• ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info

selling/trading 80% lower guns

Interesting, good to know.

I just assumed that when you go through a dealer, that they know, even if they aren't supposed to. Which I am like, whatever. I obey the law, most I have ever gotten is a speeding ticket in my life...

I considered an 80% lower for an AR build at one point, but when I saw that it was way more cost and hassle than it was worth, I ditched the idea...
80% glock lowers make way more sense to me

far easier than an ar 80%, jigs are universal for the gen 3, i can have everything shipped to my house with no 4473 or a trip to the ffl.

the glock 80% cost roughly the same as a new glock, so price wise still not really worth it unless you cacth a deal on an entire kit like i did at black friday from mdx arms (i paid like 380 delivered for a kit, so a glock 19 new essentially for 380 and some of my time aint bad)
 
As for selling 80% lowers, it is my understanding that any firearm built after the GCA of 1968 must have a serial number in order to be transferred. I have never seen any wording about "in the business of" included in that. Just my take though for what ever it is worth.
 
I think people who build ghost guns like knowing that the government doesn't have a record of that gun's acquisition.
But of course if the government were to do door to door confiscations, the government agents will have a list of other guns that they reasonably believe you have, based on guns that you did purchase from FFL dealers. So when they break into your safe to get those guns, they'll also find and take your "ghost gun" too -- even though they didn't know about it ahead of time.

And, keep in mind that if the government gets really intrusive and violates your second and fourth amendment rights, they will probably use your computer browser history and credit card and bank transactions to identify what firearms parts and accessories and ammunition you've purchased in the last few years.
They will search for any weapons that they reasonably suspect you have based on that information, too.
To keep your "ghost gun" off the government's radar, you need to build it from parts that you have acquired over the counter paying cash anonymously, not ordering any accessories or other parts online for it unless you have other guns registered to you that you don't mind the government knowing about that also use those same kinds of parts.

And then you will have to store your ghost gun and your ammunition for it in a totally separate location where law-enforcement is unlikely to find it while searching for the rest of your gun collection.


off the governments radar, you need to build it from parts that you have acquired over the counter paying cash anonymously, not ordering any accessories or other parts online for it unless you have other guns registered to you that you don't mind the government knowing about that also use those same kinds of parts. And then you will have to store your ghost gun and your ammunition for it in a totally separate location or law-enforcement is unlikely to find it while searching for the rest of your gun collectio!

Just curious as to where you think they would get such a list. As I said previously, no record of the transaction is reported unless they request a trace, which usually means that firearm has turned up at the scene of a crime or if you buy more than one hand gun in a one week period. How would they be able to compile a list from that info? If that is the only info they have it would be a very limited list.
 
As for selling 80% lowers, it is my understanding that any firearm built after the GCA of 1968 must have a serial number in order to be transferred. I have never seen any wording about "in the business of" included in that. Just my take though for what ever it is worth.

[emphasis added]

Where did you get that understanding?

Did you see some law, federal Code, or CFR saying so?

An ATF letter or Press release or a page on the ATF's website?

The only time I've ever read any real legal authority that talks about duties to mark firearms that you assemble or build yourself

is when either (1) the guns are NFA weapons, or
(2) they are firearms that are built by a licensed manufacturer
(or under circumstances that you should be a licensed manufacturer even if you violated the law by building them for resale without getting that FFL)
 
As for selling 80% lowers, it is my understanding that any firearm built after the GCA of 1968 must have a serial number in order to be transferred. I have never seen any wording about "in the business of" included in that. Just my take though for what ever it is worth.

Im gonna second this thought...they made them etch a serial number into a bonnie and clyde gun before it was allowed to go to auction (looked horrible and destroyed it in my opinion) it also stated on ATF website FAQ a couple years ago when i was fumbling through the idea that once said firearm is manufactured it is not required but if ever transferred a serial number should be affixed
 
[emphasis added]

Where did you get that understanding?

Did you see some law, federal Code, or CFR saying so?

An ATF letter or Press release or a page on the ATF's website?

The only time I've ever read any real legal authority that talks about duties to mark firearms that you assemble or build yourself

is when either (1) the guns are NFA weapons, or
(2) they are firearms that are built by a licensed manufacturer
(or under circumstances that you should be a licensed manufacturer even if you violated the law by building them for resale without getting that FFL)
As I said, it is just my understanding. I am just putting out an opinion like everyone else. As I read a little more about the GCA of 68 it does say licensed importers or manufacturers so it is a pretty murky area.
 
80% glock lowers make way more sense to me

far easier than an ar 80%, jigs are universal for the gen 3, i can have everything shipped to my house with no 4473 or a trip to the ffl.

the glock 80% cost roughly the same as a new glock, so price wise still not really worth it unless you cacth a deal on an entire kit like i did at black friday from mdx arms (i paid like 380 delivered for a kit, so a glock 19 new essentially for 380 and some of my time aint bad)

The 80% Glock lowers make more sense to me as well... I mean, it's a piece of molded plastic... Maybe someone who already owns a glock, wants to change the size, color or shape of the handle? Why is that piece considered "the gun"?

It's why I really like what Sig has done with the P320 line, and I hope that that type of modularity becomes more common...
 
80% glock lowers make way more sense to me

far easier than an ar 80%, jigs are universal for the gen 3, i can have everything shipped to my house with no 4473 or a trip to the ffl.

the glock 80% cost roughly the same as a new glock, so price wise still not really worth it unless you cacth a deal on an entire kit like i did at black friday from mdx arms (i paid like 380 delivered for a kit, so a glock 19 new essentially for 380 and some of my time aint bad)

It’s possible to build a ~$300 “Glock” if you watch for blow out deals and catch free shipping. I ended up at $320 total in mine, but it took around 3-4 months to acquire everything. Lower, parts kit, RMR cut slide, tall big dots, and threaded barrel, so I didn’t go basic. I mainly did it just for the enjoyment of doing it myself. Sure you can find a used Glock for $350, but to get the upgrades that I started with would push it to $550. Just my opinion, though.....
 
This copy of a lawsuit by anti-gun activists and mayors is interesting for two reasons.

1-- it documents what "ghost guns" are and how many crime guns are such, made from kits based on 80% finished receivers. (Washington D.C. had over 250 such ghost guns seized or found at crime scenes in that past few years, and almost all of them came from one particular company that specializes in making 80% complete polymer gun frames).


2- the lawsuit documents how ATF considers 80% lowers to be NON-firearms, and unregulated.
The lawsuit seeks to demand that ATF re-evaluate their definition of what is a firearm.
The lib-tards want a 0% receiver, a plain rectangular brick of solid aluminum, to be a regulated receiver and a "firearm" since you must be planning on making a gun out of it one day.


https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/ATF-ghost-gun-complaint.pdf
 
Back
Top Bottom