User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 3:44:26 PM EDT
[#1]
Only way they could be "illegal" is if they were stolen property.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 3:48:39 PM EDT
[#2]
It doesn't sound illegal to me and Brian never mentioned that in his post. Sounds like this is coming from H&K and H&K only. Uppers are not illegal and I don't see how these are any different.
Edited to add: unless, like Zak-Smith said, they were stolen. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 3:48:51 PM EDT
[#3]
You wouldn't be able to get one anyway since you're in Kalifornia. It comes with a bayo lug and flashider.
And I can't believe this...how could these people have gotten them unless they were stolen? And how could they possibly steal guns from HK? I dunno about this... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 3:50:20 PM EDT
[#4]
+1 Looks like someone "pushed" the HK paperwork through. At first glance it may be a broken rule for HK not a broken US law? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 3:52:09 PM EDT
[#5]
That's what it sounds like to me. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 3:59:01 PM EDT
[#6]
Guy at HK said these were Form 6'd with a specific end-user certificate, meaning to have them go anywhere but that specific end-user is a violation of the Import Permit. May be that the gov't entity who ordered them had already paid for them, meaning they owned them prior to their even reaching US soil. Uppers are not illegal in and of themselves, but to have them sold/used outside the conditions of the permit is where this issue lies.
I don't know all the details, but the way the guy was talking, I get the idea that something pretty big was at stake. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 4:03:33 PM EDT
[#7]
Wouldn't that be the fault of H&K? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 4:26:47 PM EDT
[#8]
Just from the outside looking in this looks like intimidation tactics to get the uppers returned.
They're going to prosecute locally? For receipt of stolen property? That's if you can track all the buyers down. And then you have to prove the person receiving them new they were stolen, but yet... The dealers who sold these did nothing wrong, according to HK? They're buying back the uppers? That doesn't make sense at all. If there really was a form 6 violation then why isn't the ATF involved? Why are they relying on local prosecutors? Smells of intimidation tactics to me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 4:35:40 PM EDT
[#9]
Looks like someone "pushed" the HK paperwork through. At first glance it may be a broken rule for HK not a broken US law? Not true. These uppers were Form 6'd conditionally, they were allowed in for a specific gov't end-user, NOT for resale to the public. They clearly didn't make it to that end-user and were sold to the civilian market. This is a felony. If the end-user prepaid for these specifc serialized, Form 6'd uppers, as I was told, HK didn't have proper chain of title in order to sell them as they did. In selling them, HK may have "stolen" them. This is "Grand Theft" at this level of financial loss, a felony. Signing any Form 6, one is swearing under penalty of perjury. Mistakes happen, but if HK did not make a good faith effort to correct the mistake upon discovery, intent could be argued and "Perjury" charged. Another felony. Then there are possible contractual issues like "exclusivity clauses" that may have been violated by these getting into civilian hands. There are lots of legal violations possible here. I doubt anyone would go to jail over it as it is corporate, but HK could face import license revocation and/or hefty fines or people could lose their jobs over it at the very least. For those that own these uppers and refuse to turn them in, you would not face a firearms charge per se, but once you are aware of the upper being illegally sold and continue to maintain possession, you could face "possession of stolen property" in addition to "receipt of stolen property." HK could also sue you for financial damages for failing to return the property to its rightful owner, especially if that failure causes them to lose a license or contract or pay a fine. It's a big deal that has nothing to do with the legality of owning an AR upper. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 4:42:59 PM EDT
[#10]
HI, if that's the case the only person that could face charges is the person who diverted them from the end user on the Form 6.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 5:01:24 PM EDT
[#11]
No one would be presecuted as an individual unless it could be proved that he was acting outside his duties as an employee, like he filled his pick-up with boxes when no one was looking and sold them on eBay. HK is circling the wagons because they as a corporation are liable for charges or damages. Whatever the employee does as an employee is the responsibility of the company. Just because it's a corporation doesn't mean they wouldn't face criminal charges if it came to that. At a minimum, HK is facing very public embarrassment, which is why they are offering to buy the uppers back as an incentive for people to do what they legally must do anyway, which is return them. If reimbursement doesn't work, then they'll take the next step. And they will find out who bought these because they already know who sold these. Bryan's ethical responsibility is not to protect the identities of his customers at all costs, but to notify those customers of the mistake so they can take corrective action themselves. To the contrary, in this case, willfully withholding customer information is unethical. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 5:39:04 PM EDT
[#12]
I have never imported a firearm into the US so I am not sure, but why is a Form 6 used for a barrel assembly (ie: top end)?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 5:45:28 PM EDT
[#13]
Thanks this is what I am doing. Hk already knows who has these from various individuals.
I would suggest that anyone who has these contact Hk ASAP. I have a letter in my possession clearing me of any wrong doings Thanks Bryan Pritchard |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 5:51:01 PM EDT
[#14]
I would think importing this would be like importing AK parts etc. Because its really not a gun. lol its just most of the gun. If you number an upper does that mean you have to do a yellow sheet on it also? Sounds like a load of
 to me. just my nickle thoughP.S. if you need to get rid of one just send it my way, Will properly dismantle it and put it to good use. LOL and didnt you guys pay 2k for these things? man thats a pretty bad hit if you only get 1100 back. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 5:53:27 PM EDT
[#15]
.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 5:55:55 PM EDT
[#16]
Form 6 is necessary for most critical parts, not just complete firearms. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 6:09:03 PM EDT
[#17]
You can have those in California. The only hting you cant have is a detachable magazine. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 6:16:27 PM EDT
[#18]
NO LIKE I SAID BEFORE THE PEOPLE WHO BOUGHT THESE WILL GET THEIR PURCHASE PRICE BACK PERIOD Bryan |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 6:27:23 PM EDT
[#19]
HK can kiss my ass. They'll never get another dime of my money. And I have a considerable HK collection.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 7:02:37 PM EDT
[#20]
EVERYONE is in the shit. HK cannot imdenify anyone because this is a felonious violation of the Import/Export restrictions on corntrolled items such as firearms and their components. The consignee (HK), the End User and a supervisory government body ALL have to sign off on the application and the consequences are clearly spelled out in legalese right on the form.
This is very bad. Do not hold on to the uppers as they are contraband. Surrender them, even if you take a loss. Pursue the loss against any vendor but do not for God's sake hold on the damned things. You will be a knowing accessory to a federal felony. HK is going to get screwed over.....I guarantee it. Simon |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 7:04:16 PM EDT
[#21]
Improperly sold, and stolen property are two very different things. HK is out of luck, and the only thing they are doing is jacking up the price of these things.....
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 7:40:40 PM EDT
[#22]
someone owes me an apology.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 7:48:39 PM EDT
[#23]
if i had one i would have sold it in a garage sale to a mexican looking guy half a yar ago, i think his name was manuel, or ruiz, something like that, he was 5 9 and had black hair and brown eyes
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 8:06:12 PM EDT
[#24]
There is no price rise. This stuff is contraband. It is ILLEGAL TO POSSESS. If you TRAFFIC in CONTRABAND, it is also a felony. HK is carrying out a buyback with the tacit approval of the Regulating Aurhority(ATFE) which is responsible for ensuring that the parts go only to the specified End USer. It saves on having to execute warrants to seize this contraband. HK cannot refund anyone MORE than the value declared on the Importation form.
Avenge...if they subsequently execute a search warrant and find the contraband in yopur posession, you would not only be looking at being charged with felonious posession of contraband, you would also be obstructing justice and perjury on a statutory declaration. That's if you didn't decide to play Tony Montana with the 'Nazis'. Real smart. Get a grip people...this is NOT HK alone. HK is trying to clean up the mess before the warrants start flying. HK ARE assholes but this has nothign to do with their policy of not selling The 416 to Joe Schmo. It has to do with the fact that the uppers were illegally diverted from the named End User and unloaded into the enthusiast market at hideous mark ups. SImon |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 9:09:27 PM EDT
[#25]
Simon, what if they were imported as complete weapons and parted out?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2005 11:32:29 PM EDT
[#26]
Consult a lawyer......
NOT AR-15.com..... No dog in this fight...... |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 1:31:19 AM EDT
[#27]
48th..this is all governed under ITAR etc. and no I don't believe that you can violate the conditions by simply breaking the gun down into parts. There's no proviso in Form 6 that restricts the transfer only to the 'lower receiver' or other part deemed to consitute the gun. The item is imported as a whole and treated as such unless specifically waivered.
