Act now before the ATF destroys all we hold dear!

Act now before the ATF destroys all we hold dear!

Posted by Patrick C Business Manager of TNTE Sales on 12th Aug 2021

Your rights are under attack! Don't wait another moment to submit comment on the ATF's proposed guidelines against the Second Amendment.

Something to remember when submitting your letter to the ATF: Make sure to NOT copy and paste someone else words as the ATF will ignore form-type submissions. Second, be kind and courteous, as they will not accept crass language or 20,000 Ruby Ridge references. Third, make sure to share this with EVERYONE you know! We are running out of time and they are NOT counting the letters we all submitted tot he first proposal... Take a look at one of our submissions below!!!

The ATF should not have the abilities to arbitrarily change definitions of firearms that have existed for well over a century. This should require a debate by congress as it is a fundamental shift in existing policy. Split frame weapons are not a new and novel concept as the 1911 style handguns have existed in some shape or form since 1902. This proposed ruling will hurt small business that operates in the firearms industry who have participated in lawful commerce without issue for decades. If the issue is the 80% frames and so called "ghost guns" it would be quite easy to declare all frames, lower receivers, or components that houses the fire control group must be serialized and thus created a less cumbersome method vs the proposed plan. The proposed rules relating to changing how firearm frames or receivers are defined create problems and should not be adopted. Chief among the problems is the confusion they create - the NPRM is over 100 pages long and explains a very complicated scheme of how to define a frame or receiver. This is completely unnecessary. Where there was once a simple definition that was sufficient for decades, there are now a hundred pages providing more than a handful of poorly defined grandfathered configurations, a loose statement about similar configurations, a requirement that new designs be submitted to ATF for classification, and the requirement to engrave not just one but multiple serial numbers on potentially multiple receivers in a single firearm. The problems that recently developed with the definition after decades of use don’t need a hundred pages of re-definition and multiple serial numbers to be solved. One has to question from the dealer side which serial number is the one that on "firearm" is correct for the transfer? Frankly this proposal will do nothing to stop violent crime. Criminals are already breaking existing law, why would they follow this one? Perhaps federal enforcement of existing firearms laws with violent offenders would do more to deter repeat offenses.

Even the statute that ATF is charged with enforcing by Congress indicates that a firearm has only one frame or receiver, yet ATF now wants to declare there can be multiple receivers in a single firearm, and in turn require that multiple serial numbers be marked on these receivers. It’s clear these serial number markings on a single new firearm must match, but thereafter serialized parts may be exchanged allowing different serial numbers on the same firearm. Is there a controlling serial number for the firearm, and which receiver does that serial number reside on? Which number(s) will be relayed by police in trace, or is every number on a firearm traced? What happens when a firearm with multiple serialized components is repaired with a component that has a different serial number? This just scratches the surface on the confusion this proposed rule creates about the definition of a firearm frame or receiver.

ATF should drop this complicated scheme and find a simple way as suggested above to follow the law. ATF needs to develop a simple definition that people can understand - like a single characteristic of a single part that all firearms have, and which does not have to be sent to ATF for an official determination.


Patrick C.

Sales/Operations Manager

TNTE Sales Inc.

(Comment Period Ends:28 Days) ATF Proposal 2021R-08: Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached "Stabilizing Braces"
  • In 2012, The ATF told the American people that stabilizing braces don’t fall under the National Firearms Act – enabling millions of Americans to legally outfit their guns with stabilizing braces
  • Now, The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is trying to criminalize gun owners who own guns with stabilizing braces if they don’t fall in line with new proposed restrictions – contradictory to their stance in 2012
  • This proposed rule is a blatant overreach of power, not passed by American voters or legislature, but an attempt for bureaucrats to strip us of rights granted to us by the 2nd Amendment
  • If you don’t comply with the ATF and register your gun for an additional $200 the ATF will Require YOU destroy your gun or turn it over to them – if you do nothing you will turn into a FELON overnight.
  • This is a blatant attempt to DISARM and CRIMINALIZE anyone who has lawfully outfitted and owns a firearm with a stabilizing brace.

Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached "Stabilizing Braces":

Comment on the ATF stabilizing brace rule here:

(Comment Period Ends:8 Days) ATF Proposal 2021R-05: Definition of Frame or Receiver and Identification of Firearms

  • Broadly redefine “firearm frame or receiver” and “frame or receiver” to expand the number and types of items that ATF would consider regulated firearms
  • Amend ATF's definitions of “firearm” and “gunsmith” to give the federal government more control over guns, gun owners, and those who provide critical services
  • Codify new definitions of terms such as “complete weapon,” “complete muffler or silencer device,” “privately made firearm,” and “readily” for purposes of law enforcement and prosecution and put people in much greater legal risk
  • Radically change ATF's regulations on firearm marking/engraving and recordkeeping
  • Allow the ATF to grant itself legal authority to issue new anti-2A rules and regulations outside of the APA regulatory process

Definition of Frame or Receiver and Identification of Firearms:

Comment on the ATF proposal to change frame/receiver definition here:

Other things you can do:

Write your State Senator:

Write your State Representative: