Why are tube gun MP40's not considered C&R?

[MauserMatt]

I'm just curious. My brother is about to buy an S&S Arms put together MP40, and I'm just curious why they never received the C&R designation like the West Hurley Thompson's did?

 

Is it because of all the different manufacturers? Or is there some other reason?

 

I hope he buys it! If so, we'll be posting some MP40 vs M1 Thompson videos up on YouTube!

 

Thanks!

[TSMGguy]

The short answer is that no one has ever requested the C&R designation, so the process never went forward.

[bmarvin]

The reality is every transferable machine gun should be C&R as they all meet the ATF definition.

 

 

 

"A regulation implementing Federal firearms laws, 27 CFR §478.11, defines Curio or Relic (C&R) firearms as those 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."

[MauserMatt]

Machineguns are definitely at collector level prices... Very interesting aspect of it.

 

What does it take to petition a particular weapon for C&R status?

[Mike Hammer]

In 20 years.all the tube guns will automatically become C&R's. However before then it is likely that the Supreme Court will rule that private ownership of guns will be illegal, we are just one justice away from that verdict. Think it can't happen, we'll see in the not too distant future.

 

Mike Hammer

[Sandman1957]

Great question, and one that should be of interest to this Forum "Machinegunboards". I think the Thompson Collectors Association assisted in petitioning and approval for all West Hurley Thompson Submachineguns to be added as Curio and Relics list. That organization is composed of many current forum members. There should be some resident knowledge that can assist.

 

Perhaps it is time that "they" consider petitioning another class of NFA firearms into the mix. I am not sure when that status was given to West Hurley (WH) TSMGs. However, the current cost of a MP-40 tube gun now would be about the same as the WH was when it was successfully negotiated. The MP-40 because of its design as one of the, if not "the" first successfull stamped sub-gun in history, places in into a distinct category. You can add, the historical significance of WWII etc, and a carefully drafted request along the par of the WH example should be given due diligence.

 

If those that know how to navigate this pathway were to undertake discussions and actions now, there could be something to send forward pending the outcome of the next elections. I am not optimistic that should the heir to the name of the infamous gun ban, assume office of POTUS, that this would have as good of a chance of moving forward as if another candidate of either party were elected as next POTUS. Timing always has a vote in certain petitions.

 

Bottom line, you can petition a single serial number, or a class of firearms. Both have been successfully done. I, am not an expert of either category. For those that are, please chime in. FWIW, I think the MP-40 would have the same merit as the WH TSMG.

S/Fi,

Sandman1957

[1gewehr]

Currently, ATF is very persnickety about adding new guns to the C&R list.

Their criteria is actually pretty simple.

Describe the firearm and provide every reason you can think of that they meet the definition of 'Curio & Relic'. Price alone is not a valid reason. "those 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".

 

Basically, what they want these days is for a curator of a Federally-recognized museum to be able to state the reasons why he would like to have the firearm in his museum. The museum should have some interest in the firearm aside from just 'wanna have it'. The WWII, D-Day, or similar museum would be a good choice to ask for a letter for MP40s. The Museum of Southern Decorative Arts was not a good choice to get the curator to write a letter for a prototype Atchisson Auto connector (Lightning Link). In spite of the fact that MESDA has an incredible collection of Southern firearms through the War Between The States era, a prototype from a genius inventor from Georgia did not really fit their collection. Application denied!

[dalbert]

The original poster asked about the possibility of tube guns becoming C&R. Mike Hammer correctly states that we are 20 years away from that happening automatically...Perhaps a little earlier for some of the tube guns, if the date of manufacture is available.

 

Original MP-40's are C&R, so there's no issue there.

 

I disagree that a tube gun is equivalent to a West Hurley Thompson of any type, and should therefore be considered as C&R in the same manner. The WH's were manufactured by a legitimate entity in the line of succession of the Thompson. Tube guns were made by several small manufacturers, most of whom were just trying to get as many tubes cut, marked, and registered as they could before the 5/19/86 cutoff. I own a tube Sten gun made by DLO. It's not C&R, and I don't expect it will be until it's 50 years old.

 

All this being said, you can certainly write ATF about adding something to C&R status. I am very aware of the circumstances behind the WH Thompson C&R approval. I have written a couple of letters asking for specific items to be added, but since most of them were over 50 years old already at the times that I contacted ATF, they said they would not add them, since they were automatically included.

 

You'll have to come up with a pretty creative argument to get tube guns to be accepted as C&R status prior to 2036. The NFA collector angle, and maybe mentioning this website as evidence of collectability might be your best approach. I don't want to discourage anyone from doing so. I just think it will be a difficult proposition.

 

David Albert

dalbert@sturmgewehr.com

[TSMGguy]

Is it a fair statement to say that tube guns and all machine guns will continue to be NFA items requiring registration and transfer even after 50 years have elapsed, whether or not they are not listed as curios and relics in ATF publication 5300.11?

Edited May 9, 2016 by TSMGguy

[av8tr]

WHAT ARE CURIOS OR RELICS?

As set out in the regulations (27 CFR 478.11), 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. 1.) Firearms which were manufactured at least 50 years prior to the current date, but not including replicas thereof;

2. 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. 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.

 

I believe everyone points to item 1) above. No need to be specifically listed if the weapon is 50 years old.

[dalbert]

I've thought about this a bit more, and I'm curious for your input...

 

Tube guns have achieved a collector's interest...That can be seen in posts and polls on this website, particularly on the Sten board.

 

Tube guns can be described as novel.

 

Tube guns are mostly associated with a historical event, which occurred in preparation for, and up to May 19, 1986.

 

Tube guns derive a substantial part of their monetary value from the above facts.

 

Maybe an argument could be successfully made that they should be C&R.

 

Here's another angle I've thought about...I believe this might be an argument for a single item entry onto the C&R list...namely, my DLO/Colt MG-40 Aircraft Machine Gun.

 

I have owned my MG-40 since the late 80's, and it is a side plate gun made by DLO. This is the same individual who made my Sten tube gun, and many others. Anyway, I've had my MG-40 on display twice at NRA Conventions as part of two different themed machine gun displays put on by The American Thompson Association. It was not submitted for any individual awards, however it did contribute to the overall impression of each display. In 2011, it was part of the Machine Guns of John Browning display at NRA in Pittsburgh, for which we won the silver trophy for Best Display, out of about 26 entries. It was also displayed last year at NRA in Nashville as part of a Machine Guns of Colt display. We did not win the top award last year, but an item in our display did receive one individual medal. So, I suppose I could argue that my MG-40 has been a part of two historical events, one of which achieved very high recognition by the NRA Gun Collectors body. I have forms 5320.20 for each of these events, approved by ATF, on which the MG-40 is described as being transported there for the purpose of display in the specific events mentioned. I also have photos of it in each display. I think I could make a pretty good argument that my MG-40 should be C&R. Your thoughts?

 

David Albert

dalbert@sturmgewehr.com

[johnsonlmg41]

David,

I would recommend another gun other than the MG-40 to test your application for C+R status. The sten actually would be a better choice in this particular case.

[dalbert]

I'm not seriously considering it with the MG-40. I'm just saying that opportunities may exist, and trying to stir up further thought and discussion on the subject.

 

David Albert

dalbert@sturmgewehr.com

[johnsonlmg41]

The reality of the situation is all transferable MG's are curio by the fact they now all have substantial monetary value from the scarcity inflicted by the GCA and hughes amendment which brought about massive increases in their value.   Pre 86, semi and full auto versions of the exact same gun sold for about the same money.  Within a few years of the 86 ban collector interest began to increase, prices rose for effectively the same guns.  The government specifically made these rare and novel by banning them and removing these same guns from commercial channels.  in the case of a $25000 stamped $2 sear I think I'd have to go with bizarre? 



Supposedly we have 300 mil guns in the country and growing, .062% have been banned and have paper pedigrees to prove it.  I'd call .062 of anything rare  and so do others when defining it medically ex.

.01-.1%  is rare.   Less than .01% is very rare.   Let's say there are 2000 MP40's in the registry that's .0006%   



Simple math and thousands of common definitions prove beyond a reasonable doubt that all transferables are rare, the big question is who is going to sue ATF into compliance with their own definitions?  I've thought about it, but obviously a class action or support of big name organizations would probably be better suited to make them comply?   I don't see how you could lose?  

[TSMGguy]

Deleted.

Edited May 8, 2016 by TSMGguy

[Mike Hammer]

Is it a fair statement to say that tube guns will never be transferable to a class 03 FFL (C&R) even after 50 years have elapsed, since they continue to be subject to the NFA and are not listed as curios and relics in ATF publication 5300.11?

No, that would not be a true statement. Of course machine guns will always be under NFA auspices, but tube machine guns will become true C&R's. Every possible C&R gun does not necessarily have to be or is listed in the ATF C&R publication as ANY gun, (receiver) that is at least 50's old naturally becomes a C&R gun, and therefore transferable to a 03 FFL holder. All of your pistols, rifles, shotguns, machine guns, automatically become true Curio and Relics once they achieve 50 yrs.of age. That being said, it is becoming necessary and more important to find out when your gun, (receiver) was manufactured if you plan to buy and sell C&R's.

 

Mike Hammer

[geefal]

I'm not seriously considering it with the MG-40. I'm just saying that opportunities may exist, and trying to stir up further thought and discussion on the subject.

 

David Albert

dalbert@sturmgewehr.com

 

Am I missing something, or is that just a typo. Never heard of an MG-40. MP-40, yes, MG-40? Not being snarky, just didn't know if there was something out there I am not aware of.

[RoscoeTurner]

Fourth set of photos from the top -

http://browningmgs.com/Images_1919A4/Brownings.htm

[dalbert]

MG-40 was the Colt designation for their commercial version of what became the ANM2 Aircraft Machine Gun in use with the U.S. Military. They were made in the late 1930's to early 1940's. With the exception of the shape of the cooling slots on the barrel shroud, it is the same gun.

David Albert

[geefal]

Oh cool, thank you very much sir.

[ron_brock]

MG-40 was the Colt designation for their commercial version of what became the ANM2 Aircraft Machine Gun in use with the U.S. Military. They were made in the late 1930's to early 1940's. With the exception of the shape of the cooling slots on the barrel shroud, it is the same gun.

 

David Albert

David,

 

Did we have a tube gun at the History if the SMG display? That could be an example tube gun to try for the same reasons. Could not recall if your gun was there or someone else's Sten.

 

I would think based on the monetary argument all NFA should be considered C&R, but my logic does not always agree with policy.

 

Ron

[dalbert]

Ron,

 

Those were almost all Allan's guns, except for a few that were Tracie's, as I recall. I don't think any were tube guns.

 

David