New members must contact admin@mg42.us to have their account activated. Please include your username.

salt

Our MG42 Builds and The ATF - (Long Post)

How not to see club fed.
User avatar
salt6
General
General
Posts: 1262
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 4:11 pm
Anti-spam: Mg42
Location: NE Okla
Contact:

Postby salt6 » Sat Dec 17, 2005 10:25 pm

The is a US made pistol grip.

Intruder196
Major
Major
Posts: 321
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 11:30 pm
Location: North Carolina

Postby Intruder196 » Sat Dec 17, 2005 10:27 pm

My pistol grip has a disconnector. I made it before somebody successfully converted one with the FAL set up. I would need to buy another grip stick and start over.


What about the belts? Have they been ruled a 'magazine body' or not?

User avatar
762x51
Oberst
Oberst
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:31 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Postby 762x51 » Sat Dec 17, 2005 10:38 pm

Intruder196 wrote:My pistol grip has a disconnector. I made it before somebody successfully converted one with the FAL set up. I would need to buy another grip stick and start over.


What about the belts? Have they been ruled a 'magazine body' or not?


If you are using the AR15 FCG then the disconnector and sear are one and the same just as they are in the FAL fire control group.

The belt drum is considered the "magazine body" from what I have read.

Regards,
Orin
"It is well that war is so terrible -- lest we should grow too fond of it." Gen. R.E. Lee CSA
Skype ID: ACE1100

User avatar
TOM R
Field Marshal
Field Marshal
Posts: 3355
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Anti-spam: Mg42
Location: ESCAPED FROM Nazi Jersey, !!!

Postby TOM R » Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:18 am

I know in my state the belts are "a high capacity feeding device and as such regulated the same as hi cap mags" :shock:
Great men are born in fire, it is the privilege of lessor men to light the flame, no matter the cost


FOR M60 GOTO http://WWW.M60MG.COM
nra lifer
mvpa 31698
46 cj2a
54 m37
56 CJ3B U.S. Navy
t24/m29 weasel

User avatar
Reichpapers
Brigadegeneral
Brigadegeneral
Posts: 678
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 8:55 pm
Location: Reading, PA
Contact:

Postby Reichpapers » Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:55 am

If you reweld and alter the receiver, wouldn't it be considered a US part?
It's better to be silent and considered a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.

Blanksguy
General
General
Posts: 1414
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 10:33 am
Location: Bay City, Michigan

Postby Blanksguy » Sun Dec 18, 2005 10:27 am

I too would believe that if a person takes scrap-metal (which is what the DEMILed MG42 receiver is after it is cut up........correct) and welds it up into a semi-only configuration..........only the "trunion and possible "rails" (if you use the original rails) would be considered "foreign-parts"....correct?

Be safe, RichardS.
mailto:Blanksguy2001@chartermi.net

User avatar
762x51
Oberst
Oberst
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:31 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Postby 762x51 » Sun Dec 18, 2005 12:00 pm

Reichpapers wrote:If you reweld and alter the receiver, wouldn't it be considered a US part?


I think you are right BUT I don't think the ATF has ever actually said that in one of their classification letters and that's why I am going to include the claim in the MG42 submittal.

In order to make that claim I need to quote the FTC or Customs regulation covering transformation in the submittal letter.

Come on guys - Help me find that regulation.

Regards,
Orin
"It is well that war is so terrible -- lest we should grow too fond of it." Gen. R.E. Lee CSA
Skype ID: ACE1100

User avatar
drooling idiot
General
General
Posts: 1494
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 10:30 am
Location: Philla ,PA

Postby drooling idiot » Sun Dec 18, 2005 12:28 pm

just spent 2 hours trying to find it , i swear they make it impossible.
i did find the letter i remembered that states "its possible" to have a imported part considered re-manufactured and transformed into U.S.
. I also found a letter that says its legal to re-manufacture proper demill-ed receiver scrap into a legal firearm.
I'll post them both in stickies. i haven't given up on the research yet , just for today....
"good , bad, .....I'm the man with the gun."

Its amazing anything works right around here with a bunch of
over-age juvenile delinquents running the place.

User avatar
drooling idiot
General
General
Posts: 1494
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 10:30 am
Location: Philla ,PA

Postby drooling idiot » Sun Dec 18, 2005 1:23 pm

EZFEED wrote: LOL! MY MY, here's a topic that I knew I was right on and got slammed about in the past :lol:

where ? i looked though all your posts and couldn't find anything related ?????
"good , bad, .....I'm the man with the gun."

Its amazing anything works right around here with a bunch of
over-age juvenile delinquents running the place.

User avatar
Reichpapers
Brigadegeneral
Brigadegeneral
Posts: 678
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 8:55 pm
Location: Reading, PA
Contact:

Postby Reichpapers » Sun Dec 18, 2005 1:36 pm

I believe he was talking about a different forum.
It's better to be silent and considered a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.

EZFEED

Postby EZFEED » Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:27 pm

First of all 922R is not applicable for an MG-42. It is not classified a "rifle" as defined because it is not shoulder fired but shoulder supported. The MG-34/42 is classified by ATF as a "firearm" which is the universal, cant put it in any other category, classification.

"rifles" "shotguns" (only semiautomatic) all weapons in this classification alone are 922R applicable

"SBR", "SBS", "firearms", "pistols", "AOW", weapons in this category ARE NOT 922R applicable



Here's a piece I did on the RPK which "IS" applicable but I think I was pretty clear in how I explained it.

http://www.weaponeer.net/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1187&PN=2&TPN=3


Here are some ATF letters that you guys may want to keep here. Be sure to read the text I include below them.

http://www.weaponeer.net/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=315&PN=1

http://www.weaponeer.net/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=318&PN=1

http://www.weaponeer.net/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=317&PN=1

http://www.weaponeer.net/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=44&PN=1

http://www.weaponeer.net/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=39&PN=2

http://www.weaponeer.net/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1015&PN=1


I've got like a whole cardboard box full of stuff from them at the house that I've been looking through as I have time. I still have lots more to post (about 30 more) and and sorting through the junk and usefull. Stuff that is old I throw out and then reword and compose in a different letter to get a current wording on it.

What I can do is post the ones I get in here ONLY IF YOU GUYS WANT and maybe we can get a library going or something?

Hope this helps :D

Pat
Last edited by EZFEED on Mon Dec 19, 2005 2:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
TOM R
Field Marshal
Field Marshal
Posts: 3355
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Anti-spam: Mg42
Location: ESCAPED FROM Nazi Jersey, !!!

Postby TOM R » Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:50 pm

post links to sites where i can look for the letter on "transformation of parts " and I will get on it between other chores :D
Great men are born in fire, it is the privilege of lessor men to light the flame, no matter the cost


FOR M60 GOTO http://WWW.M60MG.COM
nra lifer
mvpa 31698
46 cj2a
54 m37
56 CJ3B U.S. Navy
t24/m29 weasel

nlander

Postby nlander » Mon Dec 19, 2005 1:41 am

What about the butt stock. There are USA made stock assemblies being offered for other import guns like the AK. Seems to me tht a MG42 stock would not be that difficult to manufacture if one had the proper equipment.
Just a thought............

EZFEED

Postby EZFEED » Mon Dec 19, 2005 1:57 am

Why would you want a USA made buttstock? You don't need compliance parts on this weapon bud.
Last edited by EZFEED on Mon Dec 19, 2005 2:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

EZFEED

Postby EZFEED » Mon Dec 19, 2005 2:28 am

Stuff on remanufacturing/transformation/etc.

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/buspubs/madeusa.htm

http://www.ftc.gov/opp/madeusa2/c638.htm

http://www.ftc.gov/opa/1997/05/examples.htm

http://www.ftc.gov/os/1997/12/madeusa.pdf

This is just a bunch of stuff from the FTC about his.

When you read this get out of your head that the parts kit you have in front of you was or ever had been a firearm. What you have in front of you really is a pile of scrap steel that just HAPPENS to have origins from another country.

If a parts kit were anything other than scrap metal, i.e. a firearm, then be sure there would be more controls on them and ATF would not allow unrestricted transfer through the mail with them.