This is not a fight. It's been a felony dressed as a deal. Don't even think about trying to fight this in a court with the ATFE when they come knocking. They will probably seize the contraband and promptly take away everything else you own as material evidence. If you ahve NFA or are a FFL holder.....you DO NOT WANT any part of this. Take the buyback and go after the vendors. At least you'll have 1100 bucks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 4:34:14 AM EDT
[#28]
Simon
Please then elaborate on how a post sample MG can be imported on a F6, obviously for a LE/MIL end user and then be removed from the registry, cut up and sold as parts ? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 4:42:10 AM EDT
[#29]
There has to be a legal chain of custody paper trail, once the receiver is destroyed the weapon ceases to exist - I'm not sure how dealers in parts kits go about it in the US because most of the main importers cut the receivers outside the US. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 5:12:46 AM EDT
[#30]
I see boating accidents... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 5:23:03 AM EDT
[#31]
I tend to agree with this. All anybody has shown here is HK may have F-'ed up and now they are trying to cover their ass (and not even doing a good job at that). If HK sold something they shouldn't have, that's on them but if the part is not illegal to own, then I don't see how owning one of these could be construed as illegal in anyway? If I spent $2K + for one of these that would mean two things. I have a fair amount of extra cash and I really wanted one of these. That being the case, I would contact a lawyer and find out exactly what my legal rights and liabilities are before doing anything else. Just my $.02 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 5:28:06 AM EDT
[#32]
LW
Thanks for the response but the question was directed towards the scope of a gun being imported on a F6 for LE/mil end use, then cut and parted out to someone other than a LE/MIL end user. It happens everyday from MP5s to Mk249s. So once the item gets to a LE/MIL end user where it goes from there is up to the control and regulation of the end user (provided of course it isnt an NFA controlled item). If it is stolen from the end user inventory and sold on the market, it is the end users who must deal with crminal follow through of theft by their officers. If someone brought it in on their personal dime but validated the sale w/ LE/MIL agency credentials it is the end users issue as to how they deal with thier folks ordering and selling items using the agency as the legal mechanisim to do so. Just as a LE/MIL end user could bring in a Title 1 imported "Assault Weapon" such as a SIG550 and then turn it out for public sale if they chose, this upper is no different, at least today. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 5:51:24 AM EDT
[#33]
Correct but the order was cancelled/aborted and that means the items must return to the custody of the consignee. That's why HK is involved. If the uppers were simply stolen from an armory, then they would not have to do a thing.
FLCon....it's not the End User's issue alone. As the oversight authority the ATFE is obliged to prevent such abuses. That HK has an invoice price on the uppers leads me to believe that the uppers were imported by themsleves to be mated to domestic US lowers and as such declared items on the Form 6. Equally, LE/Mil cannot just flog their restricted gear to the public without first getting a waiver to do so from the ATFE. I seriosuly doubt there is a waiver fro the 416s. The parts kit scene is a workaround NFA and other regulations and I'm not at all certain that people want too much clarification. Simon |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 6:16:29 AM EDT
[#34]
HK has a history of claiming stuff is stolen, if they do not like the customers. Witness the SOCOM 12 round magazine debacle during the AWB. They claimed those were all stolen too. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 6:25:39 AM EDT
[#35]
I give up. *white flag*
Just remember to turn states evidence in return for immunity. Simon |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 6:34:50 AM EDT
[#36]
Are you saying that an HK416 upper, imported prior to the cutoff for the latest spin on the imported barrel ban, is "restricted gear" ? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 7:33:25 AM EDT
[#37]
Ask the ATF. I just know that items brought in illicitly using a falsified End User certificate is contraband. Believe what you will.....I'm just tellign things the way I see them. I would always err on the side of caution in these matters because I have to deal with these things and I know just how seriously dodgy End Users are viewed expecially in today's climate.
Just because you didn't falsify the End User, doesn't mean you are exempt from the consequences of the item being contraband. Disassembly of a contraband item does not make the parts any less contraband. Please go and buy an 416 upper and prove me wrong. Simon |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 7:36:50 AM EDT
[#38]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 7:43:12 AM EDT
[#39]
Tag
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 8:02:28 AM EDT
[#40]
As I was trying to explain to Sigurd just the other day, you can not import a "machine gun" for commerical purposes. As in bring them in and sell the uppers:
ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=245031&page=3 There are people doing hard time for such activities. If these uppers came off "machine guns", then yes, laws are in place that allow the goverment to come pick them up (that is the goverment, not HK): CFR PART 47.63: "Whoever knowingly imports into the United States contrary to law any articles on the US Munitions Import List; or receives, conceals, buys, sells, or in any manner facilitates its transportation, concealment, or sale after importation, knowing the same to have been contrary to law, shall be fine not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more then 5 years, or both; and the merchandise so imported, or the value thereof shall be forfeited to the United States." If the Form 6 was just for the uppers, and they were supposed to go to the Goverment, but got diverted, then again, CFR PART 47.63 applies. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 8:06:18 AM EDT
[#41]
tagged
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 8:15:39 AM EDT
[#42]
Tag+1
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 8:16:30 AM EDT
[#43]
Agreed. It's a fucking upper. Get over it, HK. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 8:17:36 AM EDT
[#44]
Fuck HK and their politics. One company can only go so far on the MP5.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 8:28:25 AM EDT
[#45]
Sure you can. There was an episode on "Shooting Gallery" last month where Century was doing exactly this. They showed crates of full-auto guns that had been imported and were in a special BATF bonded area awaiting destruction of lower receivers and salvaging of parts. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 8:32:31 AM EDT
[#46]
Those were never imported in the US, they were destroyed in a Foreign Trade Zone. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 8:43:14 AM EDT
[#47]
HK can ask you politely to return the upper and they will give you up to $1,100 back. HK is solely responsible and HK alone will face any import violations the ATF can come up with. By offering to buy back the uppers at what they consider fair market value, they are positioning themselves as actively trying to collect the uppers because of the ‘clerical error’ or whatever excuse they came up with. They will refer to their collection activity later in an attempt to lessen any fines that may be levied against them.
Consumers are under no obligation to return the uppers, assuming you can legally own the upper (you have a registered MG, SBR, pistol, etc.). However, the ATF could hassle you – inspect your collection to confirm registered MG / SBRs, require you to meet with them downtown, etc. – but even the ATF can not force you to turn in the upper. While I would strongly encourage you to turn in the upper, get your money back and avoid the potential hassle, there is no law stating you must turn the upper in. If the ATF filed charges, you could fight in court and win, but you would spend far more in legal fees than the upper is worth. Flame me all you want, but show me the law proving me wrong. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 8:43:26 AM EDT
[#48]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 9:25:46 AM EDT
[#49]
You seem to think that MGs must come in and can only come in on consignment for an end-user, which is not the case. A licensed importer who is an SOT also can import MGs with the intent to destroy them for the parts for his own use or for commercial resale. This intent just needs to be listed on the Form 6. The MGs come in and are destroyed pursuant to ATF guidelines while in the FTZ. If the imported guns or parts are then resold or used in a manner contrary to the stated Form 6 purpose or "conditional approval," then those imported parts or guns become contraband all the way down the line. It doesn't matter if the item itself is legal to own where you live (an upper for instance), it entered the US or market under ilegal pretenses and is illegal to possess for anyone and possessors can be prosecuted for possession of that contraband AND sale if it was then resold. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2005 9:37:01 AM EDT
[#50]
It is not contraband and the reason I'm so confident is that a similar scenario happened to me in MA. To quickly summarize: a few years ago the AG has banned all handguns and came up with a rigorous testing scheme with the goal of dramatically limiting handgun sales. After about two years, Glock guns finally passed the test and I purchased one through a local dealer. Later that day the AG clarified that while Glocks had successfully passed the test, they were still not eligible for sale. The AG went after Glock and levied fines against the local dealers that sold the Glocks. I was repeatedly contacted by Glock attorneys – they offered to buy my 27 back at the price I paid, by my dealer and his attorney and an AG attorney.
Being stubborn, I refused to turn in the gun primarily because my best friend (an attorney) and my dealer’s attorney couldn’t not find any State or Federal laws preventing me from owning the gun based on the situation. I’m registered to own handguns in MA and the gun was legally registered with the state and Feds when I bought it. In the end, my dealer had to pay a $5,000 fine and he claims that Glock reimbursed him . No fines were levied against me. Would I do it again – no – because it was a huge hassle that lasted seven months – all over a $600 gun - but I did learn that the Gov’t can’t force you to turn it in an item if you are legally allowed to own said firearm or upper. Yes, this falls under Federal guidelines, but it is not contraband. A Form 6's intent does not carry on for perpetuity , but only to get said item into the country. If the importer knowing lied or attempted to decieve the gov't, then the importer is liable not the consumer. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
