BATFE Changes it's mind - SA MG42 now classified as rifle
BATFE Changes it's mind - SA MG42 now classified as rifle
Here is a copy of the letter that I received from the ATF's FTB yesterday - Yes, I have already sent in a protest...
Regards,
Orin
Regards,
Orin
"It is well that war is so terrible -- lest we should grow too fond of it." Gen. R.E. Lee CSA
Skype ID: ACE1100
Skype ID: ACE1100
Don't know the reason - Chief Nixon told me he was going to overturn his earlier letter and would not give me a reason.ak47dennis wrote:Orin, Why would they contradict their previous decision?
Did you poke them in the eye… just kidding
When I spoke to his 2nd in command, Rick Vasquez, he indicated that there had been a complaint from someone.
He didn't actually come out and say that, it's just a "feeling" that I got from the conversation.
What do I think??
I think they just simply want to make it as hard as they can for a homebuilder to build a compliant semiauto MG42.
The letter says that simply because the MG42 has a buttstock is why they are reclassifying it a "rifle".
Well guess what folks, the US Ord. M60 and the Vector RPD semi's have buttstocks and are classified "firearms"..
Go figure...Could it be that ours are "homebuilt" while theirs are "factory" built??? - You be the judge....
Regards,
Orin
"It is well that war is so terrible -- lest we should grow too fond of it." Gen. R.E. Lee CSA
Skype ID: ACE1100
Skype ID: ACE1100
What do ya think? Counting those maybes, that 13 Imported Parts. Use a US made FAL trigger group and thats 10.
*SA42 (1) Frames, receivers, receiver castings, forgings or stampings
*SA42 (2) Barrels
NONE (3) Barrel extensions
*SA42(maybe?) (4) Mounting blocks (trunions)
*SA42(maybe?) (5) Muzzle attachments
*SA42 (6) Bolts
*SA42 (7) Bolt carriers
*SA42 (8) Operating rods
NONE (9) Gas pistons
*SA42 (10) Trigger housings
*SA42 (11) Triggers
*SA42 (12) Hammers
*SA42 (13) Sears
NONE (14) Disconnectors
*SA42 (15) Butt stocks
*SA42 (16) Pistol grips
NONE (17) Forearms, hand guards
NONE (18) Magazine bodies
NONE (19) Followers
NONE (20) Floor plates
*SA42 (1) Frames, receivers, receiver castings, forgings or stampings
*SA42 (2) Barrels
NONE (3) Barrel extensions
*SA42(maybe?) (4) Mounting blocks (trunions)
*SA42(maybe?) (5) Muzzle attachments
*SA42 (6) Bolts
*SA42 (7) Bolt carriers
*SA42 (8) Operating rods
NONE (9) Gas pistons
*SA42 (10) Trigger housings
*SA42 (11) Triggers
*SA42 (12) Hammers
*SA42 (13) Sears
NONE (14) Disconnectors
*SA42 (15) Butt stocks
*SA42 (16) Pistol grips
NONE (17) Forearms, hand guards
NONE (18) Magazine bodies
NONE (19) Followers
NONE (20) Floor plates
Orin, I think you hit the nail on the head! It's the same reason they came up with the barrel ban and every other gun ban in the works right now. Thanks for your hard work, we already know the pen is mighter than the sword, and so does the BATF.762x51 wrote: What do I think??
I think they just simply want to make it as hard as they can for a homebuilder to build a compliant semiauto MG42.
The letter says that simply because the MG42 has a buttstock is why they are reclassifying it a "rifle".
Well guess what folks, the US Ord. M60 and the Vector RPD semi's have buttstocks and are classified "firearms"..
Go figure...Could it be that ours are "homebuilt" while theirs are "factory" built??? - You be the judge....
Regards,
Orin
- DARIVS ARCHITECTVS
- Field Marshal
- Posts: 2442
- Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:24 am
- Anti-spam: Mg42
- Location: Minnesota
This is not surprising to me since I have noticed a trend for the BATFE to attempt to stem the construction of rifles made from imported decommissioned parts kits flowing into the country. Implementation of 922r is the start of the trend. The production of semi-auto AK-47's from Bulgarian military AK parts probably was one of the things that got the BATFE's attention. The October 2005 ban on importing barrels included with parts kits seems to be phase 2 of the BATFE plan. The BATFE appears to be attempting to slow production of any firearms based on foreign or domestic military firearms imports as parts kits and assembled as semi-auto rifles. This anti-gun tactic is a change from simply attempting to ban ownership of firearms. It is an attempt to make access to inexpensive firearms based on ex-military parts not possible. As this trend continues, ex-military parts of any kind may be banned from import, forcing Americans to rely on domestically sold firearms designs found in sporting goods stores, which have far less historical interest to collectors, or American military designs like the AR-15, which are expensive, potentially dropping the rate at which guns are bought as new. This will also cause the remaining military-based rifles, and licensed and C&R machineguns, to increase in price even faster. This makes owning such guns out of range of the average guy, and only attainable by the rich. Those of us who are fortunate to own one of more such firearms will have an increasingly difficult time finding a buyer because of the high cost of such guns.
