Our MG42 Builds and The ATF - (Long Post)

Post by **salt6** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 10:25 pm

The is a US made pistol grip.

Post by **Intruder196** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 10:27 pm

My pistol grip has a disconnector. I made it before somebody successfully converted one with the FAL set up. I would need to buy another grip stick and start over.

What about the belts? Have they been ruled a 'magazine body' or not?

Post by **762x51** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 10:38 pm

Intruder196 wrote:My pistol grip has a disconnector. I made it before somebody successfully converted one with the FAL set up. I would need to buy another grip stick and start over.

What about the belts? Have they been ruled a 'magazine body' or not?

If you are using the AR15 FCG then the disconnector and sear are one and the same just as they are in the FAL fire control group.

The belt drum is considered the "magazine body" from what I have read.

Regards,
Orin

Post by **TOM R** » Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:18 am

I know in my state the belts are "a high capacity feeding device and as such regulated the same as hi cap mags"

Post by **Reichpapers** » Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:55 am

If you reweld and alter the receiver, wouldn't it be considered a US part?

Post by **Blanksguy** » Sun Dec 18, 2005 10:27 am

I too would believe that if a person takes scrap-metal (which is what the DEMILed MG42 receiver is after it is cut up........correct) and welds it up into a semi-only configuration..........only the "trunion and possible "rails" (if you use the original rails) would be considered "foreign-parts"....correct?

Be safe, RichardS.
Blanksguy2001@chartermi.net

Post by **762x51** » Sun Dec 18, 2005 12:00 pm

Reichpapers wrote:If you reweld and alter the receiver, wouldn't it be considered a US part?

I think you are right BUT I don't think the ATF has ever actually said that in one of their classification letters and that's why I am going to include the claim in the MG42 submittal.

In order to make that claim I need to quote the FTC or Customs regulation covering transformation in the submittal letter.

Come on guys - Help me find that regulation.

Regards,
Orin

Post by **drooling idiot** » Sun Dec 18, 2005 12:28 pm

just spent 2 hours trying to find it , i swear they make it impossible.
i did find the letter i remembered that states "its possible" to have a imported part considered re-manufactured and transformed into U.S.
. I also found a letter that says its legal to re-manufacture proper demill-ed receiver scrap into a legal firearm.
I'll post them both in stickies. i haven't given up on the research yet , just for today....

Post by **drooling idiot** » Sun Dec 18, 2005 1:23 pm

EZFEED wrote: LOL! MY MY, here's a topic that I knew I was right on and got slammed about in the past

where ? i looked though all your posts and couldn't find anything related ?????

Post by **Reichpapers** » Sun Dec 18, 2005 1:36 pm

I believe he was talking about a different forum.

EZFEED · Post by **EZFEED** » Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:27 pm

First of all 922R is not applicable for an MG-42. It is not classified a "rifle" as defined because it is not shoulder fired but shoulder supported. The MG-34/42 is classified by ATF as a "firearm" which is the universal, cant put it in any other category, classification.

"rifles" "shotguns" (only semiautomatic) all weapons in this classification alone are 922R applicable

"SBR", "SBS", "firearms", "pistols", "AOW", weapons in this category ARE NOT 922R applicable

Here's a piece I did on the RPK which "IS" applicable but I think I was pretty clear in how I explained it.

http://www.weaponeer.net/forum/forum_po ... PN=2&TPN=3

Here are some ATF letters that you guys may want to keep here. Be sure to read the text I include below them.

http://www.weaponeer.net/forum/forum_po ... D=315&PN=1

http://www.weaponeer.net/forum/forum_po ... D=318&PN=1

http://www.weaponeer.net/forum/forum_po ... D=317&PN=1

http://www.weaponeer.net/forum/forum_po ... ID=44&PN=1

http://www.weaponeer.net/forum/forum_po ... ID=39&PN=2

http://www.weaponeer.net/forum/forum_po ... =1015&PN=1

I've got like a whole cardboard box full of stuff from them at the house that I've been looking through as I have time. I still have lots more to post (about 30 more) and and sorting through the junk and usefull. Stuff that is old I throw out and then reword and compose in a different letter to get a current wording on it.

