BATFE Changes it's mind - SA MG42 now classified as rifle

[762x51]

Here is a copy of the letter that I received from the ATF's FTB yesterday - Yes, I have already sent in a protest...

Regards,
Orin

[ak47dennis]

Orin, Why would they contradict their previous decision?
Did you poke them in the eye… just kidding

[762x51]

Orin, Why would they contradict their previous decision?
Did you poke them in the eye… just kidding

Don't know the reason - Chief Nixon told me he was going to overturn his earlier letter and would not give me a reason.

When I spoke to his 2nd in command, Rick Vasquez, he indicated that there had been a complaint from someone.
He didn't actually come out and say that, it's just a "feeling" that I got from the conversation.

What do I think??
I think they just simply want to make it as hard as they can for a homebuilder to build a compliant semiauto MG42.

The letter says that simply because the MG42 has a buttstock is why they are reclassifying it a "rifle".
Well guess what folks, the US Ord. M60 and the Vector RPD semi's have buttstocks and are classified "firearms"..

Go figure...Could it be that ours are "homebuilt" while theirs are "factory" built??? - You be the judge....

Regards,
Orin

[M1 Tanker]

So I guess we start working up a 922r list now. That FAL trigger group sure will help.

[Karbinator]

FUBAR

[M1 Tanker]

What do ya think? Counting those maybes, that 13 Imported Parts. Use a US made FAL trigger group and thats 10.

*SA42 (1) Frames, receivers, receiver castings, forgings or stampings
*SA42 (2) Barrels
NONE (3) Barrel extensions
*SA42(maybe?) (4) Mounting blocks (trunions)
*SA42(maybe?) (5) Muzzle attachments
*SA42 (6) Bolts
*SA42 (7) Bolt carriers
*SA42 (8) Operating rods
NONE (9) Gas pistons
*SA42 (10) Trigger housings
*SA42 (11) Triggers
*SA42 (12) Hammers
*SA42 (13) Sears
NONE (14) Disconnectors
*SA42 (15) Butt stocks
*SA42 (16) Pistol grips
NONE (17) Forearms, hand guards
NONE (18) Magazine bodies
NONE (19) Followers
NONE (20) Floor plates

[URAR1004]

What do I think??
I think they just simply want to make it as hard as they can for a homebuilder to build a compliant semiauto MG42.

The letter says that simply because the MG42 has a buttstock is why they are reclassifying it a "rifle".
Well guess what folks, the US Ord. M60 and the Vector RPD semi's have buttstocks and are classified "firearms"..

Go figure...Could it be that ours are "homebuilt" while theirs are "factory" built??? - You be the judge....

Regards,
Orin

Orin, I think you hit the nail on the head! It's the same reason they came up with the barrel ban and every other gun ban in the works right now. Thanks for your hard work, we already know the pen is mighter than the sword, and so does the BATF.

[salt6]

Ok, here's what we need to do.

1. All semi MG type guns that have a butt stock, what are they? Doesn't matter if they are US or foreign.

2. Get copies of the letters for each one.

3. Call them on the carpet through our congressmen.



Steve

[DARIVS ARCHITECTVS]

This is not surprising to me since I have noticed a trend for the BATFE to attempt to stem the construction of rifles made from imported decommissioned parts kits flowing into the country. Implementation of 922r is the start of the trend. The production of semi-auto AK-47's from Bulgarian military AK parts probably was one of the things that got the BATFE's attention. The October 2005 ban on importing barrels included with parts kits seems to be phase 2 of the BATFE plan. The BATFE appears to be attempting to slow production of any firearms based on foreign or domestic military firearms imports as parts kits and assembled as semi-auto rifles. This anti-gun tactic is a change from simply attempting to ban ownership of firearms. It is an attempt to make access to inexpensive firearms based on ex-military parts not possible. As this trend continues, ex-military parts of any kind may be banned from import, forcing Americans to rely on domestically sold firearms designs found in sporting goods stores, which have far less historical interest to collectors, or American military designs like the AR-15, which are expensive, potentially dropping the rate at which guns are bought as new. This will also cause the remaining military-based rifles, and licensed and C&R machineguns, to increase in price even faster. This makes owning such guns out of range of the average guy, and only attainable by the rich. Those of us who are fortunate to own one of more such firearms will have an increasingly difficult time finding a buyer because of the high cost of such guns.

