Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Thompson C&r Status Determination Revoked


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1 philasteen

philasteen

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Board Donor
  • 1118 posts

Posted 22 March 2006 - 10:16 PM

See link in next reply below

Edited by philasteen, 23 March 2006 - 08:11 AM.

  • 0

#2 John Jr

John Jr

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 1956 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mena, Arkansas, USA
  • Interests:Plenty

Posted 22 March 2006 - 10:56 PM

LINK TO PDF FILE

sad.gif
  • 0

#3 TD.

TD.

    Respected Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 3583 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 March 2006 - 11:01 PM

Something is definitely up. The first reply was certainly not a mistake. Someone wants to change something on that the original ruling. Maybe it will be something positive....
  • 0

#4 Norm

Norm

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2514 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis, TN
  • Interests:Thompsons (of course), Electronics, Physics, History, Mechanics, Collecting License Plates.

Posted 23 March 2006 - 12:25 AM

WTF?!

US---> buttkick.gif <---ATF

Norm

  • 0

#5 Mike Hammer

Mike Hammer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 952 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Louisiana
  • Interests:Travel, sun worshiper, margaritas, hot chicks, painting, scuba diving, movies, collecting movie memorabilia and autographs, guns, hot chicks, micro-beers, hot chicks, and did I say hot chicks?

Posted 23 March 2006 - 07:40 AM

Ha, ya'll thought I had smoked some wacky tobaccee in the previous thread on this subject. This letter confirms that ONLY W.H. produced guns were being considered accepted as C&R's. But since the original letter was not thought out and too simplisticly stated and not addressing all other possible Thompson configurations, maybe it's a good thing ATF&E is going to take there time and maybe tell us EXACTLY what form(s) of additional Thompsons will now be considered C&R's, if any. Ahh...our wonderful govenment at work, wouldn't you just like to strangle the bastards! nutkick.gif

Mike Hammer

  • 0

#6 TD.

TD.

    Respected Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 3583 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 March 2006 - 08:08 AM

Mike,
That is what I too perceive may be happening. I thought the original request from TCA was for just what we term the West Hurley Auto-Ordnance Thompson’s. I assume (but do not know for a fact) that TCA wanted to keep the initial request simple and not introduce all the Thompson variations known by Thompson collectors into the decision making process. It sounded like a pretty good strategy in that you could always build on any success for the next request. Only time will tell what is actually going on. I think it positive BATFE has actually tried to telephone the President of TCA on this matter.

  • 0

#7 v188

v188

    Member

  • Regular Group
  • 62 posts

Posted 23 March 2006 - 09:18 AM

I'm curious if anyone has a copy of the letter that TCA sent initially? I'm thinking about writing to ATF concerning a rifle I have, that had only a couple hundred made, and I'd like to see if I can get it declared C&R.

I just want to plagarize the best parts and apply them to my MG.


Back on point, I've got a reweld (Non C&R) Savage (sitting at PK"s right now) and I sure hope that ATF doesn't change the C&R definition from their original letter.


  • 0

#8 Blanksguy

Blanksguy

    Regular Member

  • Regular Group
  • 126 posts

Posted 23 March 2006 - 10:20 AM

I don't believe that this is an individual's request for the change back.......what I think is happening is that BATF (Tech. Branch) is being told to change it back because it kind of "opens" up the requests for a lot of other weapons in the newer areas of Class-III weapons.

....the end-result is that BATF does not want to receive....and have to answer to why "ALL legally registered Class III Weapons made before the 1986 MG-Ban cannot be C&R due to the increases in their value".

Just my observations from trying to get "origainal" AK-47 series rifles added into the C&R List.........and before I hear it.....the C&R List gives the requirements/procedures for a person(s) to "request-a-Determination to be made to add a weapon/series of weapons into the C&R List"......it does not say that weapons 50-years or older are "automatically-added".......or the C&R List would already have them listed by date = "Made prior to ______"...along with a long list of other weapons.

