On October 8, the Supreme Court listen oral argument at Garland v. Vanderstocka challenge to final rule Effective in 2022, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) redefines and significantly expands the meaning of the terms “firearm” and “firearm frame or receiver.” This is the first of several posts highlighting some of the enlightening court briefs filed in support of respondents who challenged this rule.
The Gun Control Act defines a “firearm” as follows: “(A) any weapon (including a starter gun) that emits a projectile by the action of an explosive, or is designed or may be readily converted to do so; (B) a frame or receiver;” 18 USC § 921(a)(3). ATF regulations from 1968 to 2022 defined “frame or receiver” as “the part of the firearm that provides the housing for the hammer, bolt, or breech block and firing mechanism,” i.e., the main part of the firearm. What attaches the barrel and stock.
The final rule expanded “firearm” to include “a kit of weapon parts designed to fire a projectile by the action of an explosive or that can be readily completed, assembled, restored, or otherwise converted.” . and a “frame or receiver” is defined as “a partially completed, disassembled Redefined to include “frames or receivers that are damaged or non-functional.”
The impetus for these new definitions was the political debate surrounding “ghost guns.” “Ghost gun” is a term used by the government and gun control advocates to refer to civilian firearms made from partially machined raw materials known as “80% receivers.” Processing this precursor material into the actual receiver involves precision drilling, milling and other machinery in metals and polymers using common and uncommon tools to create the actual receiver. Requires processing.
Federal law requires anyone engaged in the business of manufacturing or importing firearms to engrave a serial number on the firearm. Private individuals have always been free to manufacture their own firearms without such federal regulation. The new definition has the effect of making hobbyists subject to federal regulation.
5th Circuit held ATF argued that the definition of “firearm” established by Congress cannot be changed and that the redefinition of “frame or receiver” does not reflect the original common understanding of the term. Therefore, it ruled that the definition was beyond ATF’s authority and was arbitrary and capricious.
Government begins litigation in Supreme Court defense The so-called “[g]Host guns can be built from kits and parts that are widely available and permitted online. Anyone and basic tools and elementary skills Assemble a fully functional firearm Minimum 20 minutes” None of these italicized terms are close to reality.
For a reality check, check out Amici Curiae. easy Submitted by Rick Vasquez, former ATF Acting Firearms Technology Branch Chief, and the Center for Human Freedom.
Vasquez served in the Marine Corps for 21 years, during which time he worked as a gunsmith at a precision weapons factory in Quantico, Virginia. He also served as a gunsmith and firearms instructor for the U.S. Department of State. Most notably, he served as a Firearms Enforcement Officer in the ATF’s Firearms Technology Branch (FTB) from 1999 to 2014. This division determines whether partially machined materials that are later manufactured into firearms qualify as “firearms” under gun control. Activities.
Mr. Vasquez was elected FTB Vice President in 2004 and served as Acting Branch President and Assistant Branch President from 2008 to 2010. He has reviewed and approved hundreds of determinations regarding whether items are “firearms,” the majority of which related to the manufacture of receivers for AR-15-style firearms.
To quote the government summary: vanderstokeVazquez writes:
In reality, “anyone” with “basic tools” and “rudimentary skills” can obtain parts kits and assemble “a fully functional firearm,” much less “a few It can’t be assembled in “minutes”. Even assuming that “anyone” had the necessary tools to build a firearm, it also requires a level of skill, patience, and determination that few non-experts are capable of.
The government is focused on a polymer 80-part kit for Glock-style semi-automatic pistols, but has failed to explain the supposedly simple process. Vasquez outlines step-by-step instructions for building a functioning firearm from this kit of parts. He said, “On their first attempt, non-experts often cannot even get their firearm to work after hours of frustration. Many beginners don’t know where to start.” There is.
The government also does not discuss the complexity of manufacturing an AR-15-style firearm from a parts kit, which is a much more difficult task than manufacturing a Glock-style handgun. Vazquez said, “Machining the fire control cavity, especially in the lower receiver, is a necessary task to complete the unfinished receiver, requiring precision and requiring technical expertise using uncommon tooling.” “It is a painstaking process that requires knowledge.”
Naturally, Vasquez’s explanation is highly technical and may be difficult to understand for non-firearms experts. An overview diagram may be helpful. Nor will I attempt to define every term he uses. But that’s why his brief is so important. The Supreme Court should not be fooled by the government’s unrealistic claim that anyone can make a functioning gun from a kit in minutes. No ordinary person would be able to make it.
First, let’s make a Glock-style handgun. As for the tools needed, Vasquez says, “Most civilians, let alone typical street criminals, don’t have everything on hand.” When the state of California sued the ATF in 2020 for failing to designate various “80 percent” kits of parts as “firearms,” the government argued that tools such as end mills “go beyond the category of common household tools.” “There is,” he emphasized. [California] We have repeatedly characterized it as sufficient to complete this detailed task. ” California vs. ATFECF No. 64, No. 20-cv-6761 (ND Cal. January 11, 2021).
