Mass EF1 denials happening

I just got that email too. Been reading on ar15.com in the "atf mass rejection of form 1" thread. I read one guy was saying to basically just cancel it on the eform or don't respond to the email at all and get the refund until all this mess gets sorted out....I dont know though. I could take a pic of my lathe and some bar stock as well, and everything might go through and get approved....but im skeptical.
 
Last edited:
I think I said before, respond that you don’t have any parts yet. Maybe send them a picture of a pile of $20 bills? Maybe a full 2 liter soda bottle that you promise not to drink until the stamp is approved.
 
BigWaylon said:
Dear eForm 1 applicant,

The National Firearms Act (NFA) Division received your ATF eForm 1, Application to Make and Register a Firearm. As a part of the application process, NFA Division must confirm that the making or possession of a firearm would not place the applicant in violation of law.[1]

NFA Division requests that you provide certain additional information so that it may determine whether your eForm 1 application to make a silencer may lawfully be approved. Specifically, please submit to NFA Division the following:

Pictures of the parts that you will use to make the silencer (the pictures should be clear and allow the identification of the parts photographed),

A description of the processes you will use to assemble or fabricate the silencer,

The product, model, or kit name, if any, of each device and/or part that you will use to make the silencer, and

The source from which the parts were obtained, i.e., the name of the store, website, etc.

The additional information may be submitted to NFA Division at the following email address: [email protected]. Please include the form Permit Control Number or eForm ID in the Subject bar for each correspondence with attachments. The additional information may also be sent by mail to:

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
Click to expand...
There's no option here for "I haven't bought any parts to itemize or photograph, I'm waiting for my tax stamp"
 
JimB said:
I think I said before, respond that you don’t have any parts yet. Maybe send them a picture of a pile of $20 bills? Maybe a full 2 liter soda bottle that you promise not to drink until the stamp is approved.
Click to expand...
This is what they want to see.
www.mcmaster.com

McMaster-Carr

McMaster-Carr is the complete source for your plant with over 595,000 products. 98% of products ordered ship from stock and deliver same or next day.
www.mcmaster.com www.mcmaster.com

I sent them a list of stock I will be buying, pics of machine tools I am using and a description of what will be done . I can play their game.
 
Last edited:
NCFubar said:
The LGS discussion has turned to the ATF’s 4999 Firm for determining SBR vs Pistol. The owner who has no skin in the game (in fact the opposite since he’s might miss a sake on a brace) is telling customers to consider Form 1ing a lower so “when the ATF starts the 4999 enforcement” they will have an SBR lower to use their pistol upper(s) on. He is convinced that is their next grab and with DC’s current player mix it won’t be to much longer.
Click to expand...
my lgs said similar. he's noticed that there's a change in what manufacturers are selling. Something about not taking future orders for pistols anymore.
 
BigWaylon said:
Dear eForm 1 applicant,

The National Firearms Act (NFA) Division received your ATF eForm 1, Application to Make and Register a Firearm. As a part of the application process, NFA Division must confirm that the making or possession of a firearm would not place the applicant in violation of law.[1]

NFA Division requests that you provide certain additional information so that it may determine whether your eForm 1 application to make a silencer may lawfully be approved. Specifically, please submit to NFA Division the following:

Pictures of the parts that you will use to make the silencer (the pictures should be clear and allow the identification of the parts photographed),

A description of the processes you will use to assemble or fabricate the silencer,

The product, model, or kit name, if any, of each device and/or part that you will use to make the silencer, and

The source from which the parts were obtained, i.e., the name of the store, website, etc.

The additional information may be submitted to NFA Division at the following email address: [email protected]. Please include the form Permit Control Number or eForm ID in the Subject bar for each correspondence with attachments. The additional information may also be sent by mail to:

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
Click to expand...
Correct me if i'm wrong... but once you have a permission slip, you can have other people perform the work for you, right?
also, a form 1 applicant doesn't even need any of the parts to get permission...
so what the heck is going on?
 
