4 ms·
Legally, I'd think this would be the same as if a gunsmith were to make a lower receiver for himself. If that activity would be regulated in a given jurisdictio
by jarrett 15y ago
Legally, I'd think this would be the same as if a gunsmith were to make a lower receiver for himself. If that activity would be regulated in a given jurisdiction, is there any reason printing the receiver wouldn't be?
This article doesn't really get into the question of printing then subsequently transferring a receiver to another person. Were that to occur, I assume that the person who printed it would be regulated in exactly the same manner as any other gun manufacturer.
- hvs 15y agoI'm pretty sure the gov't would look at printing the receiver as precisely the same as milling one on a CNC machine. Transferring it is going to be treated the same as any other firearm transfer in the U.S. as well.
- jarrett 15y agoExactly my point. I think all the speculation about the legal ramifications of printing a receiver is off-base. I see no reason why the government wouldn't view it as just another form of manufacturing.
- commandar 15y ago>Transferring it is going to be treated the same as any other firearm transfer in the U.S. as well. i.e., expect the BATFE to get rather upset with you if you manufacture a receiver intending to transfer it to someone else without being a licensed firearms manufacturer. Manufacturing a firearm for personal use is generally good to go as long as you stay within the bounds of NFA, etc regulations.