Jump to content

No Such Thing As 80% Receiver.


Guest hardrede
 Share

Recommended Posts

I think Hardrede - you hit the nail on the head.

 

I have a copy of Bob's letter from Phili Ord, and this is why I was questioning where this "formula" came from.

 

It is a duck! http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hardrede-What you say makes sense.Where do you suppose the ubiquitous 80% finshed receiver myth originated??I have heard that same number for many years.Could it have actually originated with Phila.Ord. advertising??

 

T-Man-Do you have any references to an 80% finished receiver as being an ATF goal or benchmark?

 

REISINGSTAR http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/wink.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding of where the "80% is acceptable" came from.... I only remember the vaguest bits and pieces of this issue, but from what little I remember, the 80% business was extrapolated from a letter written by Ed Owen. I don't remember the particulars, but in a nutshell, someone had written Tech Branch asking about modifying an MG receiver to make a different type of MG (Uzi to Micro Uzi? MG 08/15 to MG 08? I can't remember...) Anyways, the letter from Ed Owen said that in his/Tech Branch's opinion, modifying a registered receiver by more than 20% constituted making a "new" MG/receiver. From there, I'd guess that the additional "20%" equated to a machinegun.

 

Bottom line, Tech Branch these days seems interested only in quoting the law (ever read any of the latest batch of letters from Tech Branch?) and then saying something to the effect that "if it fires more than one shot per trigger pull it's an MG." Obviously, if it's only 80% complete, it won't fire muliple shots per trigger pull. Where they can get you though (and if they want to get you bad enough, they will) they can charge you with criminal intent (can be pretty vague sometimes, a little like Contempt of Court) as well as under the rubric of "readily restorable." (Let's face it, a piece of pipe is a "readily restorable" Sten gun...cut a bolt handle slot, ejection port, magazine opening, and sear slot, and two quick spot welds, and voila: a machine gun. An ex-buddy of mine (used to be an 07/02, I don't know if he still is) once cobbled together a post-sample Sten with a cordless drill and a Dremel in about an hour. Far less time than the so-called "8 hour" rule/guideline.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE
T-Man-Do you have any references to an 80% finished receiver as being an ATF goal or benchmark?

 

The only place I see reference to '80% recievers" is in gun ads. There is nothing in the law or regs that I can find that eludes to percentages of finish on a reciever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks to T-Man,hardrede,philohio,billinva,and the others who commented.I think I've got a better grip on how ATF might interpret the law,and how to stay safe.-THERE IS GOOD VALUE IN THIS BOARD!

 

REISINGSTAR http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...