[ARCHIVED THREAD] - NFA question (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 12/6/2013 10:11:37 AM EDT
| If you buy a worn out m16 fully auto lower on a tax stamp, could you in theory build a brand new lower and stamp the lower with the serial number of the m16 lower and destroy the worn out m16 lower? |
|
No. The law is designed to make sure that old machine guns can not be replaced. They WANT them all to wear out. It is already working, as there is such a small supply of transferrables, demand has driven the cost up so high most people can't afford to own one. However, I'll bet you could have a competent machinist make a steel liner for the inside of the lower receiver to hold the pins, and some thinner FCG parts that would fit in there. Probably not much you could do for the buffer tube threads and the pivot pin holes though. The take down pin hole could possible be sleeved with steel inserts.
|
|
Quoted:
If you buy a worn out m16 fully auto lower on a tax stamp, could you in theory build a brand new lower and stamp the lower with the serial number of the m16 lower and destroy the worn out m16 lower? there are persons here who can rebuild it right m60 joe comes to mind |
|
Quoted:
I THINK you would have to send it back to the factory, the factory would have to destroy the old lower and re-issue the same serial number to a new lower. Makes sense. I was asking because, if i bought a registerable full auto lower that was worn out, would there be any way to restore it. |
|
Quoted:
I THINK you would have to send it back to the factory, the factory would have to destroy the old lower and re-issue the same serial number to a new lower. But something about making a new machinegun and all that.... Nope. That has been done in the past, but is no longer allowed. The original receiver can be repaired if it is damaged, but if it is destroyed, it's gone forever. Legally speaking, that is. |
|
Quoted:
Nope. That has been done in the past, but is not longer allowed. Quoted:
Quoted:
I THINK you would have to send it back to the factory, the factory would have to destroy the old lower and re-issue the same serial number to a new lower. But something about making a new machinegun and all that.... Nope. That has been done in the past, but is not longer allowed. Thank you |
|
No.
You must repair the actual item. This is actually a serious issue with RDIAS and RLLs, because they will wear or break over time. Then you weld them back together and grind/machine to the correct dimensions. After a few repair cycles, there might be very little original metal actually left, and certainly none left in the wear points. Moreover, if you were to replace it, and make such replacement good enough, there'd be no way to tell. But, the law says repair only, you cannot replace. Everyone knows NFA is a bad law, but whatcha gonna do? |
|
Quoted: Makes sense. I was asking because, if i bought a registerable full auto lower that was worn out, would there be any way to restore it. Quoted: Quoted: I THINK you would have to send it back to the factory, the factory would have to destroy the old lower and re-issue the same serial number to a new lower. Makes sense. I was asking because, if i bought a registerable full auto lower that was worn out, would there be any way to restore it. You could absolutely restore it. Tig weld material in, machine where necessary, and re-anodize. It would be expensive, but that process is done with high dollar dies every day. |
|
Quoted:
No. You must repair the actual item. This is actually a serious issue with RDIAS and RLLs, because they will wear or break over time. Then you weld them back together and grind/machine to the correct dimensions. After a few repair cycles, there might be very little original metal actually left, and certainly none left in the wear points. Moreover, if you were to replace it, and make such replacement good enough, there'd be no way to tell. But, the law says repair only, you cannot replace. Everyone knows NFA is a bad law, but whatcha gonna do? Thank you, a great answer. Thank you my friend. |
|
Quoted:
The NFA is truly fucked, but it's FOPA that really fucked us hard. I don't think there would be many semi auto ar-15's sold today if everyone realized they could get an M-16 for the same price +$200... Ironically, repealing the Hughes amendment would actually give the antis what they say they want, since everyone's rifles would be registered and we'd all have to submit to fingerprinting, etc. |
|
Quoted:
Ironically, repealing the Hughes amendment would actually give the antis what they say they want, since everyone's rifles would be registered and we'd all have to submit to fingerprinting, etc. Quoted:
Quoted:
The NFA is truly fucked, but it's FOPA that really fucked us hard. I don't think there would be many semi auto ar-15's sold today if everyone realized they could get an M-16 for the same price +$200... Ironically, repealing the Hughes amendment would actually give the antis what they say they want, since everyone's rifles would be registered and we'd all have to submit to fingerprinting, etc. Can you imagine how many Form 1's would be submitted the second the Hughes repeal goes into affect? 
