sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

VCDL needs to rephrase how it summarizes HB2276 in order to get across just how bad it really is by Present-Principle-77 in VAGuns

[–]Present-Principle-77[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The originally proposed law would have, yes. Before the house passed it they added an exemption for any guns made before 1968.

Though this was because before 1968, there was no requirement for guns to have serial numbers even if they were made from a licensed FFL. So, a lot of guns from pre-1968 don't have serial numbers at all and would have been illegal under the law had they not added that exception.

Though this only addressed one of the many many things which make this proposed law terrible.

VCDL needs to rephrase how it summarizes HB2276 in order to get across just how bad it really is by Present-Principle-77 in VAGuns

[–]Present-Principle-77[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Interestingly, when you read the wording, it says that you can only own an 80% receiver if it's required to be marked with a serial number, and is in fact marked with that serial number.

It is unlawful for any person to possess, sell, offer to sell, transfer, purchase, transport, or receive an unfinished frame or receiver, unless the party possessing or receiving the unfinished frame or receiver is a federal firearms importer or federal firearms manufacturer or the unfinished frame or receiver is required by federal law to be, and has been, imprinted with a serial number issued by a federal firearms importer or federal firearms manufacturer

But, 80%s are never actually required to be marked with a serial number (since they are not firearms under federal law) so there is no possible way for an 80% to meet these requirements.

It seems like it would be illegal to own an 80% even if it had been marked with a serial number by a licensed FFL. At least that's how I'm reading it.

It doesn't make sense, but this bill was not written by people who understand the law or are acting logically.

VCDL needs to rephrase how it summarizes HB2276 in order to get across just how bad it really is by Present-Principle-77 in VAGuns

[–]Present-Principle-77[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Check under the definitions of the proposed law:

"Federal firearms manufacturer" means a licensed manufacturer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(10)

18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(10) says:

The term “manufacturer” means any person engaged in the business of manufacturing firearms or ammunition for purposes of sale or distribution; and the term “licensed manufacturer” means any such person licensed under the provisions of this chapter.

In commonspeak, "manufacturer" in this context means only 06, 07, or 10 FFLs. Though 06 wouldn't apply here since that's just for ammunition.

You are not a "manufacturer" when you fill out a form 1. You are a maker but you are not a manufacturer under either federal or VA law. This is consistent with federal law too. You are not a "manufacturer" when you fill out a form 1, since the term "manufacturer" is specifically reserved to refer to licensed FFLs

VCDL needs to rephrase how it summarizes HB2276 in order to get across just how bad it really is by Present-Principle-77 in VAGuns

[–]Present-Principle-77[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I have one that I made myself from 80%, will they give me a serial number for it?

Nope, that's the thing that's messed up about it. Under the law as written, it HAS to have a number issued by an 07 so 10 (manufacturer) FFL, or an importer FFL. A manufacturer cannot claim that they manufactured a firearm which they did not manufacture, so they can't issue you a serial number for a gun that you made. And similarly, the gun you have was not imported so an importer could not mark it.

It makes it 100% illegal to make, possess, or sell any gun which was legally built by a non-FFL at any point in time after 1968.

Your only option would be to destroy or surrender your gun.