws, I'd love to see the specific statues and case law. Nonetheless, are you saying many of the guys on this board are in fact breaking federal law, subject to prison and fines for what they often call a "build"? I hope you're wrong about this, as I'm sure if faced with criminal charges (maybe even using posts on the hide as proof, as in, "you even posted you were undertaking a build") the "builders" would suddenly change there minds, and agree they are just modifying an existing, legal firearm. Now, those that are selling there "custom built" rifles could really have a problem, as they are entering into the stream of commerce, not one off home built. Again, I hope you're wrong. But if you're right-a lot of guys could be in trouble!

 

[pawprint2]

So if I buy 6 model 70 actions, add barrels, chamber & head space, add a stock, sights, etc, do I put it together or build it, or what different does it make?

Just a couple

If you ever sell one, and you believe you are the manufacturer, I believe you need a license to manufacture firearms (building to sell), and if you believe you are the manufacturer, and have the license, and pay the FET, then yes you are the builder, otherwise you have only modified an existing rifle.

 

[Deadshot2]

I would say in your above example, yes indeed you have build a house!! Great analogy, by the way! However; I believe you can build a house without a contractors license etc. in many locations in the US. Kind of like making Whiskey, or Explosives etc. Firearms require a special License, and just like Whiskey they have a Fed Tax, I'm still holding strong with the Fed Law on this, those that have the license (with a few exceptions-one of a kind home built etc, see the regs) and pay the tax have manufactured-or built a firearm, those not requiring and new Fed Tax, just modified an existing-tax having been paid on it-firearm, thus they "modified", not manufactured (built the fire arm). If the BATFE along with the IRS suddenly appeared with papers demanding the payment of firearms excise tax on every firearms "built" by gun smiths(for the past 7 years), you would hear in loud screams, how they are only modifying existing firearms, and they do not owe the tax, nor do their customers. In North Korea the North Korean govt. can decide what is a firearm, but here in the USA, I believe our govt still has that power (unless we've made a deal with UN that I'm not aware of). Finally, here in Tennessee, home of great shooting and great whiskey, I believe if you took a bottle of Jack and poured it into a fancy-crystal server, while you've modified the package, you would not be the whiskey maker, and I don't think you'd be charged with mfg of illegal alcohol. Bartenders Mix drinks, they do not mfg Spirts, even though they take existing parts and mix them together. I'm fairly sure no bartender in Tennessee is required to have a license to mfg Spirts (distillers license), the (Fed Tax) was already paid by the true manufacturer-therefore he [the bartender] is just a modifier, not a manufacturer.

If I'm not mistaken, one can "build" a firearm from scratch without any permission from the Gov. That is as long as they do so for their own use ONLY. Only time one needs to get the .gov's permission is when the builder wants to sell it. Then you're required to fill out the Form 1 (permission slip) and assign a serial number to it.

You also can't use 10 or more imported parts if it's a semi or shotgun.

 

[kraigWY]

I'm not into selling rifles, I have traded a gun or two, but never traded a gun I didn't regret getting rid of, no more, I wont sell or trade a gun again.

As to my Model 70s, I make a thousand yard rifle for a couple friends and fellow guard shooters, and made a 338 WM to trade for to a neighbor for a motorcycle. I have the rest. Made my wife a 243, its one of the most accurate rifle I have. The other three I put together for me.

So I'm not worried about ATF coming after me. I'm not a dealer or a gun smith. I'm a shooter that just likes Winchesters.

Still looking for another Model 70 action for a 260. Got a good candidate, I Model 70 AMU target rifle in 308 I got from the CMP Auction. But the way it shoots I couldn't justify re-barreling it to 260. Guess you can't have too many 308 target rifles.

But I'll find one. I'll get my Model 70 in 260 before I head to the big rifle range in the sky.

 

[Graham]

Just an observation, to no one in particular, that some people do more talking and posting than listening and reading. All academic, really, since the answer is found on the ATF website and you don't even have to get into the text of the rulings.

 

[skinnj1]

Pawprint2-

DID YOU READ the BATFE tech branch letter to gunsmith's and manufacturers I listed above TTB | FAET FAQs
and the BATFE tech Branch FAQ TTB | FAET FAQs ??? It's all there.
there is several examples of tax being paid twice, ANYTIME a firearm is "manufactured" (Value added) by their definition past a bare receiver (bare receivers are exempt) FET is incurred, see pages 8,9,11 of the letter- all have had FET paid by a manufacturer in fact page 2 of the letter specifically states

" When existing parts of a firearm are replaced, refinished or repaired, no
manufacture takes place. However, if parts are added to a frame, receiver
or action, such alterations are generally found to be manufacture.
Additionally, when custom firearms are produced from new or used
firearms acquired by a gunsmith, as when surplus military firearms are
“sporterized” and the custom firearms are a new and different type of
firearm, then manufacture has taken place.
 Cutting off part of the barrel of a firearm is, of itself, an act of manufacture."