DrScaryGuy said:
1. Correct me if i'm wrong... but once you have a permission slip, you can have other people perform the work for you, right?
2. also, a form 1 applicant doesn't even need any of the parts to get permission...
3. so what the heck is going on?
Click to expand...
1. Depends on who you ask, and what day of the week it is
2. Correct
3. Government overreach
 
Catfish said:
It doesn't matter where or when. ATF has said two things for years, they just connected the dots: 1) you can't buy suppressor parts and 2) if you intend to make a suppressor from it, it's now a suppressor part.
Click to expand...
Agree with all you have here.

The point was with the video like posted, where it implies that the ATF knows somehow that you've purchased a kit of suppressor parts (from say, Diversified, Fastenal, McMaster Carr, etc) rather than fabbing something from nothing.

There's no way for them to know from what's on a form 1 how one has crafted the item.
 
wired said:
Yep. Just got one. Looks like theyre going to get a pic of my mill and my lathe and a pile of metal.
Click to expand...
Be sure to send about 350 high resolution bitmaps.
 
JohnFreeman said:
There's no way for them to know from what's on a form 1 how one has crafted the item.
Click to expand...
They aren't approaching this from a law enforcement perspective where they need suspicion that a crime might happen. They are regulators with this outlook:

NFA Division must confirm that the making or possession of a firearm would not place the applicant in violation of law.
Click to expand...
So because NFA, they get to put the burden of proof on us.
I hope someone has a lawyer working on unraveling this mess.
 
Last edited:
GaryS said:
I wonder if the ATF will start telling us that a Idaho potato is a silencer part and want us to have a form 4 for our groceries?
Click to expand...
Have I got news for you!

apnews.com

Potato Used As Silencer, Jury Says

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) _ Defense attorneys said it was simply a potato. Prosecutors argued it was a silencer. In the end, a jury decided a man who wielded a gun with a potato stuffed in the barrel was guilty of using a silencer-equipped gun in the commission of a drug crime _ a conviction...
apnews.com apnews.com
 
What theyre doing is just going back to their old pre 2010 ish standard . You couldnt buy any of this stuff before then. Threaded tubes? Haha good luck. Undrilled baffles? No way .
 
wk9k said:
I just got that email too. Been reading on ar15.com in the "atf mass rejection of form 1" thread. I read one guy was saying to basically just cancel it on the eform or don't respond to the email at all and get the refund until all this mess gets sorted out....I dont know though. I could take a pic of my lathe and some bar stock as well, and everything might go through and get approved....but im skeptical.
Click to expand...
I sent pics of all my equipment. They should have prints today maybe monday . I dont track that stuff 'cause tracking slows things down. I should get a response in the next few weeks.
 
wired said:
What theyre doing is just going back to their old pre 2010 ish standard . You couldnt buy any of this stuff before then. Threaded tubes?
Click to expand...

...maglites were around for a long time...
 
"As a part of the application process, NFA Division must confirm that the making or possession of a firearm would not place the applicant in violation of law."

To translate: "Please provide all the information required to convict yourself of a felony, including high resolution pictures and the web site you bought from. We'll decide whether or not it meets the definition of what we define as a silencer today. Items we officially tolerated for a decade , may or may not meet the definition of what you will be proving in this self incrimination effort. "

Have a nice day and please do make sure to "ask an expert". "

I have no pending Form 1s, and no rejected form 1's and likely never will since they've decided to go make felons of law abiding applicants who followed their rules (of the day) to a "T".
 
Last edited:
JohnFreeman said:
"As a part of the application process, NFA Division must confirm that the making or possession of a firearm would not place the applicant in violation of law."

To translate: "Please provide all the information required to convict yourself of a felony, including high resolution pictures and the web site you bought from. We'll decide whether or not it meets the definition of what we define as a silencer today. Items we officially tolerated for a decade , may or may not meet the definition of what you will be proving in this self incrimination effort. "

Have a nice day and please do make sure to "ask an expert". "

I have no pending Form 1s, and no rejected form 1's and likely never will since they've decided to go make felons of law abiding applicants who followed their rules (of the day) to a "T".
Click to expand...
I was about to submit an EF1 the day before this all went down. Never owned a kit and have two EF4s awaiting approval. Nevertheless, feel like I dodged a bullet.
 
