50-BMG bolt action upper = firearm? What is ATF up to?

[68Charger]

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/...n=sumome_share

This seems like a real can of worms..

[APEXgunparts]

I think the thing to remember here is that a Safety Harbor Firearms 50 BMG turn bolt action upper is very different in design and function when compared to a "standard" AR-15.
It will attach to a standard AR15 lower, but that lower needs different internal parts to function with the SHF 50 BMG upper.
I believe that SHF was trying to get an approval from ATF Imports Branch to import these from an overseas supplier and when they examined a sample the ATF TECH Branch people noted the function was more like a bolt action rifle than a semi-auto AR.

I have sent a copy of the letter to my contact at F.A.I.R. Trade and will see what they say.
It is a manufacturing and import issue so right in their "lane".

Richard

[Grant H.]

Even more interesting will be to see what happens with this pending all the appeals BS (if any happen) of the Defense Distributed settlement.

[Great-Kazoo]

A bolt action is considered a receiver/ firearm, under current guidelines. How the bolt action upper deal shakes out is anyone's guess.

[Gman]

How can a bolt action upper be considered a firearm when it has no fire control group, yet a Sig pistol has the chassis and fire control group regulated as the firearm that can be dropped into various frames?

On one hand you have no striker, slide, barrel that is a firearm and on the other you have a bolt, firing pin, and barrel that is a firearm? You either get the serialized parts that make it fire, or you get the top end that can't fire without being coupled to a serialized lower.

If they go down the path that the bolt action upper is the firearm, does this mean that AR type lowers are no longer considered a firearm? If you have 2 firearms linked together, which serial number identifies the complete functional firearm?

Seems pretty stupid to me.

Sent from my electronic leash using Tapatalk