Kraig IS NOT liable for tax because he built it for himself he was not involved in commerce- if he later sells it no tax incurred
AGAIN REREAD the links or go straight to 27 CFR parts 53 and 70 and 26 U.S.C Sec 5801-5872 , It's the law wether you or I like it or agree with it, I would hardly consider a Dealer/Gunsmith who buys a 5R and shortens it to 18" and threads it 5/8x24" a "Manufacturer" but the BATFE does again read the dang links I have provided, straight from the source.

I am done discussing any other inaccuracies with you till you become more educated on the subject- I'm out.

 

[pawprint2]

Actually, you haven't read your own source, it depends on who the manufacturer is. If the firearm is supplied by the customer, the customer is the new "manufacturer" or builder in your example, if he uses it prior to selling no FET is incurred.
2. If I perform gunsmithing, when is my customer considered the manufacturer?


The gunsmith is considered the manufacturer if:

The customer is considered the manufacturer if:


He or she alters a firearm in connection with a sale to the customer (however, the gunsmith's alteration of the firearm must constitute manufacturing).
•The customer supplies a firearm to the gunsmith for modification; or





•The gunsmith sells a firearm to the customer and makes alterations to it as separate transactions.


3. If my customer is considered the manufacturer, when is he or she liable for FAET?


The customer is liable for FAET if:

The customer is not liable for FAET if:


• He or she sells the firearm before using it; or

He or she uses the firearm for personal use after delivery from the gunsmith.


• He or she uses the firearm in the operation of his or her business.



Once again the is a difference between "home built" even if it is done by a smith for you at your direction, and a manufacturer.

Once again, if you are not a home builder, but rather a builder/manufacturer you must have a manufacturers license, and pay the FET. If you are replacing barrels, triggers, new paint, you are not a manufacturer, but rather modifying an existing weapon. Those making their own action, are in my opinion building a firearm (home builders) and would be free from the FET. If you can mail order it, for example: an AR upper, it is not a firearm, if you must meet the state and federal requirements for the purchase-it is a firearm. No requirements for a can of paint, barrel, or trigger....go figure.
If one studies the regs, reads and educated themselves a little more, you find that an individual is a mfg, and is liable for FET if they don't use the weapon prior to sale, without regard to how long they have owned it, or their intentions when they modified the weapon. For example a man purchases 7 Mod 70's, makes major modifications, to almost every part, does not use one of them, but rather trades or sells it, he is in fact in violation of the law, because he entered into commerce, regardless of what he was thinking about when he purchased the rifles to start with. Home built weapons, for ones own use, have many exceptions. Not building at ones home, but home built for ones own use.

 

[skinnj1]

pawprint2 - Hopefully, your at least past the point of thinkin FET is only incurred once as I have used the BATFE own examples as to how FET does occur again and again. You still fail to get the basic understanding that both an individual and a liscensed manufacturer can legally do things that in the BATFE's eyes constitute "manufactureing" only the liscensee is responsible for FET. Look back at the drivel you have posted earlier in this thread :

Those adding barrels, stocks, triggers, sights, cool paint jobs, etc. are not building or manufacturing small arms, they are modifying legally manufactured firearms, one built by a licensed mfg, and the fed tax has already been paid.

Reconcile this with the letter I referenced....

I've been around long enough to remember when the BATFE arbitrarily decided to rule that "cerakoting" a gun was "manufacturing- luckily that was rescinded pretty quick.

It should be obvious to anyone reading our posts who knows what they talk about and who doesn't.....

 

[skinnj1]

Once again the is a difference between "home built" even if it is done by a smith for you at your direction, and a manufacturer.

