Yes, I can see future resale value as a reason you would not want to engrave.
Yes, I can see future resale value as a reason you would not want to engrave.
I'm not convinced that it is an actual requirement. The opinions of various field agents and perhaps even the people that answer the phone at the NFA branch are mostly just that.
As for why I don't want it engraved, I just prefer not to have extraneous markings on my gun. Not that I intend to sell too many of my NFA toys, but having my name literally written on it does not help resale. It also looks a little cheesy. I know that it bothers me that STILLWATER, OK is on the side of another of my SBRs. With my slight case of OCD, it would also annoy the hell out of me when I no longer reside in the same city that I have engraved. Basically I have no real legitimate reason to not engrave, but I don't really see a good reason to engrave.
In the end, if engraving makes you guys feel better about it, go for it. Everything that I have up until now is engraved. Prior to submitting my last Form 1, I read dozens of opinions and a few letters that seem to indicate that it is not a requirement for Form 1 SBS and SBR, only for Form 1 silencers and AOWs...unless you actually make an SBR or SBS from an 80% receiver. This AK is going to be an experiment. If it gets the green light as is, I will not engrave, if it comes back for correction, it will take an hour and $20 to have it engraved.
Food for thought:
If you want to get into a sticky situation, consider the number of people that have gunsmiths cut their barrels for them. Consider all of the people that get Form 1s stamped and then send Title 1 guns to folks like S&H, RDTS, Tromix, Red Jacket, and many others who actually do the work that creates a Title 2 weapon. That does not fly with a Form 1 silencer, yet most SBRs that are not AR-15s are created this way. ATF surely knows and does not seem to care. In other words, how I can be the maker if Red Jacket is converting my Title 1 AK into an 8 inch death machine?
Rob
As for why I don't want it engraved, I just prefer not to have extraneous markings on my gun. Not that I intend to sell too many of my NFA toys, but having my name literally written on it does not help resale. It also looks a little cheesy. I know that it bothers me that STILLWATER, OK is on the side of another of my SBRs. With my slight case of OCD, it would also annoy the hell out of me when I no longer reside in the same city that I have engraved. Basically I have no real legitimate reason to not engrave, but I don't really see a good reason to engrave.
In the end, if engraving makes you guys feel better about it, go for it. Everything that I have up until now is engraved. Prior to submitting my last Form 1, I read dozens of opinions and a few letters that seem to indicate that it is not a requirement for Form 1 SBS and SBR, only for Form 1 silencers and AOWs...unless you actually make an SBR or SBS from an 80% receiver. This AK is going to be an experiment. If it gets the green light as is, I will not engrave, if it comes back for correction, it will take an hour and $20 to have it engraved.
Food for thought:
If you want to get into a sticky situation, consider the number of people that have gunsmiths cut their barrels for them. Consider all of the people that get Form 1s stamped and then send Title 1 guns to folks like S&H, RDTS, Tromix, Red Jacket, and many others who actually do the work that creates a Title 2 weapon. That does not fly with a Form 1 silencer, yet most SBRs that are not AR-15s are created this way. ATF surely knows and does not seem to care. In other words, how I can be the maker if Red Jacket is converting my Title 1 AK into an 8 inch death machine?
Rob
You can't. Weapons sent to these places for conversion shouldn't be done on a form 1. It should be registered with the NFA under their Mfg FFL as an SBS/SBR/whatever by Tromix, Red Jacket etc, then transferred to you via form 4. The Engraving would have their name on it, as in GlockToGo's case.
Thanks for the info RobC. I do see your point. As for me, I don't mind having "Me, Lawton, OK" stamped on mine anymore the "Remington, Ilion, NY". I don't currently live in either one of those places. Just doesn't bother me at all.
As for your food for thought, consider this: If you sent your AK to Red Jacket (without a Form 1) and asked them to convert it to an SBR, then they would make it an SBR, register it with ATF on a form 2, engrave their info (as they are the maker) and then transfer it to you on a Form 4 as an existing SBR. If you file the form 1 as the maker and then send it to Red Jacket they would not need to do any engraving as you have already made it an SBR using the form 1. They are simply being subcontracted by you (the maker) to perform the work. Yes they are doing the exact same work, but since they did not register it with ATF (you did with your form 1) they would not need to engrave their info. I would consider the maker to be the one who registers the gun with ATF (either by Form 1 or Form 2) to be the maker, not the person who actually performs the work.
I think you hit the nail on the head. ATF considers "Making" to mean the paperwork process. After the form 1 is approved the receiver is considered an SBR, regardless of it's current configuration. Therefore it matters not who changes the barrel length.
Similar threads