Regards, RichardS.
Blanksguy2001@chartermi.net
  • 0

#9 Lancer

Lancer

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Board Donor
  • 1055 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fremont, Ohio

Posted 23 March 2006 - 10:39 AM

QUOTE (Blanksguy @ Mar 23 2006, 10:20 AM)
it does not say that weapons 50-years or older are "automatically-added".......or the C&R List would already have them listed by date = "Made prior to ______"...along with a long list of other weapons.

Regards, RichardS.
Blanksguy2001@chartermi.net

Blanksguy

I was aways under the impression that if you could prove a gun was manufactured more than 50 yrs ago, it is a C&R whether it's on the list or not. Are you suggesting this is not the case?
  • 0

#10 Roland, Headless Thompson Gunner

Roland, Headless Thompson Gunner

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 688 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Maryland
  • Interests:Thompsons, Garands, All things WW2, Corsairs, Classic Guitars, Sex, Guns and Rock &amp; Roll

Posted 23 March 2006 - 01:34 PM

Why is Carol's first name blacked out? Is it also the serial number of her WH 28?
  • 0

#11 Blanksguy

Blanksguy

    Regular Member

  • Regular Group
  • 126 posts

Posted 23 March 2006 - 02:44 PM

Lancer,
Questions for you sir.....

1: Whay are military Bolt-Action Rifles listed in the other sections along with the other 100 or so weapons that were made over 50-years ago?...and many weapons listed as "made prior to 1946"?

2: Why does the NFA Brance use the current C&R List (with "up-dates") to help approve Transfers to people with C&R Licenses?

The "at least 50-years-old" applies to a "criteria" that allows for the submission of the request for Determination for C&R Status".....not a "blanket-approval" for anything over 50-years old. Such as the criteria to be met during submission of "value"....and/or "rarity",.....and/or "association to a Historic-person or Historic-battle"...............and/or the "manufactured at least 50-years prior to current date".

Not to try to egg you on..........but can you tell me where (page) in the C&R List you are reading that "Any weapon manufactured at least 50-years ago/50-years old is automatically added to the C&R List".....or "is automatically determined to be a Curio & Relic".

Please educate me so that I will be better able to deal with BATF Tech. Branch during my submissions.
Regards, RichardS.
Blanksguy2001@chartermi.net
  • 0

#12 Bill in VA

Bill in VA

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 675 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Southwest Virginia

Posted 23 March 2006 - 04:53 PM

Well, this isn't a scan of pdf copy of the letter, but rather a transcription, but here's something:
http://www.geocities...3/cnrover50.htm


  • 0

#13 Lancer

Lancer

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Board Donor
  • 1055 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fremont, Ohio

Posted 23 March 2006 - 06:12 PM

Blanksguy
Who knows "why" the ATF does a lot of the things they do?

Bill in VA's link seems to shed alot of light on the subject and it's good-n-nuff for me.
  • 0

#14 JimFromFL

JimFromFL

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 1949 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

Posted 23 March 2006 - 07:43 PM

QUOTE (PhilOhio @ Mar 23 2006, 10:53 AM)
If it's 50 years and one day old, it's C&R. Period.

I thought this was just one part. The other part is that it has been deemed to have played an important role in history and not just age.


  • 0

#15 bt3_guns

bt3_guns

    Respected Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 197 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:VA
  • Interests:Tommy Guns
    F-111s

Posted 23 March 2006 - 11:12 PM

For V188 -- send me an email and I'll ask Carol to get you a copy of her request to BATFE.

For TD – You are correct; Carol didn’t have enough information available to ask about other variations. I’m sure that she would have included them in the request if she had reliable production quantities. If they are available, let her know and she’ll use that information in her discussions with Mr. Nixon.

