It's Been For Sale For Some Time, Now.
Posted 18 March 2005 - 03:01 AM
I can't decide if it's on the level, or not. What do you think?
Posted 18 March 2005 - 07:27 AM
More likely the 1st but who knows? I believe that our friendly law officiers has much better things to do than to try this, so really doubt that any law enforcement is behind it.
I know one thing, I won't bother trying to find out, regardless!!!
Posted 19 March 2005 - 12:32 AM
It could be perfectly legal.
Posted 20 March 2005 - 02:27 AM
Some years back, I wanted to buy this kind of dummy gun. I saw a few of them on ebay, but was concerned about the legalities. I decided to ask this question of the BATF. Here is the letter. Some have suggested that this is their standard reply, erring on the side of safety. However, I'd be a little leary of calling their bluff.
Posted 20 March 2005 - 08:41 AM
Never let it be said BATFE does not have a sense of humor.
Posted 20 March 2005 - 04:14 PM
There are likely a couple of Class 2 fellows on this board, maybe they can help. I'd like to have a dummy gun made from a "real" receiver with the serial number, markings, etc. But jail time and a mega fine do not appeal to me. It sure is an area of frustration and confusion...at least for me. It looks like that Unique Canes & Replicas might be getting in some the Russian Lend Lease Thompsons. If so, how do they get 'em here?
Oy, what to do (besides staying the heck away from 'em)...
Posted 20 March 2005 - 04:45 PM
Posted 20 March 2005 - 07:38 PM
Posted 20 March 2005 - 09:18 PM
I've seen that letter from Bartlett and I've also seen the one from Ed Owen that pretty much said just the opposite. He stated that deep fusion welding of the bolt to the barrel, the barrel to the receiver and welding a properly demilled receiver back together and to the internal parts was an acceptable method of deactivating a Machinegun and building a dummy. Ed Owen ran the tech branch for quite some time. I think the Owen letter was included with the purchase of the MG13, Hotchkiss 13.2mm, and ZB37 dummy MG's. I never said anything about the MG34 or thompson dummies as I have no knowledge of them ( from IMA anyway). I've seen the other mentioned dummies in person and was mistakenly sent one of the ZB37 dummies when I ordered a parts kit. I suggest that speaking with the guys at IMA about these dummies might enlighten, if they will talk about it.....
To Ron Mills,
I am a class 2 manufacturer and I would prefer the standard torch cutting to the welding if a rebuild is considered. Cutting the parts out of the welded mess without damage is much harder than fixing the torched receiver to take the undamaged parts. Its not simple or easy either way but thats my 2 cents.
I don't mean to say that this guys gun is perfectly legal but rather than saying its illegal stay away perhaps its worth looking into.
Hope that clarifys....
Posted 20 March 2005 - 10:59 PM
|QUOTE (amafrank @ Mar 20 2005, 09:18 PM)|
|I've seen that letter from Bartlett and I've also seen the one from Ed Owen that pretty much said just the opposite. He stated that deep fusion welding of the bolt to the barrel, the barrel to the receiver and welding a properly demilled receiver back together and to the internal parts was an acceptable method of deactivating a Machinegun and building a dummy.|
See, I was told by an ATF guy here (won't name names) that this is acceptable, as long as it was torch cut in three places, you weld stock to the inside to create far too tight a gap for any real bolt parts to fit (kind of like the extra-thick side plate on the IMA 30 cals when you're done), weld the bolt that has been trimmed to fit inside to the interior, remove any engaging surfaces so it won't engage the lower at all, weld the breech shut, and weld the barrel to the reciever, and you're good to go.
A local guy here who has dozens of such "demil" jobs has been inspected by same ATF agent and got the green light on them all. He displays them all the time, and has never gotten any problems.
I remember years ago hearing a joke that it all depends on who looks at it at what time and maybe even what kind of mood he's in as well. I'm wondering of that's pretty accurate!
Edited by p51, 20 March 2005 - 10:59 PM.
Posted 21 March 2005 - 10:41 PM
Posted 22 March 2005 - 10:45 PM
|QUOTE (LSU Tiger @ Mar 21 2005, 10:41 PM)|
|Well, to parapharse the '60s song about a "409," "gonna save my nickels, save my dimes, gonna buy me a real one!"|
Well, that's fine if you live in a state where you can legally own any form of Tommy Gun. I don't.
Can't own class three or even a short barrel semi here, so a display gun like this is the only option, other than one of those Japanese die-cast toy guns…
Posted 25 March 2005 - 11:14 PM
Posted 25 March 2005 - 11:49 PM
|QUOTE (red cap @ Mar 25 2005, 11:14 PM)|
|Was at a Kalifornia gun show last year and saw TWO illegal SMG's for sale...I was totally amazed to say the least. One was an unlicensed dewatted 1934 Steyr-Solothurn; it was apparentlly a dewat from the 1950's (they were $19.95 from Ma Hunter as I recall); just a barrel plug...totally illegal both under Federal and Kalifornia law. The seller had a 2 table set up, either a private citizen or a really small time FFL dealer who honestly didn't know any better. The other was a Savage M1A1 TSMG with an uncut receiver and the forward part of the bolt (which had been cut in two) tack welded into the barrel feed throat...looked like I could have gotten it running in a couple of hours. This for sale by a guy selling pre-1898 stuff, also apparently innocently ignorant of the laws. Just about dropped my teeth...|
I'd agree with you that these guns you describe wouldn't pass ATF muster, but what WOULD for the M1A1?
What is the proper method of putting torch cut partsd back together for a display piece?
HAS ANYONE HERE ACTUALLY DONE THIS AND GOT THE OKAY ON IT?
Posted 26 March 2005 - 12:36 PM
Posted 26 March 2005 - 02:22 PM