[Bullwinkle]

So now ALL the BRP's are NON-COMPLIANT....????


That'll go over like a TURD in a punch bowl at Sunday dinner....

[smoggle]

Bolt carrier and reciever are both modified so they 'ought' to be considered US parts. But, 'ought' and 'are' are two different words.

50 rnd drums could be considered a 'magazine' too. Similar to AK drums.

Heck who knows what they will consider. ARGGGHHHHHHHHH

[none123]

So now ALL the BRP's are NON-COMPLIANT....????


That'll go over like a TURD in a punch bowl at Sunday dinner....

no because thay use a ar15 fcg and a new made receiver

allough the rewelded receiver scrap should be considered a new us part...the metal may be importered but it's manufactured here...

I think TNW's mg34 might have some issues now though

[762x51]

** The ATF has ruled that a feed belt is a “High Capacity Feeding Device” and I believe they have ruled that the belt is a magazine body but I cannot find the reference.

This list shows that at the moment we have 11 imported parts in a semi MG42 and we need to find 1 US made part to get our parts count down to 10 imported parts.

Our best bet to make sure that we are in compliance is to find the US Customs or Federal Trade Commission regulation that defines “Substantial transformation” of an item from foreign manufacture to US manufacturer. I’m sure that a reconstructed receiver will be considered to be US made but we have to show the ATF where it has been “transformed” in compliance with US Customs or FTC regulations.

Believe me when I say that they will not just take our word that a reconstructed receiver is now a US made part. We will have to prove that it is by quoting a regulation to them. This will also hold true for the modified bolt carrier.

[762x51]

Here is what I have found so far regarding "Substantial transformation" :

http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bi ... n=retrieve

Code: Select all

[Title 19, Volume 1]
[Revised as of April 1, 2005]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 19CFR10]

[Page 81-158]
 
                        TITLE 19--CUSTOMS DUTIES
 
   CHAPTER I--BUREAU OF CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION, DEPARTMENT OF 
              HOMELAND SECURITY; DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
 
PART 10_ARTICLES CONDITIONALLY FREE, SUBJECT TO A REDUCED RATE, ETC.

Sec. 10.14  Fabricated components subject to the exemption.

10.14(b)

Substantial transformation of foreign-made articles or materials. Foreign-made articles or materials may become products of the 
United States if they undergo a process of manufacture in the United States which results in their substantial transformation. Substantial 
transformation occurs when, as a result of manufacturing processes, a new and different article emerges, having a distinctive name, character, 
or use, which is different from that originally possessed by the article or material before being subject to the manufacturing process. The mere 
finishing or modification of a partially or nearly complete foreign product in the United States will not result in the substantial 
transformation of such product and it remains the product of a foreign country.

[ak47dennis]

Orin, The firing pins would get us to 10 imported. I thought E-Z Feed had a letter stating that a remanufactured/re-welded SA receiver also was considered to be a "US Part" ?

[salt6]

Operaating Rod?

salt

[Pirate]

I don't think the retracting handle is realy an op rod. on an m1 carbine, m14 and garand it
is, it actually locks and unlocks the bolt and reciprocates during the firing cycle. the retracting handle on the 42 doesn't

[M1 Tanker]

Op Rod is the charging handle.

Orin, where are you getting barrel extension??? Muzzle attachment maybe, but in no way do I see a barrel extension. There is no extension to the barrel, nor does the barrel screw into anything like the 1919 or M2.

Chris

[M1 Tanker]

Pirate, the charging handle on a FAL is an op rod and it doesn't move during firing either. I wonder about the whole magazine body too, but the only ruling I remember seeing on that was by the California DOJ. How is a belt a magazine body when its not by defination a magazine?

Here is a list of other rifles.

[TOM R]

wouldn't the bolt carrier and trigger housing be us? they are altered far beyond the original design, so it the firingpin, also in sa the cockin handle is altered, also though the rec scrap is just that scrap, which would mean a rewlded alterd chunk of scrap is a new rec?