Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 1/7/2006 10:52:16 AM EDT
...and I'm convinced that ATF simply makes up the rules as they go along.

Today I saw, with my own eyes, a post 86 HK MP5 on a Form 4.

The owner is a current federal employee who was unwilling to let me photograph either the firearm or the Form 4 (can't say I blame him).

Seemed to be a "manufactured as" MP5 (in onther words not a HK94 conversion) with the post 86 "restricted/government use" markings usually encountered on a post 86 HK SMG. But this one was privately owned by an "individual" and apparantly on the NFA registry as a "transferrable."

As I understand it, the person involved wanted his own "personal" MP5 and took the steps to acquire one (with the expectation to pay pre86 transferrable prices) and spoke to his supervisor (believing at the time he needed approval for the purchase) and the supervisor (who did not understand the NFA process) ordered a MP5 through agency channels (which was obviously a post86).

When the individual involved explained that he could not "personally own" the post86 SMG the supervisor wrote a letter and a Form 4 transfer was provided. In other words a post86 magically became "transferrable."

And as far as I can tell that is what seems to have happened.

And I have now seen EVERYTHING...
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 10:52:50 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/7/2006 10:54:22 AM EDT by Shoot-N-Scoot]
Have you seen a man eat his own head?

Thats so wrong on so many levels.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 10:53:19 AM EDT
dude you've got a shrike, of course you've seen everything
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 10:53:39 AM EDT
Not surprising.



The IRS has a "guideline book" and just makes up rules as it goes.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:04:56 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
...and I'm convinced that ATF simply makes up the rules as they go along.

Today I saw, with my own eyes, a post 86 HK MP5 on a Form 4.

The owner is a current federal employee who was unwilling to let me photograph either the firearm or the Form 4 (can't say I blame him).

Seemed to be a "manufactured as" MP5 (in onther words not a HK94 conversion) with the post 86 "restricted/government use" markings usually encountered on a post 86 HK SMG. But this one was privately owned by an "individual" and apparantly on the NFA registry as a "transferrable."

As I understand it, the person involved wanted his own "personal" MP5 and took the steps to acquire one (with the expectation to pay pre86 transferrable prices) and spoke to his supervisor (believing at the time he needed approval for the purchase) and the supervisor (who did not understand the NFA process) ordered a MP5 through agency channels (which was obviously a post86).

When the individual involved explained that he could not "personally own" the post86 SMG the supervisor wrote a letter and a Form 4 transfer was provided. In other words a post86 magically became "transferrable."

And as far as I can tell that is what seems to have happened.

And I have now seen EVERYTHING...



DUUUUUUH.

"Why are the USAS-12 and Streetsweeper shotguns destructive devices if they don't do anything a Bennelli, Saiga, or Spas-12 won't do?" "Uh... They look scarier?"

I'm sure the ATF does all sorts of favors for fellow feds. FBI, ATF, or some other alphabet soup agency wants his own toy, he just pulls some weight with the right folks and they make an "exception" for him.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:11:08 AM EDT
Fire mission, imagine the media hype... the government breaking it's own laws!

oh yea, I'll wake up now.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:11:35 AM EDT
good, i'm glad this guy figured out a way to obtain his gun. the laws, as the ATF makes them up, are BS anyway. maybe i have a little envy of him, but this means one more transferable MG in the hands of a civilian.

now if i could just figure out a way to get my MG (without paying thousands of $).
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:11:42 AM EDT
can you imagine what would happen if he legally sold it to you, and you were caught with it?

in the end, you may get out of jail, but it would be a lot of trouble to go through.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:17:05 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
...and I'm convinced that ATF simply makes up the rules as they go along.

Today I saw, with my own eyes, a post 86 HK MP5 on a Form 4.

The owner is a current federal employee who was unwilling to let me photograph either the firearm or the Form 4 (can't say I blame him).

Seemed to be a "manufactured as" MP5 (in onther words not a HK94 conversion) with the post 86 "restricted/government use" markings usually encountered on a post 86 HK SMG. But this one was privately owned by an "individual" and apparantly on the NFA registry as a "transferrable."

As I understand it, the person involved wanted his own "personal" MP5 and took the steps to acquire one (with the expectation to pay pre86 transferrable prices) and spoke to his supervisor (believing at the time he needed approval for the purchase) and the supervisor (who did not understand the NFA process) ordered a MP5 through agency channels (which was obviously a post86).

When the individual involved explained that he could not "personally own" the post86 SMG the supervisor wrote a letter and a Form 4 transfer was provided. In other words a post86 magically became "transferrable."

And as far as I can tell that is what seems to have happened.

And I have now seen EVERYTHING...



Let me get this straight.

A federal employee wants an MP5. He buys one as a post 86 sample using his federal employee status and has it converted to pre-86 status? WTF? So he can now sell it?

I couldn't have read that right.

Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:20:23 AM EDT


Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:22:58 AM EDT
Did he say what year he acquired it?

Kharn
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:24:40 AM EDT

Originally Posted By fadedsun:


Let me get this straight.

A federal employee wants an MP5. He buys one as a post 86 sample using his federal employee status and has it converted to pre-86 status? WTF? So he can now sell it?

I couldn't have read that right.





Actually he intended to buy a pre86 transferrable but through the actions of his employer a post86 magically became "transferrable."

As far as I can tell he could sell the thing tommarow for about $14k. Despite the "restricted" markings it does have a Form 4 and the serial numbers match.

Like I said, I've never seen anything like this. I was 100% positive he had a post sample that was simply "signed out" to him. I more or less went over to prove him wrong. Imagine my surprise...
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:25:23 AM EDT
Some animals are more equal than others.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:26:21 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Kharn:
Did he say what year he acquired it?

Kharn



Recently.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:29:43 AM EDT

Originally Posted By bulldog1967:
Some animals are more equal than others.




Exactly.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:33:53 AM EDT

Originally Posted By fadedsun:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
...and I'm convinced that ATF simply makes up the rules as they go along.

Today I saw, with my own eyes, a post 86 HK MP5 on a Form 4.

The owner is a current federal employee who was unwilling to let me photograph either the firearm or the Form 4 (can't say I blame him).

Seemed to be a "manufactured as" MP5 (in onther words not a HK94 conversion) with the post 86 "restricted/government use" markings usually encountered on a post 86 HK SMG. But this one was privately owned by an "individual" and apparantly on the NFA registry as a "transferrable."

As I understand it, the person involved wanted his own "personal" MP5 and took the steps to acquire one (with the expectation to pay pre86 transferrable prices) and spoke to his supervisor (believing at the time he needed approval for the purchase) and the supervisor (who did not understand the NFA process) ordered a MP5 through agency channels (which was obviously a post86).

When the individual involved explained that he could not "personally own" the post86 SMG the supervisor wrote a letter and a Form 4 transfer was provided. In other words a post86 magically became "transferrable."

And as far as I can tell that is what seems to have happened.

And I have now seen EVERYTHING...



Let me get this straight.

A federal employee wants an MP5. He buys one as a post 86 sample using his federal employee status and has it converted to pre-86 status? WTF? So he can now sell it?

I couldn't have read that right.




can you say.. 'toto .. where not in kansas anymore'???
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:34:30 AM EDT
So a department could theoretically make a few "magical machine guns" a year, sell them for current market price to a civilian that wants to pay upwards of 10k, and the department could get new cars and pay off debts?
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:36:25 AM EDT
Report it to FBI or local PD seriously. ATF corruption probe might do all of us some real good.

Report It

Unless this guy is family or a good freind rat on him.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:40:37 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Mattl:
Report it to FBI or local PD seriously. ATF corruption probe might do all of us some real good.

Report It

Unless this guy is family or a good freind rat on him.



+1 This is just a license to print money.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:42:23 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TheRedHorseman:
dude you've got a shrike, of course you've seen everything


OMG!

Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:43:30 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/7/2006 11:47:41 AM EDT by Mattl]

Originally Posted By Crowcreek:

Originally Posted By Mattl:
Report it to FBI or local PD seriously. ATF corruption probe might do all of us some real good.

Report It

Unless this guy is family or a good freind rat on him.



+1 This is just a license to print money.



Seriously walk away from the computer pick up the phone and narc on the motherfucker.

Might I also suggest getting local media attention first.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:47:20 AM EDT
Apply to get your own new MP5 on a Form 4 and sue for letting him do it, simply because he's an agent.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:48:48 AM EDT
+1 Turn it in.

We can't do it ,so they sure as hell shouldn't be able to.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:52:33 AM EDT
report it, it could be used as leverage to nuke 922o, if they dont enforce a rule then it ceases to be a rule.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 11:57:53 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/7/2006 11:58:06 AM EDT by SirDrinksAlot]

Originally Posted By TheRedHorseman:
report it, it could be used as leverage to nuke 922o, if they dont enforce a rule then it ceases to be a rule.



Aye, that kind of shit gives me such a fucking headache.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 12:00:44 PM EDT
Report it. Why cant i buy an M16 for a grand?
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 12:02:12 PM EDT
Can not believe he got a Form 4 for it. Some dumbass had just come in from a weekend long drunk spell signed off on it.

It will eventually come home to bite him in the ass.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 12:02:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By HarrySacz:
Report it. Why cant i buy an M16 for a grand?



Yeah. Jerks!
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 12:21:29 PM EDT
.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 12:23:22 PM EDT
Heads should roll for this!

If not, someone's dog ought to be shot for this BS.

It's just so wrong on so many levels.

HS1
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 12:25:42 PM EDT

So doesn't this set some kind of "precedent"?


So now, we can ALL get post 86's on form 4's?
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 12:26:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By lippo:
So doesn't this set some kind of "precedent"?


So now, we can ALL get post 86's on form 4's?



it could be argued in court, might actually work too. its a long shot but you never know....
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 12:28:09 PM EDT


That is absolutely fucking unbelievable.



Link Posted: 1/7/2006 12:29:34 PM EDT
tag
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 12:38:56 PM EDT
taggity, this may become interesting.......
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 12:40:57 PM EDT
Well I guess this falls under the old saying....


[mel brooks] "It's good to be the king!!!!!!"[mel brooks]
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 12:42:46 PM EDT
Tag.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 12:49:25 PM EDT
Call the NRA, see what they think the best course of action is.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 12:49:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Mattl:
Report it to FBI or local PD seriously. ATF corruption probe might do all of us some real good.

Report It

Unless this guy is family or a good freind rat on him.



Good friend, good guy who actually intended to do things the right way.

Through a combination of him being unfamiliar with the NFA process which was further complicated by a supervisors assumptions he ended up with a very affordable MP5 on a Form 4.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 12:52:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By cobrasks:
+1 Turn it in.

We can't do it ,so they sure as hell shouldn't be able to.



Actually...ATF did a very similar thing with the DOC HK94s recently.

Most were post 89 LE ONLY imports and ATF issued a letter saying they were "magically" Pre89 Imports and could be sold to civies. I have the letter that allowed me to sell several of them.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 12:52:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/7/2006 12:57:08 PM EDT by Gamma762]
What was the phrase in the '86 law... "except upon authority of a government agency" or something like that? Guess they exercised their authority. Good for him, bad for everyone else.

ETA:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
Actually...ATF did a very similar thing with the DOC HK94s recently.

Most were post 89 LE ONLY imports and ATF issued a letter saying they were "magically" Pre89 Imports and could be sold to civies. I have the letter that allowed me to sell several of them.


Another WOW, I wasn't aware of that with the DOC 94's.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 12:54:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Gamma762:
What was the phrase in the '86 law... "except upon authority of a government agency" or something like that? Guess they exercised their authority. Good for him, bad for everyone else.





Hmmmm, I think you may be right.

Damn, looks like we all need Fed jobs.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 12:56:28 PM EDT
Your buddy has done it once for himself, now, he must repeat the process a couple thousand times for the rest of us here.

Tell him to get busy. I'd like a MP5SD please.

Link Posted: 1/7/2006 1:01:54 PM EDT
I truely hope your mallards are linear.

As I was reading your post I was reminded of a fellow in '88 who was set up & busted for sale of a FA. Not every I was dotted & not every T was cross to the satisfaction of the ATF. Turns out the guy selling & the guy buying were both ATF & the former dealer now felon was made an example. An entrapment defense didn't hold water according to the judge.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 1:24:35 PM EDT
Seems like someone got their form one back for a M16 a year or so ago... posted on sturm??
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 1:25:58 PM EDT


friend or not, the fact that he is allowed to abuse his position to be above the law is bullshit.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 1:27:30 PM EDT
Mostly a tag but the line, "some animals are more equal than others" needed to be repeated yet again.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 1:29:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By TheRedHorseman:


friend or not, the fact that he is allowed to abuse his position to be above the law is bullshit.



Agreed.
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 1:38:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/7/2006 1:46:02 PM EDT by txgp17]

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
That is absolutely fucking unbelievable.

Wow, you don't see DK curse very much. I say report it. The main problem with the ATF is they have absolute power, and you know what absolute power does.......

Originally Posted By BangStick1:
Your buddy has done it once for himself, now, he must repeat the process a couple thousand times for the rest of us here.

Tell him to get busy. I'd like a MP5SD please.

Yes, and I'd like a MP5/10 "A5" with a Retractable buttstock and 3-round burst trigger group please
Link Posted: 1/7/2006 1:40:38 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/7/2006 1:46:58 PM EDT by NimmerMehr]
I'm sure there was a thread about this that the pre/post 86 law said that the gov could make exceptions.

Ahh here is an except from FOPA of 1986


"(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful for any person to transfer or possess a machinegun.

(2) This subsection does not apply with respect to--

(A) a transfer to or by, or possession by or under the authority of, the United States or any department or agency thereof or a State, or a department, agency, or political subdivision thereof;


As the non-lawyer me reads this, the government is allowed to play favors with respect to post 86 machine guns, just as New York City may play favors with respect to handgun permits.

After some nippping to remove the various allowances. This subsection does not apply with respect to a transfer by the United States or any department or agency thereof.

No law was broken, that man has connections.

Also, as I read this, any local police dept can authorise the transfer of a post 86 machine gun to a private citizen.

Maybe I'm wrong, I'd like a lawyer to chime in though.

Link Posted: 1/7/2006 1:42:44 PM EDT
that says nothing about being able to transfer to a private individual
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top