What part of a handgun is the FFL component

C

Coach Z

New member
After just ordering my first AR and finding how modular they are and that the only FFL component is the stripped lower receiver I was wondering what part of a handgun is the "gun"? For example you can order every part under the sun for a Glock but what part(s) are regulated.

Sorry if this is a bit too random but it's had me wondering so I thought I'd put it to the wisdom of the forum.
 
N

Newton24b

Moderator
the frame is the reqistered part. the frame is what you hold in your hand and everything else attaches to. its kinda strange but fun.
 
D

Don H

New member
Newton24b said:
the frame is the reqistered part. the frame is what you hold in your hand and everything else attaches to. its kinda strange but fun.
Click to expand...
The Ruger Mark I, II, & III would be exceptions - the receiver is the legal firearm portion with the serial number.

BeachHead said:
Whichever part has the serial number on it.
Click to expand...
Some pistols have the serial number stamped on several components - frame, barrel, slide. In that case, generally the frame is considered the firearm (in the U.S.).
 
S

Skans

Active member
It really depends on the gun. With most pistols, (semi-auto and revolver) the frame is the gun; but there are exceptions - like someone pointed out - Ruger Mark I, II, III.

Bolt action rifles don't have upper and lower receivers, so the receiver is the gun.

Military style rifles can be confusing. AK's don't have an upper or lower receiver - just a receiver. But, AK's also have serial numbers on many of the parts. The receiver is the gun.

With AR's the lower receiver is the gun

With FAL's, the upper receiver is the gun; the lower receivers with the fire control parts are not regulated. I believe the same is true for HK's and some other rifles as well.

Then you have "odd-ball" guns, like pen-guns, knife guns, etc. Most likely the serial numbered part is the gun.

NFA items are regulated differently - that's a completely different discussion. In other countries, other parts can be the regulated items.
 
D

dahermit

New member
With most pistols, (semi-auto and revolver) the frame is the gun; but there are exceptions - like someone pointed out - Ruger Mark I, II, III.
Click to expand...
Explain please. What part of those guns constitues a gun that is different from a Buck Mark, for instance?
 
D

Don H

New member
dahermit said:
Quote:
With most pistols, (semi-auto and revolver) the frame is the gun; but there are exceptions - like someone pointed out - Ruger Mark I, II, III.

Explain please. What part of those guns constitues a gun that is different from a Buck Mark, for instance?
Click to expand...
I'm not familiar with the Buckmark, so the similarities/differences between it and the Ruger are unknown to me and I can't make a valid comparison. The Ruger is designed such that the receiver detaches from the grip (frame) portion...it doesn't have a slide but uses a bolt. The serial number is on the receiver. In a very broad sense, it's much like an upper/lower combination with the serial # stamped on the upper.
 
S

sigcurious

New member
I cannot say this is the case for the Rugers mentioned above, but the sig p250 has an internal framework that holds together all the moving bits(basically, trigger, hammer etc), and can be swapped into any size of p250 frame and slide. This internal bit is the "firearm" and I think would be able to be called a receiver in broad firearms terms, as I understand it the receiver in a firearm is the part that holds the moving bits. Which would lead me to guess the Rugers mentioned above are similar. Especially with how customized they can get.

edit: teach me to get up and get some coffee someone beat me to it! lol
 
S

Skans

Active member
No, the receiver on the Ruger is the part that the barrel fits into. I don't really know why, but that's the way it is. The fire control section of FAL's is not the regulated part. Nor, is the fire control - grip section, of an UZI. Same goes with PTR-91's - the aluminum block that holds all of the fire control parts and fits into the grip-frame is not the regulated part of the PTR/HK 91.

There really is no one rule when it comes to what is and is not the regulated part of a gun. In semi-autos, I think it has more to do with which part can be more easily modified to make it full-auto. For example, with a FAL, you can't modify it to fire full-auto without cutting the upper receiver (early sear-cut FAL's excepted). With an AR-15, you would need to do something to the lower receiver to convert it to full-auto. I suspect that BATFE looks at semi-auto handguns the same way.....but, then again, Glock would be an exception, wouldn't it. To make a Glock select-fire, you would have to modify the slide, which is not the controlled part....there goes my theory:(

Does anyone know how ATF determines what part of a gun is the "controlled" part?
 
Last edited:
K

kazanski612

New member
Skans - in the case of the Sig 250, it's basically the trigger control group - the "fire control assembly" or whatever. Assuming you buy that piece from your local FFL, you need a background check to purchase that piece. Beyond that, they sell different frames/barrels/slides/etc that you buy over the counter.

So the theory is that Sig bugged the US gov't as to exactly which part is the "controlled" part... then they made that part portable into different frames. But you still only have 1 "gun."
 
W

wogpotter

New member
The real answer is "Whatever part the BATFE declares to be the regulated part".
It varies gun to gun depending on what criterion they decide makes a component the "receiver". This varies depending (among other things) if the feature, or gizmo that determines something administratively is in, or part of a component.
Example (but using rifles, sorry.) Ar-15 the lower receiver is the regulated part because it contains the fire control group that BATFE has determined constitutes a semi-automatic, or fully automatic weapon. This is an administrative, not engineering definition before someone jumps on me. Now in the case of the FAL it is the UPPER that constitutes the receiver, even though the fire control group is in the lower. In a FAL the semi/full auto feature is the "cut for the safety sear" which is in the upper component.
Pretty arbitrary & conforming to paperwork, not mechanics so it seems pretty capricious as well.
 
S

Skans

Active member
So the theory is that Sig bugged the US gov't as to exactly which part is the "controlled" part... then they made that part portable into different frames. But you still only have 1 "gun."
Click to expand...

I think ATF just looks at new guns on a case-by-case basis. Most likely, ATF makes their decision on which part needs to be controlled based on which part needs can most easily be modified to make it fire full-auto.
 
J

James K

Member In Memoriam
The reason the receiver of the Ruger .22 autos is the serial numbered part is quite simple - stamping the serial number on the grip frame would mash it flat. The choice of serial location was Ruger's not BATFE's.

Jim
 
S

Skans

Active member
Jim, I wouldn't have guessed that in a million years.

Come to think of it, that makes good sense. Probably each manufacturer decides where to put the #'s, and as long as BATFE is ok with it, that's how it's done.
 
4

44 AMP

Staff
Firearms manufacturers were putting serial #s on their guns generations before it became a Federal requirement. Most of their guns anyway. Since 1968, all guns. One can still find old .22s and bargin grade shotguns without serial #s, as they were made that way. Guns made before 1968 are not required to have a serial #, but most did.

Today, all guns sold in the US must have a serial number, and BATF generally accepts the makers location. The normal location is the reciever (or frame for handguns) as this is the part needed to make the gun work. There are some variances due to different designs. Serial #s marked on other parts are for the convienience of the maker. Only one component is the registered part.
 
J

James K

Member In Memoriam
The main reason many guns did not have serial numbers when it was not required is simple - cost. Not only would it have cost time and machines to put on a serial number, but putting on a serial number would be pointless if no records were kept and that meant more work and cost.

When GCA '68 was passed, makers estimated that serial numbering their inexpensive shotguns and rifles would add between $7 and $10 to the retail price. Whether that was true or not, most makers simply stopped production of inexpensive guns at that time, or raised prices. Considering that at that time a single shot .22 sold for only $15-20, a $7-$10 increase was significant and probably spelled the end of the "boys' rifle" as it had been known.

Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top