Gaston said:
So everything is either a suppressor, suppressor part, or readily convertible into a suppressor, and they want pictures of the (suppressor) parts one intends to convert into a suppressor? Seems like a bad idea...
Click to expand...

Thats the thing. They dont want you doing that and they will turn it down and probably come to see you. Its a Darwin test. . They want you to machine one from bar stock. I'm not that shocked because thats what they wanted for years. This whole drill a hole in a "solvent trap" thing is a very recent phenomenon and I'm not surprised in the slightest theyre putting the kibosh on it. Gives me an excuse to buy more tooling. Like I need one.
 
Last edited:
wired said:
I sent pics of all my equipment. They should have prints today maybe monday . I dont track that stuff 'cause tracking slows things down. I should get a response in the next few weeks.
Click to expand...
Ok I might do the same thing I dont know yet. You'll probably get a response sooner than that hopefully.
 
JimB said:
Is that yours, and is it for sale?
I regret selling my SB9
Click to expand...
Thats one I bought for the shop at work. I sold my SB9 recently which a solid little machine but too small for full size cans. Bought a Hendey lathe last month that is supposed to be delivered monday. Big 4000 lb 14X30 sumbitch from a WW2 shell casing manufacturer. Watch this baby run. Brings joy to your face.


 
Apparently eForms has been updated:


0482934D-A7F5-4DBB-A430-96200B44D851.jpeg
 
NCFubar said:
The LGS discussion has turned to the ATF’s 4999 Firm for determining SBR vs Pistol. The owner who has no skin in the game (in fact the opposite since he’s might miss a sake on a brace) is telling customers to consider Form 1ing a lower so “when the ATF starts the 4999 enforcement” they will have an SBR lower to use their pistol upper(s) on. He is convinced that is their next grab and with DC’s current player mix it won’t be to much longer.
Click to expand...

The problem is 4999 isn't law and speculation is the game right now. Also, AR pistols are in common sporting usage according to the ATF's own definitions and the ATF's interpretation also violates the ADA.
 
Slimer said:
The problem is 4999 isn't law and speculation is the game right now. Also, AR pistols are in common sporting usage according to the ATF's own definitions and the ATF's interpretation also violates the ADA.
Click to expand...
Nor was their grab on bump fire stocks … then AG Whittaker just stated the DOJ “amended” regulations to “clarify” the definition on a machine gun. That’s what they are setting up with Form 4999 (which they actually revised last summer when they were starting to focus on the braces. So their “current” definition(s) don’t really mean much when current AG Garland can “amend” them to “clarify” what an SBR is. Same thing is percolating with forced reset triggers also … the AG to ATF friendship gives the idiots far more reach than they ever should have.
 
NCFubar said:
Nor was their grab on bump fire stocks … then AG Whittaker just stated the DOJ “amended” regulations to “clarify” the definition on a machine gun. That’s what they are setting up with Form 4999 (which they actually revised last summer when they were starting to focus on the braces. So their “current” definition(s) don’t really mean much when current AG Garland can “amend” them to “clarify” what an SBR is. Same thing is percolating with forced reset triggers also … the AG to ATF friendship gives the idiots far more reach than they ever should have.
Click to expand...

The thing about bump stocks and FRTs is they ultimately can be viewed by the uninformed as "le ebil machine gun" because of their use to increase RoF.

Barrel length is not as apparent to the plebs who wouldn't understand why a 14.5" M4 barrel is not okay next to a 16" M4 barrel. It can easily be argued that shorter barrels are medically needed for disabled shooters or people who don't have the physical capacity to handle a rifle. You can also argue the $200 tax for a SBR/SBS is racist/misogynic/whatever and is a government agency continuing systemic discrimination.

tl;dr It's easy to run a campaign for a few inches of steel instead of something that sounds like a MG.
 