All - Carol did get to speak to Mr. Nixon the other day. The BATFE told Carol that the reason for their action was that letter had not been "Fully Vetted". Due to some mix-up, the BATFE legal office didn't complete their review of the document before Mr. Nixon signed it and sent it out. Mr. Nixon told her that he anticipated it would take ~60 days for the review and so Carol is expecting a reply in May.

Carol teaches middle school and this is a busy time for her with grades and the annual 8th grade Shakespeare play. She has called Mr. Nixon with a follow-up question or two but since their first conversation; they haven't been able to connect.

OK those are all the facts -- the following is my personal opinion only:

The BATFE would not have drafted a letter approving this request unless they planned to do just that. So unless this opens the door to all pre-86 MGs as C&R guns I expect that the final result will be an affirmative answer. They may well change the reason for saying yes but the end result will be the same. I also don’t think that they will change from all TSMG to just West Hurley M28s – Again this part is my opinion.
  • 0

#16 45fan

45fan

    Member

  • Regular Group
  • 53 posts

Posted 24 March 2006 - 08:50 AM

A firearm is a C&R if 50 plus years old. >>>>>>

As set out in the regulations (27 CFR 178.11), curios or relics include firearms which are of special interest to collectors by reason of some quality other than is associated with firearms intended for sporting use or as offensive or defensive weapons. To be recognized as curios or relics, firearms must fall within one of the following categories:

1.) Firearms which were manufactured at least 50 years prior to the current date, but not including replicas thereof;
2.) Firearms which are certified by the curator of a municipal, State, or Federal museum which exhibits firearms to be curios or relics of museum interest; and
3.) Any other firearms which derive a substantial part of their monetary value from the fact that they are novel, rare, bizarre, or because of their association with some historical figure, period, or event. Proof of qualification of a particular firearm under this category may be established by evidence of present value and evidence that like firearms are not available except as collector's items, or that the value of like firearms available in ordinary commercial channels is substantially less.

http://www.atf.gov/f...urios/intro.htm

  • 0

#17 p51

p51

    Member

  • Regular Group
  • 70 posts

Posted 25 March 2006 - 01:59 AM

I wonder if I’m the only here who noticed the underlying concern that if something was signed off by ATF for any reason, that it couldn’t be revoked later on like this was?
I’ve printed this letter out and will show it to the next knucklehead who tells me they have a ATF letter on something, as if it’s engraved in stone for all eternity…
  • 0

#18 Mike Hammer

Mike Hammer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 952 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Louisiana
  • Interests:Travel, sun worshiper, margaritas, hot chicks, painting, scuba diving, movies, collecting movie memorabilia and autographs, guns, hot chicks, micro-beers, hot chicks, and did I say hot chicks?

Posted 02 March 2007 - 05:16 PM

It's been a year since BATF has recended the approval of the '28 West Hurley as a C&R gun and I have heard nothing new on this front. While transfers may be handled faster nowadays, (and it was long overdue to see that happining), It seems they have little interest or focus on resolving this and other legal issues. I can apprecite a lack of manpower, (less lawyers is always a good idea), but come on, they could at least explain their actions and tell us what in the name of JC is happing here? The woman who sumitted this request was told 60 days, it's now been a year, has anyone heard anything or perhaps talked with higher ups at ATF?

Mike Hammer
  • 0

#19 SecondAmend

SecondAmend

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 610 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 March 2007 - 07:07 PM

It would be my guess the ATF has probably been pretty busy of late with the Akins Accelerator, as well as evaluating the numerous M11/9 and M16 prototypes that are in the works.

As the WH 28 is transferable as is, there may be low priority to the C&R request evaluation.
  • 0

#20 inertord

inertord

    Respected Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 508 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NE Ohio

Posted 02 March 2007 - 10:11 PM

I am wondering out of the blue if The ATF may have just closed this issue and considers the last ruling as final, until further action is officially requested of them? Would someone originally involved need to make an official appeal to their last reversal to gain further consideration?
  • 0