Posted 10 December 2004 - 02:11 PM
This would be just like a brand new as issued M1 TSGM.
Would anyone want one? Is it worth doing? What do you think the price should be? How much would "you" pay?
Posted 10 December 2004 - 04:44 PM
Posted 10 December 2004 - 06:13 PM
Posted 11 December 2004 - 12:24 AM
Posted 11 December 2004 - 12:37 AM
Posted 11 December 2004 - 01:03 AM
|This may be a really dumb question, so i apologize ahead of time. are all 'display' or 'dummy' guns have a solid reciever? and does that mean that you can not work the bolt at all?|
The quick answer is that all display guns should have a solid receiver and NO moving parts (including cocking handle.)
This is not a dumb question at all; in fact, it is a very good question that has been brought up several times.
There are people out there selling "display SMGs" that have a moving cocking handle (including display TSMGs.)
I am not a C3, C2, or ATF agent; but my advise: AVOID THESE DISPLAY GUNS!
They cross the line and the ATF could view one as an SMG. If they do, your goose is cooked!
Posted 12 December 2004 - 02:04 AM
I know variations of this question come up all the time. Could you direct us to some specific passage of law, or a federal court ruling (case law), or a published government directive which states that all dummy receivers must :
have no moving parts at all, such as a moveable dummy cocking handle,
be made or not made with any specific feature which places the object into, or out of, the machinegun category, other than the ability to be readily/easily converted to the real thing.
The problem with the law is that it is not solid. One time the ATF might say a moving cocking handle on a display gun is ok; the next time- NO! The only solid part of the law that I know of is that it can not be more than 80% complete. How vague is that?!
Like I said, I'm not a C3, C2, or ATF agent. I am just saying that when people ask me if it I think it is ok to buy one of these display guns with moving parts (such as a cocking handle), I tell them "NO."
Speaking of a semi auto being much closer to a full-auto than a display gun, you are correct. My registered firing pin that I have to convert my 27A1 into a full-auto is nothing more than a piece of sheet metal with a serial number sctratched on it.
As far the "line" that is crossed, it seems to be where ever the ATF wants to draw it at that particular time.
PS - Philohio: I should be getting my gun back in a month or so; I'll send you pics!
Posted 12 December 2004 - 09:20 AM
Here is the response I got, when I wrote the ATF for clarification on this point. This is not addressing the replica designs that have cocking handles, only about rewelding kit receivers, that still have a partially moving bolt. Of course a letter does not make a court ruling, but it does get my attention.
Posted 12 December 2004 - 04:45 PM
Is having a sliding actuator worth it to you?
As Dirty Harry said, "How lucky do you feel?"
Posted 12 December 2004 - 05:29 PM
Posted 12 December 2004 - 05:42 PM
Those dummy guns that Kahr makes are made on the 27A1 size receiver. It is 1/10 inch shorter than a real 21/28 receiver.
Posted 13 December 2004 - 08:15 AM
Posted 13 December 2004 - 01:27 PM
I understand the size difference, I was thought the issue was a solid receiver vs. parts that moved being legal on a dummy gun. I understood that the Kahr display guns have working bolt/actuator handles on them though I have not seen one off the website.