ATF's jurisdiction on your parts kit leave when you turn in your F-6A at the customs office (except if you do something stupid and have a kit and the parts to finish it like a blank original dimension receiver with it, or if it was demilled improperly and not removed from federal control).

From then onward you are a proud owner of expensive JUNK! FTC controls junk like this. You remanufacture and do your bit to where you put in X hours of labor and have ultimately remanufactured it to where it has been removed from the purpose of what it used to be and is now operable only in the semiautomatic system that you are running in your clone.

I have my own AKM FCG's that I submitted to ATF for classification and permission to use. Guess what they're made from????? Imported AKM FCG's and all I do is remachine them a bit and give them a whole new contour. I call them my EZ match triggers.
I don't buy US made FCG's.

User avatar
762x51
Oberst
Oberst
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:31 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Postby 762x51 » Mon Dec 19, 2005 9:29 am

Patrick (EZFEED) has brought up an interesting point in that maybe the MG42 would not be considered a "rifle" by the ATF and this of course would change the way any submittal letter would be worded.

In light of this, I have this morning FAXed a letter to the ATF asking this simple question:

"Would a semi-automatic replica weapon constructed from a properly destroyed and legally imported German MG42 machine gun or variant of this weapon be considered a firearm as defined in The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA), Title 18, United States Code, Chapter 44 § 921(a)(3)?

This replica weapon, by retaining the same size, weight, and appearance of the original German MG42, would not be designed to be shoulder fired and thus not be a “rifle” as defined in the GCA, Title 18, United States Code, Chapter 44 § 921(a)(7)."


Simple questions like this are normally answered quickly so lets just see what the ATF has to say regarding this question.

I hope Patrick is right because if he is then we don't have to worry about the US parts count question and "transformation" either.

Regards,
Orin
"It is well that war is so terrible -- lest we should grow too fond of it." Gen. R.E. Lee CSA
Skype ID: ACE1100

User avatar
TOM R
Field Marshal
Field Marshal
Posts: 3355
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Anti-spam: Mg42
Location: ESCAPED FROM Nazi Jersey, !!!

Postby TOM R » Mon Dec 19, 2005 10:09 am

so if it is NOT considered a rifle then what will it be?
:?
Great men are born in fire, it is the privilege of lessor men to light the flame, no matter the cost


FOR M60 GOTO http://WWW.M60MG.COM
nra lifer
mvpa 31698
46 cj2a
54 m37
56 CJ3B U.S. Navy
t24/m29 weasel

User avatar
762x51
Oberst
Oberst
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:31 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Postby 762x51 » Mon Dec 19, 2005 10:43 am

TOM R wrote:so if it is NOT considered a rifle then what will it be?
:?


Tom,

You can read the definition of a "firearm" on page 4, middle column, bottom:

http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/2 ... chap44.pdf

Regards,
Orin
"It is well that war is so terrible -- lest we should grow too fond of it." Gen. R.E. Lee CSA
Skype ID: ACE1100

User avatar
TOM R
Field Marshal
Field Marshal
Posts: 3355
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Anti-spam: Mg42
Location: ESCAPED FROM Nazi Jersey, !!!

Postby TOM R » Mon Dec 19, 2005 12:33 pm

man thats alot of reading :wow:
Great men are born in fire, it is the privilege of lessor men to light the flame, no matter the cost


FOR M60 GOTO http://WWW.M60MG.COM
nra lifer
mvpa 31698
46 cj2a
54 m37
56 CJ3B U.S. Navy
t24/m29 weasel

nlander

Postby nlander » Mon Dec 19, 2005 1:50 pm

I agree with you EZFEED. Acording to the letter the MG42 doesn't fit the specs of a "rifle", but we all know how the gov changes its mind and see different things at different times. I hate the idea of puting any foreign (US) parts on such a great gun such as the MG42. I like to keep mine as original as possible and still be within the guide lines of the law. I hope for all of us and future builders the letter 762x51 faxed to the ATF comes back with a positive answer.
By the way a big thanks goes out to 762x51. Maybe our hopes will be answered shortly.

We are simply ..... Collectors of the world’s great historic machinery.


  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “Legalities”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest