Engraving and backfill question/thought

[troy28]

I am familiar with C3 items and engraving requirements for items like SBR. i.e. Meeting the depth requirements on the lower.

I also understand this is a forum and not seeking legal advice to hold up in a court of law and everything is still at your own risk.

This is an aesthetic thing for me. I'm just not a fan of how the marking looks, even when placing it in the best place to be legal and less visible.

If you properly mark the lower to the correct depth, then come back and color fill it / backfill it to bring it up more flush with the surface. Not using anything permanent like bondo or jb weld. Something that could be cleaned out with like a toothpick, if you ever had to show it is marked, and up close you could still clearly see it is marked just very subdued.

Would this still be considered to be marked correctly?

 

[VUPDblue]

My instinct is to say that the marking would still be technically correct, but IANAL. I presume you're talking about an AR since you mentioned the "lower". Have you seen the underside of the lower around the trigger hole markings? That's where I'd do it if I absolutely didn't want to look at it all the time.

 

[praff]

On an AR lower that is engraved fairly small and then colored with alumablack, it is hardly noticeable. I will update with a pic later, but you would never know it was there (bottom of trigger gaurd and blackened).

 

[DanVoils]

I used Testor's model paint on mine. Before I did I called the ATF and was given the go ahead as it is permanently marked and the fill is readily removable.