Dave Berryhill

Once again, this is not a "new" interpretation of the law. The BATFE has used this definition of manufacturing for several years. I believe that what has changed is their enforcement of it. Now that there is a 50 gun per year exemption, the BATFE appears to be going after the missed FET from previous years. One thing that these reports have not stated is whether Larry Crow/Competitive Edge purchased guns, made the modifications ("manufacturing") and then resold them or did the modifications to customer-supplied guns. The answer to that question is critical. If he is reselling the firearms then he is liable for the FET under the current law. If the BATFE is trying to make him pay FET on work to customer's guns then they have changed their interpretation of the law and have done so without notifying FFL holders. THAT would have a very negative effect on the gunsmithing industry. Either way, I think the legislature needs to define "manufacturing" (and while they are at it, define "legitimate sporting purpose") and take the ability to define the law away from the BATFE. Law enforcement's job is to enforce the law. The legislature and the court's job is to define and interpret it.

I've been looking around for more info about this and haven't found any so far. I'm not sure if the ATF is doing anything different other than trying to enforce their interpretation of the law. I looked into this quite a bit last year. They have interpreted manufacturing as "altering or modifying" for some time now so that is nothing new. Here is an excerpt from the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax & Trade Bureau's (aka "TTB") Excise Tax Reference Guide: http://www.ttb.gov/fet/feat_reference_guide.htm#4 "D. Gunsmithing vs. Manufacturing. A gunsmith who only does repair or replacement work on an existing firearm will not be a manufacturer for FAET purposes, unless: o The gunsmith has title to the firearm and his work materially changes the firearm so that a different taxable article results. See Rev. Rulings 58-586, 64-202 and 69-325. o The customer is the manufacturer for FAET purposes in situations where the gunsmith performs modifications on a firearm at the customer’s direction. The customer would be liable for FAET upon his sale or taxable use of the firearm." What makes a gunsmith liable for excise tax is title or ownership of the firearm. If the gunsmith only works on customers' guns then the gunsmith is not liable for excise tax. If the gunsmith buys the firearm first, does work on it and then sells it, he is considered a manufacturer and is liable for excise tax. Recently a bill was passed that exempts a gunsmith from excise tax if he "manufacturers" less than 50 firearms per year. A couple of notes: I'm not sure what is going on with the ATF or if anything has changed other than the recent 50 firearms per year exemption. So far, I haven't seen anything other than the news that was posted here. It would be nice to get some clarification on this. Excise tax is only charged on complete firearms. Even though the receiver is legally considered a firearm, excise tax is not charged on a bare frame. Also, when the Dept. of Homeland Security was created the ATF was split. Prior to that it was under the Treasury Department. Now the enforcement and licensing unit, which is now called the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), is part of the Dept. of Justice. The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax & Trade Bureau (TTB) is in charge of tax revenue, including excise tax on firearms, and is part of the Dept. of Treasury. Somethings never change though. I asked for a written ruling to clarify an excise tax issue last year but still haven't received it yet. I was told by phone that their legal department was working on it but it's been over 6 months since I submitted my request.

Sorry, I didn't get the price. The other good news is that Remington is going to install the extended carrier release on some of their other competition shotguns (trap, skeet, etc.) so it will be more widely available later this year.

Yes, Remington had an 1100 Tactical #26437 at the SHOT Show. It appears to be the same gun as the CM except the stock is black synthetic and the metal is coated OD green. It has the same 22" ribbed barrel, sights, Rem chokes, extended bolt handle, extended mag tube and extended carrier release as the CM. It's in their new catalog.

Thanks Randy - It sounds like like the Ti cylinder is the way to go for this application.

That may be true but a hardened steel insert may prolong the life of the cylinder, saving money in the long run. Of course if you're really yankin' on the trigger and the cylinder stop notch is hitting the cylinder stop notch hard something has to give, either the stop, the notch or the window in the frame. How do the titanium cylinders hold up to the impact compared to the stainless steel cylinders (all other things considered equal including the weight difference)?

Very interesting topic. (I haven't visited in a while and just started lurking here again). The idea of the cylinder stop being sacrificial isn't a bad idea. Brownells has started carrying Ron Powers new cylinder stop (part# 713-000-066). Has anyone tried it yet? Also, did anyone notice the S&W cylinder shown in the "Insider" column in the last issue or two of American Handgunner? It showed some photos of how S&W used to repair damaged cylinder stop notches by inserting a small piece of steel into the side of the notch. I'd love to find out more details about how that was done.

What's the name of the program?

Is Remington selling those parts now? I heard that they weren't when they first released that shotgun.

You must be using that "new" math. The OD of the O-Ring is 0.989 + (.070 x 2) = 1.129

Any info on modifying the interceptor latch? I've tried doing a search but it doesn't seem to work. All I get is an error message.

You (or your gunsmith) can adjust the amount of travel that the grip safety has to move before unblocking the trigger bow. Perhaps you can "tune" it to the amount of movement that your grip makes.

OK, I understand now. Do the cartridges stay lined up vertically in the mag or do the tips move to the sides?

It might look funny but you could increase the size of the bump on the safety with a Tig welder.

Quote: from Patrick Sweeney on 7:55 am on July 15, 2002 ...His mags are altered 20 rounders that have one lip bent in to create a single-position feed, and he uses the bolt hold open slot as the base of the cartridge locator, allowing the use of 80 grain bullets loaded long. I can understand bending one of the mag lips so it will only feed from one side but can you explain the "he uses the bolt hold open slot as the base of the cartridge locator, allowing the use of 80 grain bullets loaded long" part further? I do understand that blocking the gas port allows the rifle to work manually. It works just like a regular AR15 except that there is no gas to operate the bolt so it must be manually pulled to the rear. (Edited by Dave Berryhill at 9:38 am on July 15, 2002)