DARIVS ARCHITECTVS
Knight's Armoury
Knight's Armoury
- Bullwinkle
- Stabshauptmann
- Posts: 197
- Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:58 pm
- Location: Sunny South
no because thay use a ar15 fcg and a new made receiverBullwinkle wrote:So now ALL the BRP's are NON-COMPLIANT....????
That'll go over like a TURD in a punch bowl at Sunday dinner....
allough the rewelded receiver scrap should be considered a new us part...the metal may be importered but it's manufactured here...
I think TNW's mg34 might have some issues now though
** The ATF has ruled that a feed belt is a “High Capacity Feeding Device†and I believe they have ruled that the belt is a magazine body but I cannot find the reference.
This list shows that at the moment we have 11 imported parts in a semi MG42 and we need to find 1 US made part to get our parts count down to 10 imported parts.
Our best bet to make sure that we are in compliance is to find the US Customs or Federal Trade Commission regulation that defines “Substantial transformation†of an item from foreign manufacture to US manufacturer. I’m sure that a reconstructed receiver will be considered to be US made but we have to show the ATF where it has been “transformed†in compliance with US Customs or FTC regulations.
Believe me when I say that they will not just take our word that a reconstructed receiver is now a US made part. We will have to prove that it is by quoting a regulation to them. This will also hold true for the modified bolt carrier.
This list shows that at the moment we have 11 imported parts in a semi MG42 and we need to find 1 US made part to get our parts count down to 10 imported parts.
Our best bet to make sure that we are in compliance is to find the US Customs or Federal Trade Commission regulation that defines “Substantial transformation†of an item from foreign manufacture to US manufacturer. I’m sure that a reconstructed receiver will be considered to be US made but we have to show the ATF where it has been “transformed†in compliance with US Customs or FTC regulations.
Believe me when I say that they will not just take our word that a reconstructed receiver is now a US made part. We will have to prove that it is by quoting a regulation to them. This will also hold true for the modified bolt carrier.
Last edited by 762x51 on Fri Feb 17, 2006 4:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
"It is well that war is so terrible -- lest we should grow too fond of it." Gen. R.E. Lee CSA
Skype ID: ACE1100
Skype ID: ACE1100
Here is what I have found so far regarding "Substantial transformation" :
http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bi ... n=retrieve
http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bi ... n=retrieve
Code: Select all
[Title 19, Volume 1]
[Revised as of April 1, 2005]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 19CFR10]
[Page 81-158]
TITLE 19--CUSTOMS DUTIES
CHAPTER I--BUREAU OF CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION, DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY; DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
PART 10_ARTICLES CONDITIONALLY FREE, SUBJECT TO A REDUCED RATE, ETC.
Sec. 10.14 Fabricated components subject to the exemption.
10.14(b)
Substantial transformation of foreign-made articles or materials. Foreign-made articles or materials may become products of the
United States if they undergo a process of manufacture in the United States which results in their substantial transformation. Substantial
transformation occurs when, as a result of manufacturing processes, a new and different article emerges, having a distinctive name, character,
or use, which is different from that originally possessed by the article or material before being subject to the manufacturing process. The mere
finishing or modification of a partially or nearly complete foreign product in the United States will not result in the substantial
transformation of such product and it remains the product of a foreign country.
"It is well that war is so terrible -- lest we should grow too fond of it." Gen. R.E. Lee CSA
Skype ID: ACE1100
Skype ID: ACE1100
Pirate, the charging handle on a FAL is an op rod and it doesn't move during firing either. I wonder about the whole magazine body too, but the only ruling I remember seeing on that was by the California DOJ. How is a belt a magazine body when its not by defination a magazine?
Here is a list of other rifles.
Here is a list of other rifles.
- TOM R
- Field Marshal
- Posts: 3355
- Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 3:11 pm
- Anti-spam: Mg42
- Location: ESCAPED FROM Nazi Jersey, !!!
wouldn't the bolt carrier and trigger housing be us? they are altered far beyond the original design, so it the firingpin, also in sa the cockin handle is altered, also though the rec scrap is just that scrap, which would mean a rewlded alterd chunk of scrap is a new rec?
Great men are born in fire, it is the privilege of lessor men to light the flame, no matter the cost
FOR M60 GOTO http://WWW.M60MG.COM
nra lifer
mvpa 31698
46 cj2a
54 m37
56 CJ3B U.S. Navy
t24/m29 weasel
FOR M60 GOTO http://WWW.M60MG.COM
nra lifer
mvpa 31698
46 cj2a
54 m37
56 CJ3B U.S. Navy
t24/m29 weasel