I think the ATF would just quit! |
| The 1986 new machinegun ban is the real issue honestly. Take that away+speed up the NFA process and I'd find the system somewhat reasonable and might even consider getting one. Of course the anti's know this and that's why they'll fight any change. They know that a right which is horribly delayed, overpriced and generally infringed upon is just as good as a right denied. 99% of the population will just say 'screw it' and do without. You also have all the current owners of MG's who don't want change because their $20,000 MG would suddenly be worth $1500. |
|
Quoted:
Makes sense. I was asking because, if i bought a registerable full auto lower that was worn out, would there be any way to restore it. Quoted:
Quoted:
I THINK you would have to send it back to the factory, the factory would have to destroy the old lower and re-issue the same serial number to a new lower. Makes sense. I was asking because, if i bought a registerable full auto lower that was worn out, would there be any way to restore it. There was recently a group of dealers who got busted for doing something similar. Transferred a "cheap" MG like a M11 back and forth many times, each time changing one detail. Long barrel here, caliber conversion there, belt fed conversion over there, until the only thing "original" was the piece of sheet metal stamped with the serial number, which ended up welded to a newly made M60, 1919 or similar. Some guns were sold as transferrables, and IIRC when ATF caught the act they told the buyers their gun was illegal but since they fucked up and allowed it on the registry they could keep it but never transfer it. $20,000 investment that can never be recovered. Beats prison though. |
|
Quoted:
Can you imagine how many Form 1's would be submitted the second the Hughes repeal goes into affect?
I think the ATF would just quit! Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The NFA is truly fucked, but it's FOPA that really fucked us hard. I don't think there would be many semi auto ar-15's sold today if everyone realized they could get an M-16 for the same price +$200... Ironically, repealing the Hughes amendment would actually give the antis what they say they want, since everyone's rifles would be registered and we'd all have to submit to fingerprinting, etc. Can you imagine how many Form 1's would be submitted the second the Hughes repeal goes into affect?
I think the ATF would just quit! There are thousands of war souvenir machineguns stashed in barns all over the country. The paperwork influx from these alone would tie ATF up and bury them for years. |
|
Quoted:
I THINK you would have to send it back to the factory, the factory would have to destroy the old lower and re-issue the same serial number to a new lower. But something about making a new machinegun and all that.... That's happened during the 1994 AWB See letter 2002-142 http://www.openatf.com/rulings |
|
Quoted:
This... Who is honestly going to know what they're looking at and then who can say, "this doesn't seem right" Quoted:
Quoted:
As long as it's an identical part I don't see how it's practically enforceable. This... Who is honestly going to know what they're looking at and then who can say, "this doesn't seem right" Realistically speaking, you'd probably get away with it, possibly for a very long time ... until the gun comes into the hands of a serious collector/dealer or ATF agent who notices that the receiver is finished, machined, and/or configured in a manner inconsistent with the supposed date of manufacture. There are a lot of little things you can fuck up in this scenario that a trained eye with background on what the receiver is "supposed" to look like, would notice. |
|
Quoted: This... Who is honestly going to know what they're looking at and then who can say, "this doesn't seem right"  Quoted: Quoted: As long as it's an identical part I don't see how it's practically enforceable. This... Who is honestly going to know what they're looking at and then who can say, "this doesn't seem right" |
|
Quoted:
Realistically speaking, you'd probably get away with it, possibly for a very long time ... until the gun comes into the hands of a serious collector/dealer or ATF agent who notices that the receiver is finished, machined, and/or configured in a manner inconsistent with the supposed date of manufacture. There are a lot of little things you can fuck up in this scenario that a trained eye with background on what the receiver is "supposed" to look like, would notice. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
As long as it's an identical part I don't see how it's practically enforceable. This... Who is honestly going to know what they're looking at and then who can say, "this doesn't seem right" Realistically speaking, you'd probably get away with it, possibly for a very long time ... until the gun comes into the hands of a serious collector/dealer or ATF agent who notices that the receiver is finished, machined, and/or configured in a manner inconsistent with the supposed date of manufacture. There are a lot of little things you can fuck up in this scenario that a trained eye with background on what the receiver is "supposed" to look like, would notice. Yes, but get real. I'd be dead when any of that happened and you know it ETA: if I have a M16, nobody is getting to "inspect" it. Check the serial number real quick, maybe - while I hold it in front of your dumbass face. (not your dumbass face but the dumbass ATF agent's face.  )
|
|
Quoted: No. The law is designed to make sure that old machine guns can not be replaced. They WANT them all to wear out. It is already working, as there is such a small supply of transferrables, demand has driven the cost up so high most people can't afford to own one. WHOA WHOA WHOA. Are you seriously implying that there is some kind of conspiracy within the government to keep citizens from keeping and bearing arms (A right enshrined in the Bill of Rights) through over regulation, red tape and bureaucracy? I have heard some tin foil woo-woo in my time, but this is ridiculous! I will have you know that all of these so called conspirators have all sworn an oath to the US Constitution, and the right to keep and bear arms by extension in the BoR. |
|
Quoted:
You could absolutely restore it. Tig weld material in, machine where necessary, and re-anodize. It would be expensive, but that process is done with high dollar dies every day. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I THINK you would have to send it back to the factory, the factory would have to destroy the old lower and re-issue the same serial number to a new lower. Makes sense. I was asking because, if i bought a registerable full auto lower that was worn out, would there be any way to restore it. You could absolutely restore it. Tig weld material in, machine where necessary, and re-anodize. It would be expensive, but that process is done with high dollar dies every day. From what I know, 7075 isn't really considered weldable. |
|
Receivers are metal. Metal can be welded back together, it can be built up in worn spots, and it can be machined back down to spec. In reality, a receiver will last forever with the right care.
Those torch-cut AK receivers can also be put back together with just a welder and a mill...both of which MANY people have in their home garages. |
|
Quoted:
From what I know, 7075 isn't really considered weldable. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I THINK you would have to send it back to the factory, the factory would have to destroy the old lower and re-issue the same serial number to a new lower. Makes sense. I was asking because, if i bought a registerable full auto lower that was worn out, would there be any way to restore it. You could absolutely restore it. Tig weld material in, machine where necessary, and re-anodize. It would be expensive, but that process is done with high dollar dies every day. From what I know, 7075 isn't really considered weldable. At least not if the 7075 is structural. You could probably get away with it for something like this, since there isn't any real pressure on a lower. |
|
Quoted:
No. You must repair the actual item. This is actually a serious issue with RDIAS and RLLs, because they will wear or break over time. Then you weld them back together and grind/machine to the correct dimensions. After a few repair cycles, there might be very little original metal actually left, and certainly none left in the wear points. Moreover, if you were to replace it, and make such replacement good enough, there'd be no way to tell. But, the law says repair only, you cannot replace. That's a lot like the magazine "rebuild kits" like they have/had in California where you could eventually replace an entire magazine with new parts. 
|
|
Quoted:
Oversight got much tighter along those lines when they busted a few jackasses some years back "repairing" Form 4'd MACs and Stens into configurations like this: 
https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRGSta9uVixHga0CpElKsqdGAzbgFOHRg2DIgS0cqktRnJAYlLSEA Reminds me of the old story: “This, milord, is my family’s axe. We have owned it for almost nine hundred years, see. Of course, sometimes it needed a new blade. And sometimes it has required a new handle, new designs on the metalwork, a little refreshing of the ornamentation . . . but is this not the nine-hundred-year-old axe of my family? And because it has changed gently over time, it is still a pretty good axe, y’know. ” |
|
Quoted:
Based on threads in the NFA forums, the markings are never quite right. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
As long as it's an identical part I don't see how it's practically enforceable. That was my wonder Based on threads in the NFA forums, the markings are never quite right. never quite right for whom? Who are flaunting your illegally repaired NFA item to? |
|
Quoted:
This... Who is honestly going to know what they're looking at and then who can say, "this doesn't seem right" Quoted:
Quoted:
As long as it's an identical part I don't see how it's practically enforceable. This... Who is honestly going to know what they're looking at and then who can say, "this doesn't seem right" You would be surprised what ATF will do when they smell something. They have been known to track down other serial numbers close to the one in question and examine them to see if they match up correctly. Tony |
|
Quoted:
There are thousands of war souvenir machineguns stashed in barns all over the country. The paperwork influx from these alone would tie ATF up and bury them for years. Quoted:
Quoted:
Can you imagine how many Form 1's would be submitted the second the Hughes repeal goes into affect?
I think the ATF would just quit! There are thousands of war souvenir machineguns stashed in barns all over the country. The paperwork influx from these alone would tie ATF up and bury them for years. Let's say there's just 6 million AR15s. That number is still way low, but let's just say. That's an instant untapped revenue stream of 1.2 billion dollars for the AR15 alone. Now how many Glocks are out there and how many people would want to throw on a FA rear plate? Even if they left the tax at $200, the government stands to make literally billions of dollars. Now, true, they don't really care about that, but that's more than enough money to be able to conduct proper, timely, and effective investigations. We're talking about an absolute assload of money. The annual budget for the entire FBI is $8B. You're talking about a level of funding here that, at minimum, would pay for 20-25% of the entire FBI. That's 6,000 to 8,000 people. That's nearly double what the ATF currently has (4,770 employees total). You would literally have the funding to nearly triple the size of the ATF if you repealed the Hughes Amendment. |
|
Quoted:
You would be surprised what ATF will do when they smell something. They have been known to track down other serial numbers close to the one in question and examine them to see if they match up correctly. Tony Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
As long as it's an identical part I don't see how it's practically enforceable. This... Who is honestly going to know what they're looking at and then who can say, "this doesn't seem right" You would be surprised what ATF will do when they smell something. They have been known to track down other serial numbers close to the one in question and examine them to see if they match up correctly. Tony Wow, very believeable though. They have too large of a budget and too much free time |
|
Quoted:
Let's say there's just 6 million AR15s. That number is still way low, but let's just say. That's an instant untapped revenue stream of 1.2 billion dollars for the AR15 alone. Now how many Glocks are out there and how many people would want to throw on a FA rear plate? Even if they left the tax at $200, the government stands to make literally billions of dollars. Now, true, they don't really care about that, but that's more than enough money to be able to conduct proper, timely, and effective investigations. We're talking about an absolute assload of money. The annual budget for the entire FBI is $8B. You're talking about a level of funding here that, at minimum, would pay for 20-25% of the entire FBI. That's 6,000 to 8,000 people. That's nearly double what the ATF currently has (4,770 employees total). You would literally have the funding to nearly triple the size of the ATF if you repealed the Hughes Amendment. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Can you imagine how many Form 1's would be submitted the second the Hughes repeal goes into affect?
I think the ATF would just quit! There are thousands of war souvenir machineguns stashed in barns all over the country. The paperwork influx from these alone would tie ATF up and bury them for years. Let's say there's just 6 million AR15s. That number is still way low, but let's just say. That's an instant untapped revenue stream of 1.2 billion dollars for the AR15 alone. Now how many Glocks are out there and how many people would want to throw on a FA rear plate? Even if they left the tax at $200, the government stands to make literally billions of dollars. Now, true, they don't really care about that, but that's more than enough money to be able to conduct proper, timely, and effective investigations. We're talking about an absolute assload of money. The annual budget for the entire FBI is $8B. You're talking about a level of funding here that, at minimum, would pay for 20-25% of the entire FBI. That's 6,000 to 8,000 people. That's nearly double what the ATF currently has (4,770 employees total). You would literally have the funding to nearly triple the size of the ATF if you repealed the Hughes Amendment. Which to me wouldn't be that swell of an idea (even if the registry were opened up). |
|
Quoted:
Which to me wouldn't be that swell of an idea (even if the registry were opened up). Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Can you imagine how many Form 1's would be submitted the second the Hughes repeal goes into affect?
I think the ATF would just quit! There are thousands of war souvenir machineguns stashed in barns all over the country. The paperwork influx from these alone would tie ATF up and bury them for years. Let's say there's just 6 million AR15s. That number is still way low, but let's just say. That's an instant untapped revenue stream of 1.2 billion dollars for the AR15 alone. Now how many Glocks are out there and how many people would want to throw on a FA rear plate? Even if they left the tax at $200, the government stands to make literally billions of dollars. Now, true, they don't really care about that, but that's more than enough money to be able to conduct proper, timely, and effective investigations. We're talking about an absolute assload of money. The annual budget for the entire FBI is $8B. You're talking about a level of funding here that, at minimum, would pay for 20-25% of the entire FBI. That's 6,000 to 8,000 people. That's nearly double what the ATF currently has (4,770 employees total). You would literally have the funding to nearly triple the size of the ATF if you repealed the Hughes Amendment. Which to me wouldn't be that swell of an idea (even if the registry were opened up). You would have to sell it that way to congress, we already know that the Federal gov is mostly running on usurped powers, but if it were to have a hope of passing, it would have to be considered a revenue enhancing bill to placate the uninformed. The Hughes amendment would just be the mechanism of enacting it. It's really no different than what they did with the ACA, promise one thing and do another. In this case however you would have to give them the funding but everyone would get practically free machine guns!
|