Armory Sponsor
Posted: 11/19/2007 6:10:24 PM EDT
|
Found on another board... www.subguns.com/boards/boardadmin/mgmsgadmin.cgi?read=631361 
 ETA: Makes you wonder how many more of these exist... |
|
Can the weapon be exported? I'm just trying to think of ways to get out of the SNAFU the ATF created, facilitated, and cooperated with. Sue them. They say it's illegal, but they facilitated it. Sue them for everything lost and for tricking people into comitting felonies. |
Only with a Form 6, which prolly would not get approved. Besides, the value of a used M16, in any foreign country where it would be legal to export it, is prolly less than $200. We can only export to "our friends," and .gov has been giving them free M16s for years.
Under the Federal Torts Claim Act, you can file a Standard Form 95 with BATFE. BATFE can grant or deny your claim. AFAIK, they have never granted a claim, and for decades they have been making rulings that cost people money and property. If they deny, you can sue in Federal District court in the district in which you live. But do you have any idea what it will cost in legal fees to sue the federal government? 
|
Oh don't I know... Fuckers cost me a grand last year... It would be a better investment of ten grand to buy a real MG than fight them over a bumpfire stock. Difficult for any person to fight a group that has many lawyers and essentially infinite resources, and will only be sued if they let you sue them. Yup. Pretty much fucked. |
It's been tried in the past; the gun owners lost. Honestly, it's BS like this that makes me hope that Heller goes the right way, resulting ultimately in the death of the 1934 NFA. |
While we all know the NFA is bullshit, I would be satisfied if they simply dropped the MG ban, and removed SBR, SBS, and suppressors from NFA. Might as well dump AOW's too. Make NFA applicable to MG's destructive devices and gadget guns. If that works out, we'll dump the whole thing. Take a page from the anti playbook. Step by step... |
Yup. Look at the OP's timeline: This was registered with a Form 10 in 1974. First form 5 transfer to a dealer in 2002 ... Most LE departments that have NFA in inventory have a mix of guns: Those that were purchased (via Form 5's), those that were confiscated or issued through a .gov surplus program (Form 10's) and those that were donated to the department by civilians (a mix of Form 5's, which are the correct form, and Form 10's, which should not be used for legal NFA but often are anyway). LE do not guard their Forms with the zeal of a civilian, because they are never compelled to produce proof of registration. My bet is that in this case, as in many, many others, the LE agency that registered it on a Form 10 in 1974 could not find the original paperwork when they sold in 28 years later (2002). They just assumed it was among the Form 5 guns, and sold it as such in good faith. The liability for the present owner's loss flows all the way back to that LE department. For that to happen, the current owner must sue the person who sold it to him; that person must in turn sue the dealer who bought it from the LE agency, and that dealer in turn must sue the original LE agency. No one is going to see a cent here except the lawyers. As far as the "many, many" examples out there.... Again, true, because so many MGs have gone through LE agencies at one time or another. From 1934 through at least the mid-1960's, I'd estimate, at best half of the LE agencies bothered to register the MGs they bought or otherwise acquired. MGs that were purchased directly from the manufacturer were Form 2'd and then Form 5'd to the departments, but those bought legally from dealers and individuals were often just signed out on the books and no formal transfer ever made. Similarly, the donation by a widow or estate of a registered MG was often not followed up with a Form 5 putting it in the department's name. LE are human, and avoid doing bureaucratic paperwork if they think there is no need.... Starting in the late '60s, there was a move to get all these off-the-books LE MGs registered. And without a paper trail, they registered them all on Form 10's, which means they can never be owned by anyone other than LE or military: Even SOTs cannot take possession of a Form 10 MG. (Fun fact: Some departments tried to register MGs in the 1968 amnesty, which would have made them transferable, and were asked, off the record, by ATF to not do so: The amnesty was for civilians, and ATF was buried in applications -- they didn't need more paperwork from LE agencies, which could file a Form 10 anytime). HTH. |
Yeah, this is the part that is absolute bullshit. Just think about how many more transferables there would be
|
Depends on what you want to buy. Most factory machine guns made in the '80s or after will not be a problem: M11/9s and M11/380s, Vector Uzis, AC556s, 9-mil SN Colt M16A1s. The odds of them being sold legally, turned into contraband, confiscated by LE and finally re-registered are slim. The most dangerous to buy are Colt Thompsons and other "original" MGs from prewar times: There are a lot of so-called "transferable" prewar MGs that are not. Be very careful about U.S. military-marked MGs, many of which were given to LE with a non-transferable requirement. In addition, C&R guns without amnesty papers and a documented paper trail from WWII can be risky. So are guns that apparently were made on Form 1's by individuals -- they could equally be ex-contraband. Tube guns from known makers are somewhere in-between, as are RDIAS and RLLs. I have seen one RDIAS that I know was not manufactured by the maker of record on the Form 2, due to the method of manufacture, so I imagine there are other contraband examples out there. When you are ready to buy, first figure out what you want. Then ask here. We'll try to help you avoid the landmines. 