California journalist Austin Murphy wrote: article “How easy is it to make a ghost gun?” Press Democratic Party (November 12, 2021). Vasquez cites this article at various stages of construction, showing how it is beyond the capabilities of non-experts without expensive and sophisticated tools. In fact, Murphy enlisted the help of a gunsmith with the expertise and tools to do most of the work.
Murphy said she felt “a twinge of panic as I read the instructions,” which led her to seek professional help to conduct a full-scale workshop. Vázquez said that even after handing over the work to experts in three parts: first milling the frame, then assembling the many parts, and finally repairing the blockage as it occurred, the group was unable to function. It took over seven hours to construct the frame to do so.” Polymer80 kit firearm. ”
“When the out-of-pocket costs of building a gun at home exceed the cost of purchasing a new gun, it strengthens the conclusion that home building is an activity primarily undertaken by hobbyists,” Vazquez said. are. For gangbangers who don’t have the skills or tools, the black market and theft serve as an alternative.
To show that “anyone” can make a Glock-style pistol in minutes, the government video among them seasoned firearms expert Build the frame from the Polymer80 kit using a jig, drill bit, Dremel high-speed grinding tool, file, and sandpaper. Then use roll pins to attach a large number of intricate parts.
It’s not that easy. To drill the six holes, Vasquez explains, you first need to place a frame precursor on the jig. “If these opposing pin holes are not aligned within a few thousand inches, the firearm cannot be assembled.” Next, mill the top rail, then mill the barrel block, but This is also difficult.
For these steps, Murphy enlisted the help of a second firearms expert “to avoid making stupid and dangerous mistakes…” Murphy tried to install the slide lock spring and locking lever himself, but it was “a mess. I saw myself trying to drop this little slide lock into an elusive groove more than a dozen times.” Next, install the magazine release spring and button, assemble the trigger assembly, drop it into the frame, insert the slide stop lever pin, and install the slide. (In the video cited by the government, the slides were already assembled.)
“Manufacturers often find out something went wrong with the milling process the moment they try to rack the slides,” says Vasquez. That happened to Murphy, too, and he handed the malfunctioning handgun to an expert friend for a few more hours of troubleshooting.
Vazquez wrote the first part of his brief as saying, “The central premise of the government’s claim that ‘anyone’ can manufacture a fully functional Glock-style handgun from a kit of parts in ‘minutes’ is simply false.” It concludes with. ”
The second part of the brief describes the much more difficult process of manufacturing AR-type firearms, which is why the government has virtually ignored the subject. To complete the AR lower receiver from the partially completed “blank” you purchased, you will need to mill the area that will house the trigger mechanism and hammer, and drill holes for the selector, trigger, and hammer pin. As explained in the government overview, California vs. ATFThis requires “multiple drill bits strong enough to drill through aluminum or polymers, and a lubricant to reduce heat and prevent the drill bits from melting,” as well as “special tools such as end mills.” [that] It must be used to excavate a cavity to house the trigger and fire control mechanism. ” Vase blocks, bench blocks, barrel rods, torque wrenches, armored wrenches, etc. are also needed, Vasquez added.
In response to California’s assertion that blanking AR-type receivers was only a “simple process,” ATF’s Firearms Technology and Industry Services Division (formerly known as the Firearms Technology Division) then (and now) Daniel Hoffman, director of , explained how difficult it is. teeth. Hoffman is a retired Army infantry sergeant with nearly 30 years of technical experience in complex weapons platforms. He wrote:
I completed my first AR-type receiver in the fall of 2017 using compatible AR-type fixtures (like jigs), a hand drill, and a drill press. The initial excavation of the fire cavity took approximately three hours. However, because the dimensions of the cavity were not to specifications, it took an additional hour and a half to get the receiver to a working condition. Even though it took four and a half hours, and given my extensive experience with firearms, the build quality of the finished receiver was substandard, and the fire control cavity was not cut to exact specifications.
Once the lower receiver is complete, over 100 parts must be assembled to create a functioning AR gun. Depending on the quality, the cost can range from $500 to $3000. Vasquez concludes that “even if you spend the time and money to gather all the necessary tools, equipment, and parts, you will still need the knowledge and skill to assemble a working AR-type firearm.” Masu.
In short, the government wants the members of the court to believe that the so-called .[g]Host guns can be built from kits and parts that are widely available and permitted online. Anyone and basic tools and elementary skills Assemble a fully functional firearm Minimum 20 minutes” A brief by former ATF Acting Firearms Technology Branch Chief Rick Vasquez explodes that illusion.