BS plain and simple their is no "home built" listed anywere in ther regs, laws, or rulings simply a liscensed manufacturer or an individual who manufactures under a situation not requiring a liscense or FET. See page 10 secenario 3 in letter "SCENARIO #3
X
Sells barrel and action to customer.
CUSTOMER
Supplies barrel and action.
A
Adds parts to barrel and action and assembles a complete firearm for a fee.
CUSTOMER
Receives complete firearm for personal use.
A is not liable for FAET since A has not sold a firearm to customer.
Customer is the manufacturer but not liable for FAET since it is for
personal use.
(Based on Internal Revenue Service Ruling 58-586 and Title 27, Code of
Federal Regulations, Section 53.112(b))." it doesn't call the person a "homebuilder" it calls them a MANUFACTURER even though the gunsmith did the work

 

[pawprint2]

Interesting! So, I guess if you buy a legal firearm, and purchase it legally, then take it home and modify it, can you remove the original manufactures name and serial number, as you are now the mfg? Joe Schitz buys a new (legal purchase) Smith 686 4 inch, cuts it off to a 2 inch, paints it, etc, can he now remove all of the serial numbers and mfg engravings, replace it Schitz #1, use it a few times then sell it? As the new mfg does have his name one the weapon, "Schitz", would this be okay? If not, then removing the mfgs name and numbers would mean you are removing the mfg's name and numbers. How does this work?

 

[skinnj1]

Interesting! So, I guess if you buy a legal firearm, and purchase it legally, then take it home and modify it, can you remove the original manufactures name and serial number, as you are now the mfg? Joe Schitz buys a new (legal purchase) Smith 686 4 inch, cuts it off to a 2 inch, paints it, etc, can he now remove all of the serial numbers and mfg engravings, replace it Schitz #1, use it a few times then sell it? As the new mfg does have his name one the weapon, "Schitz", would this be okay? If not, then removing the mfgs name and numbers would mean you are removing the mfg's name and numbers. How does this work?

OBSFUCATION. The BATFE tech branch has already ruled on "which" manufacturers need to put markings on stuff and which ones do not- Hint there is a reason why the lettering is a specific size, depth and contains certain words on GAP's electro-etched markings on a barrel (as some of their activities constitute manufacturing by a liscensee holder) and Kraig is not required to put the samemarkings on his M70 by the same determination even though he is technically the MANUFACTURER also aliebt for personal use in situations not requiring FET.

There is specific rulings where "non-liscensed" manufacturers must mark stuff- example Form 1 can but don't try to tell me a Form one can builder is a "liscensed manufacturer" because BATFE has already ruled them a manufacturer of the can but incapable of leagally repairing a baffel strike on the same can stating only a "liscensed manufacturer" (ie 02/07) can engage in the act of repairing baffels -SEE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN Manaufacturer of the baffels/can and someone who has the proper peices of papers and the requisite BS that goes along with them to repair the same baffel?

You tread on thin ice anytime you get hypothtical with them (BATFE) and ask stupid questions-so I DO NOT RECCOMEND CALLING THE TECH BRANCH" to prove some internet dude wrong,come back to me with rulings contrary to the examples I have listed from any of the common sources (Bardwell etc) and I'll be very interested in what you had to say.

 

[skinnj1]

Pawprint2 - another way to asnwer your question is to ask a question. Does a 02/07 who fills out the correct form and SBR's a lower have to remove the existing manufacturer's markings/ serial number? NOPE they have to add their's (name and address and they can "reuse the serial # if they so choose. If you or I form one the same lower, we have to because of GCA 1968 also....but by the BATFE's interpetations of USC, CFR,and how much a butterly flaps it's wings in China, we would not have to in your example as while we are technically a "manufacturer" but not one who falls under marking requirements.

 

[pawprint2]

OBSUFUCATION! The answer is quite simple, again the Federal Laws

Removing serial numbers

BTW, the pertinent law is 18 USC, Chapter 44, Section 922(k):
Quote

(k)" It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to transport, ship, or receive, in interstate or foreign commerce, any firearm which has had the importer's or manufacturer's serial number removed, obliterated, or altered or to possess or receive any firearm which has had the importer's or manufacturer's serial number removed, obliterated, or altered and has, at any time, been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce."

I guess after reading the above law, according to you, it would be okay, for Joe Schitz to remove the serial number and mfg name, and replace it with his own, as HE is the manufacturer, and not Smith and Wesson. If is not okay, then Smith remains the mfg. How say you? Or, maybe it's like an electron, it can be in two places at the same time, and in this case the same gun can have two different manufacturers at the same time!

 

[skinnj1]

OBSFUCATION- reread my example on the SBR lower some people are required to place markings under some situations, if others do things that constitute manufacturing they may have to add their's but do not have to remove previous markings-although they can (if they are a liscnsed manufacturer). Other's involved in certan other activities do not have to mark their stuff. I never said you or I coud legally remove markings COMPREHENSION FAIL. Quote where I did.

 

[skinnj1]

Pawprint2- you still have not readdressed the TWICE question or the inaccuracies in the quote I quoted, wnaa keep playing?