If anybody wants to contact their representatives, the ASA has a method to do it in seconds (takes longer if you want to alter their canned response).

americansuppressorassociation.com

ATF Form 1 Update: Take Action Now! - American Suppressor Association

Contact Your Legislators.Take Action Now! WASHINGTON, D.C. – On February 28th, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) summarily denied 847 Form 1 applications to make a suppressor because they believed the applicants were using solvent trap kits. On March 3rd, ATF notified...
americansuppressorassociation.com americansuppressorassociation.com
 
BigWaylon said:
If anybody wants to contact their representatives, the ASA has a method to do it in seconds (takes longer if you want to alter their canned response).

americansuppressorassociation.com

ATF Form 1 Update: Take Action Now! - American Suppressor Association

Contact Your Legislators.Take Action Now! WASHINGTON, D.C. – On February 28th, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) summarily denied 847 Form 1 applications to make a suppressor because they believed the applicants were using solvent trap kits. On March 3rd, ATF notified...
americansuppressorassociation.com americansuppressorassociation.com
Click to expand...
Thanks for posting that. I filled out their form letter and purchased a ticket.
 
BigWaylon said:
Heard today one vendor has roughly $100K of material on hand they’re not gonna be able to move. They’re semi-local…wonder if they take cash on the loading dock. 🤔
Click to expand...
i'm sure they'd make fun windchimes.
as long as no bore axis hole is drilled, they couldn't be considered baffles...
 
DrScaryGuy said:
i'm sure they'd make fun windchimes.
as long as no bore axis hole is drilled, they couldn't be considered baffles...
Click to expand...


Well, that is exactly what ATF is calling them - baffles. And a pipe is a suppressor tube, even if unthreaded.
 
BigWaylon said:
Pictures of the parts that you will use to make the silencer (the pictures should be clear and allow the identification of the parts photographed),
Click to expand...

If you have the parts already you're a felon in possession of illegal suppressor parts, but to make it legal you have to show them pictures of the parts before you assemble it?
 
Jayne said:
If you have the parts already you're a felon in possession of illegal suppressor parts, but to make it legal you have to show them pictures of the parts before you assemble it?
Click to expand...
You cant make it legal. Thats the whole gist of it. If you didnt make the parts start to finish its not legal. If you bought a solvent trap or sauce cups or whatever euphemism they have for undrilled silencer baffles then they are never going to be legal and the ATF wants to see what you have so they can decide the legality of what you are building. The ATF NEVER said those things were legal. I know, it sucks but to those of us who were building silencers 20-30 years ago it doesnt come as any surprise. Not by a long shot. People used to go to jail over tubes.
 
Last edited:
NCFubar said:
I got a feeling that the ATF is gonna make some more “over reaching” moves in the next few months. I‘m thinking the ATF will start their Form 4999 and go after the SBR/Braced Pistol classification and the “Forced Reset Trigger”/machine gun arguments.
Click to expand...
As much as the ATF may dislike it, FRT's are not “designed to shoot automatically more than one shot without manual reloading by a single function of the trigger”. i.e. FRT's don't violate the letter of the language intrinsic to the ATF's long-standing definition of a "machine gun". Certainly they walk right up to the line of the law, but they don't step over it ... and that really seems to chap some people's hides at the ATF ... suggesting they will, indeed, try to overreach by revising their definition of "machine gun" after the fact ... which is a bunch of BS, IMHO.

Braces carry the same concern; they're not 'stocks' ... and use of them in lieu of one doesn't constitute "constructive intent" ... at least, not in the eyes of a reasonable person. Again, some chapped hides at the ATF over something that walks right up to the line of the law ... without crossing it.

