First off hello. I am a long time lurker. Should have registered long ago but never have.

I have built 3 80% AR's in the past. I still have them and love them.

I want to build another now .

My question is this.

If i buy the kit, do all the work to make it a real functioning firearm, would it be legal to allow a machinist to engrave it for me and then have a professional coat like a Robar or Ceracoat etc?

Thanks

sure.. there are no laws against it.

 

I may do a Ceracoat review in the near future

TheLug wrote: First off hello. I am a long time lurker. Should have registered long ago but never have. I have built 3 80% AR's in the past. I still have them and love them. I want to build another now . My question is this. If i buy the kit, do all the work to make it a real functioning firearm, would it be legal to allow a machinist to engrave it for me and then have a professional coat like a Robar or Ceracoat etc? Thanks

It is my understanding that you can have a machinist engrave your firearm, and you can get someone else to paint it, as long as you are physically present while the work is being done and you don't leave the weapon overnight.  Both operations constitute "gunsmithing" and require an FFL07.

I looked into it awhile back. I'd love to do both of those things for $$ as I'm already set up for it, but I really don't want to have to deal with all the paperwork to get an 07.  No amount of money is worth dealing with the legal system.
< ="text/">_popupControl();

Actually, ATF has made a very clear ruling on external finishes and engraving, and issued ruling 2009-1.

To summarize, it does not require s a Manufacturers License (type 07), but requires a Dealer Type License (which includes a gunsmith).

The entire ruling linked below

ATF Ruling 2009-1

Thanks Gundoctor, That information is great. So instead of the OP needing an 07, his machinist and painter will both need at least FFL01's.

I did a quick search on the term "gunsmithing" on the ATF site and the difference lies in the (paraphrased) "modifying for resale".  The FFL01 can modify or "gunsmith" for a fee for the service provided for an owner of a firearm. 

But the same FFL01 cannot acquire a firearm of their own, modify it, then resell it without being regarded as a manufacturer.

I have been approached in the past by people that wanted to try to skirt the laws and "loan" me their gun so I could modify it then send it back to them.  I flatly refused such a deal.  Way too many black holes to fall into.

Awesome! Thanks for the replies!

That is what i was thinking / hoping so this is good news.

I have one more question. What would happen if it 10 years (or any length of time) down the road i needed say an adjustment, or a hole re-drilled. would i be the one that would have to do the work or could at that point since it is a gun that i made have work done on it by another gun smith?

I'll make a stab at this.

A gun you make is no different than any other gun, especially as long as it remains your gun. You can even sell it, if the selling is incidental. But if you engage in the "business" of buying or selling or making or fixing guns then you open yourself up to being regulated---and gun activities (as a business) are very highly regulated. You can take a gun you made to a gunsmith to be repaired or modified, not problem.

There is nothing wrong or illegal about a friend "fixing" a gun for a friend. You might mount a scope or even drill a hole. If you don't charge for it, it is not a business activity and would not be regulated. In MY opinion, no license is needed for helping a friend "fix" a gun, no more than a license is needed to help a friend comb their hair or help them put brakes on their truck. But if you were to charge for these services or to conduct them as a business you obviously would need the proper licenses, permits, etc (i.e. business permits and licenses as a hairdresser or mechanic). You wouldn't be violating any law to paint your girlfriends toenails (for free), but if you painted her friends and charged her for it you would be in violation of the law.

Some things are always regulated, whether money is involved or not, because they are taxed. NFA items like machine guns and silencers are highly regulated--not through "regular laws", but through "tax code". So even if you make a silencer or machine gun for yourself or for a friend for free you are subject to the law because they are required to be taxed.   The same is not true for a firearm that is not a NFA item--they are not taxed individually when made by individuals. Businesses that manufacture firearms are required to be licensed and to pay taxes if they make over a certain number each year.

Many"laws" are actually taxes on commerce. Many federal laws are taxes on interstate commerce.

So, if you take you gun over to a friends garage and they help you drill holes for scope mounts or paint it with camo paint, and no money or other consideration changes hands--it is simply friends helping friends--no business has occurred and nothing license wise is needed.   On the other hand, if you took the rifle to a machine shop to have the holes drilled and tapped, and they charged you the same as they would have if it wasn't a gun but simply a block of steel--that is business--and if they do not have the proper licenses to work on a gun they have violated the law. Same if you sent if to a heat treater or anodizer or any thing else that "worked on" or changed it in any way for a fee--those "businesses" will need the proper FFL to work on guns.

There are interesting discussions that could occur about whether interstate commerce was occurring and whether the Feds would actually have jurisdiction and would actually charge someone, but I would leave those disputes for others to litigate.   If money or other consideration changes hands the proper FFL is needed.

One law that is fascinating is the 922r compliance on foreign parts in a firearm. To my knowledge not a single individual has ever been prosecuted under this statute. Now, if you were an individual the Feds were after for other reasons, no doubt they could use this statute to possibly get a warrant and maybe find other things while they were looking--but up to this point they have been reluctant to actually charge anyone--probably because they feel the law would not stand up to judicial review? So do they keep it on the books just to cause problems or keep U.S. parts manufacturers like Tapco working? Or to give them a vague reason to request a search warrant? Who knows, but I do know that many guns that are in violation of 922R are seized every year and the charge is never added and prosecuted. This even includes times when the Feds would love to have a way to involve themselves with a defendant. Go figure. 922R generates a lot of discussions and experts on gunboards and some business for small firearms parts manufacturers but little else. That said, do you want to be a test case?

Outstanding comment and help there Gundoc!

I was following along with Holescreek, in my opinion... thanks for the clarification!