What I can do is post the ones I get in here ONLY IF YOU GUYS WANT and maybe we can get a library going or something?

Hope this helps

Pat

Post by **TOM R** » Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:50 pm

post links to sites where i can look for the letter on "transformation of parts " and I will get on it between other chores

nlander · Post by **nlander** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 1:41 am

What about the butt stock. There are USA made stock assemblies being offered for other import guns like the AK. Seems to me tht a MG42 stock would not be that difficult to manufacture if one had the proper equipment.
Just a thought............

EZFEED · Post by **EZFEED** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 1:57 am

Why would you want a USA made buttstock? You don't need compliance parts on this weapon bud.

EZFEED · Post by **EZFEED** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 2:28 am

Stuff on remanufacturing/transformation/etc.

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/buspubs/madeusa.htm

http://www.ftc.gov/opp/madeusa2/c638.htm

http://www.ftc.gov/opa/1997/05/examples.htm

http://www.ftc.gov/os/1997/12/madeusa.pdf

This is just a bunch of stuff from the FTC about his.

When you read this get out of your head that the parts kit you have in front of you was or ever had been a firearm. What you have in front of you really is a pile of scrap steel that just HAPPENS to have origins from another country.

If a parts kit were anything other than scrap metal, i.e. a firearm, then be sure there would be more controls on them and ATF would not allow unrestricted transfer through the mail with them.

ATF's jurisdiction on your parts kit leave when you turn in your F-6A at the customs office (except if you do something stupid and have a kit and the parts to finish it like a blank original dimension receiver with it, or if it was demilled improperly and not removed from federal control).

From then onward you are a proud owner of expensive JUNK! FTC controls junk like this. You remanufacture and do your bit to where you put in X hours of labor and have ultimately remanufactured it to where it has been removed from the purpose of what it used to be and is now operable only in the semiautomatic system that you are running in your clone.

I have my own AKM FCG's that I submitted to ATF for classification and permission to use. Guess what they're made from????? Imported AKM FCG's and all I do is remachine them a bit and give them a whole new contour. I call them my EZ match triggers.
I don't buy US made FCG's.

Post by **762x51** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 9:29 am

Patrick (EZFEED) has brought up an interesting point in that maybe the MG42 would not be considered a "rifle" by the ATF and this of course would change the way any submittal letter would be worded.

In light of this, I have this morning FAXed a letter to the ATF asking this simple question:

"Would a semi-automatic replica weapon constructed from a properly destroyed and legally imported German MG42 machine gun or variant of this weapon be considered a firearm as defined in The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA), Title 18, United States Code, Chapter 44 Â§ 921(a)(3)?

This replica weapon, by retaining the same size, weight, and appearance of the original German MG42, would not be designed to be shoulder fired and thus not be a â€œrifleâ€ as defined in the GCA, Title 18, United States Code, Chapter 44 Â§ 921(a)(7)."

Simple questions like this are normally answered quickly so lets just see what the ATF has to say regarding this question.

I hope Patrick is right because if he is then we don't have to worry about the US parts count question and "transformation" either.

Regards,
Orin

Post by **TOM R** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 10:09 am

so if it is NOT considered a rifle then what will it be?

Post by **762x51** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 10:43 am

TOM R wrote:so if it is NOT considered a rifle then what will it be?

Tom,

You can read the definition of a "firearm" on page 4, middle column, bottom:

http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/2 ... chap44.pdf

Regards,
Orin

Post by **TOM R** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 12:33 pm

man thats alot of reading

nlander · Post by **nlander** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 1:50 pm

I agree with you EZFEED. Acording to the letter the MG42 doesn't fit the specs of a "rifle", but we all know how the gov changes its mind and see different things at different times. I hate the idea of puting any foreign (US) parts on such a great gun such as the MG42. I like to keep mine as original as possible and still be within the guide lines of the law. I hope for all of us and future builders the letter 762x51 faxed to the ATF comes back with a positive answer.
By the way a big thanks goes out to 762x51. Maybe our hopes will be answered shortly.

We are simply ..... Collectors of the worldâ€™s great historic machinery.