Since I'm already a suppressor and MG owner, I don't really care how this all plays out so long as a) the rules are clear, b) adequate time is provided AFTER new ATF stances become official to allow individuals who legally obtained and possesses certain goods to continue to legally possess them without turning them into criminals over night; and c) the property for which one legally paid (and thus, owns) is something one has a clear path to continued ownership of OR the government provides each and every one with timely, appropriate, and fair market value compensation for such property should it be made unpossessable, unusable, and unsellable through regulation (i.e. should a "regulatory taking" occur) ... in keeping with the 5th Amendment requirement that private property NOT be taken by the government for public use (in this case, so-called public safety), without just compensation.

I'm sure there are a lot of FRT owners who would dislike paying a $200 tax stamp over it, but I'm betting if they thought it through ... they'd love the idea of it becoming the equivalent of a drop-in autosear on the NFA registry given how stupidly valuable transferable, drop-in autosears have become. The 5th Amendment says they're entitled to either their legally obtained property or just compensation from the government if the government takes it, and existing SCOTUS precedents make it clear the 5th Amendment applies to both private property and to regulatory takings.

I don't really have a feeling on the mass denial of eforms aside from it being someone with a chapped hide overreaching...
 
Last edited:
surrealone said:
I'm sure there are a lot of FRT owners who would dislike paying a $200 tax stamp over it, but I'm betting if they thought it through ... they'd love the idea of it becoming the equivalent of a drop-in autosear on the NFA registry given how stupidly valuable transferable, drop-in autosears have become. The 5th Amendment says they're entitled to either their legally obtained property or just compensation from the government if the government takes it, and existing SCOTUS precedents make it clear the 5th Amendment applies to both private property and to regulatory takings.
Click to expand...
If a forced reset trigger is by “amending”, “reinterpretation”, etc deemed to be a machine gun they technically can not be added to the NFA registery as an autosear since they were manufactured after 1986 Per the FOPA. IF they can not be added the ATF and such will demand they be turned in or a destroyed with a piece being turned like owners had to do with the Akins Accelerator after a 3 year battle they lost 12 or so years back. That’s why the ATF getting buyer information from companies is such a sore subject. You get an official gooberment letter saying your property you bought has been “deemed” illegal and you have to forfeit ownership leaving you SOL.
 
Last edited:
NCFubar said:
If a forced reset trigger is by “amending”, “reinterpretation”, etc deemed to be a machine gun they technically can not be added to the NFA registery as an autosear since they were manufactured after 1986 Per the FOPA. IF they can not be added the ATF and such will demand they be turned in or a destroyed with a piece being turned like owners had to do with the Akins Accelerator after a 3 year battle they lost 12 or so years back. That’s why the ATF getting buyer information from companies is such a sore subject. You get an official gooberment letter saying your property you bought has been “deemed” illegal and you have to forfeit ownership leaving you SOL.
Click to expand...

Sure ... they can try that angle. However, the property was legal at the time it was obtained .. and, in this hypotethical situation, only retroactively deemed illegal [thereby creating a regulatory taking] due to a (new/re-)interpretation of a term by a governmental agency. In such case, the regulatory taking of property that was completely legal ... and lawfully obtained while completely legal ... requires 'just compensation' under the 5th Amendment. Since they will have taken a 'machine gun' (per their own revised definition), the compensation one should reasonably seek is the amount required to replace what's been taken ... which means the value of a machine gun, all paperwork, and all taxes (plus attorney's fees) ... since that's what it would take to replace what was originally legally obtained ... and then seized via the regulatory taking. (Add in damages for the violation of one's civil rights, too, of course.)

That's a legal fight worth having ... to set a precedent for which we have a dire need. After all, a precedent that says the government (state or federal) must pay for 2A-related things they retroactively ban ... will make entities think twice about enacting such bans, as there are likely more guns than there are coffers with which to pay for them.

The bump stock ban situation is worth watching, as it could set precedent here, as property loss associated with the ATF's reversal on that front is estimated to be over $100M in privately owned assets. (Reference for the dollar figure in this article: https://www.globenewswire.com/news-...-Bump-Stock-Ban-to-Resolve-Circuit-Split.html)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom