Transferable vs. non-transferable > General NFA Questions

Posted: 10/19/2006 12:40:23 PM EDT

What makes the difference between weapons being transferable or not?

I know nothing of class 3 stuff and was just curious. A search of this forum and the FAQ's didn't help, sorry if it's not valid or an always asked question.

Thanks,

Chad

Posted: 10/19/2006 2:52:06 PM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:
What makes the difference between weapons being transferable or not?

I know nothing of class 3 stuff and was just curious. A search of this forum and the FAQ's didn't help, sorry if it's not valid or an always asked question.

Thanks,

Chad

a transferable is a machinegun logged into the NFA regestry before may 1986. a post sample is a machine gun made after 1986 . a pre sample is a machine gun imported after 1968 but before 1986 ,only dealers can own these as well.

Posted: 10/19/2006 4:17:08 PM EDT

[#2]

Also any weapon confiscated by police and registered for dept. on form 10 looses any potential transferable status.

Posted: 10/20/2006 7:40:54 AM EDT

[#3]

Very good responses - thanks guys...

Posted: 10/20/2006 2:45:32 PM EDT

[#4]

Are the M16s police departments are getting from the military transferable?

Posted: 10/20/2006 2:55:12 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
Are the M16s police departments are getting from the military transferable?

no

Posted: 10/20/2006 6:37:49 PM EDT

[#6]

Why not?

Posted: 10/20/2006 8:06:54 PM EDT

[#7]

Because the M16s from Govment.org are still military property on loan to the PD. The PD can't even keep them.

Posted: 10/21/2006 3:04:17 PM EDT

[#8]

Because the M16s from Govment.org are still military property on loan to the PD.

That was a good idea while it lasted.

Posted: 10/21/2006 11:00:31 PM EDT

[#9]

The .gov could transfer them and remain legal, yes?

Posted: 10/22/2006 5:43:22 AM EDT

[#10]

Military guns are not in the NFA registry so not transferable. The government makes the rules so if they decided to make them transferable they could be with the stroke of a pen.

But they are not.

Posted: 10/22/2006 11:36:30 AM EDT

[#11]

922(o) doesn't prescribe compliance with the NFA; it requires lawfull compliance. Any MG the military lawfully possesses that was also possessed lawfully prior to may 19 is, by implication, lawfully transferrable. The NFA makes no provision for registry, therefore there is no way to comply with it in the case of a non-NFA-registered weapon that was "lawfully possessed" prior to may 19. Very similar (IMO) to US v RIA.

Of course, just like previously indicated, if Johnny Gov don't want to sell us his guns, we aren't gonna get 'em unless something changes.

Posted: 10/22/2006 11:51:14 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
922(o) doesn't prescribe compliance with the NFA; it requires lawfull compliance. Any MG the military lawfully possesses that was also possessed lawfully prior to may 19 is, by implication, lawfully transferrable. The NFA makes no provision for registry, therefore there is no way to comply with it in the case of a non-NFA-registered weapon that was "lawfully possessed" prior to may 19. Very similar (IMO) to US v RIA.

Of course, just like previously indicated, if Johnny Gov don't want to sell us his guns, we aren't gonna get 'em unless something changes.

well then agien how many of them would be pre 86 dealer samples do to being exported and then coming back post Gun control act of 86 but pre May 19th Machine gun freeze?

Warning

Confirm Action

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Transferable vs. non-transferable

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Transferable vs. non-transferable