|
|
BTW, out of 150k-200k transferable MGs, IMHO there are a coupla hundred that may be "problem" MGs ... and it's usually the "advanced" collectors who get burned, by alleged C&R or otherwise rare MGs. I have done FOIA requests on all my MGs, so I know their history from Day One. It's a good way to document whether a particular MG was ever owned by LE, and it shows what forms they were transferred on, every time they changed hands after leaving the factory. I would recommend every MG owner do an FOIA request on all their toys. Of course, there's always the chance it'll turn up a Form 10 in the history ... but it's a good way to document their guns, to prevent this sort of crisis if you ever sell them. 
|
i've heard that SWD only made RLL's, and yet there are a few SWD RDIAS's floating around...  |
|
While not as troublesome, be aware that the paperwork itself may be completely balled up as well. Here are examples I've personally seen: 1. Uzi listed as a "Jewmatic" under the model designation. (It was a F1 conversion, so technically the name is legit. However, today most folks want the correct model name listed on their paperwork. 2. Japanese Type 99 (7.7x58 caliber) registered as a .25 auto. (This was the case for my personal Type 99. It was brought back and papered as a DEWAT in 1943; apparently the "Office of Naval Intelligence" <dewatting agency> was an oxymoron. They also registered it with the wrong barrel length. Interestingly, the F5 didn't have a place for OAL. Apparently that wasn't required on early paperwork.) 3. RPD papered as an AK-47. (Much harder to resolve than the obvious "Jewmatic." In this case, the postal clerk who filled out the amnesty papers in 11/68 didn't know the difference. Apparently the soldier didn't either, so this amnestied RPD was always quietly transferred as an AK-47 because no one wanted to deal with the mess in fixing the registration.) 4. Sten SMG listed as SBR. (Yet another postal clerk '68 amnesty error. Resolved after some wrangling.) 5. Sten papered with wrong serial number. (Another postal clerk '68 amnesty error. The serial number is an IRS number- it was added because the gun didn't have a serial number. There was a mis-strike when stamping the new serial number; an 8 looked like a 3 and was registered as a 3. Fixing this involved doing a rubbing, having the gun inspected by ATF agents to verify the issue, and a lot of nervous waiting. 6. M2 carbine conversion with two serial numbers. (Someone added a second serial number to the receiver and papered it under the new number. However, the old number is still there. This causes lots of problems if the gun is ever inspected. ATF says to leave it as it stands.) I've heard of others, but these ones stick out in my mind the most. |
I personally dont know too much about it, never done it before. from the ATF's website: Your request must be made in writing, and mailed to ATF, Disclosure Division, Room 8400, 650 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20226. You may also fax your FOIA request to (202) 927-8866. |
|
You write them a letter requesting all info that is in the NFA Registry regarding your NFA item. There are several sample letters floating around the internet; here is one that I have used for some of mine: Chief, Disclosure Division Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives Washington, D.C. 20226 Dear Sir or Madam: I, [your name], residing at the above address, hereby request, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, that you provide me with all information and copies of all documents in the possession of your agency related to the firearm specified below, including the weapon history report. The firearm is, on information and belief, a machinegun (as defined by 26 U.S.C. § 5845(b)), registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record as: Serial number: [serial number] _Model: [model] _Name and address of manufacturer: [name and address] I understand that certain personal information on records relating to the National Firearms Registration and Registration Record are exempt from disclosure. To the extent possible, please provide me with copies of such records redacted to remove the exempt information. I hereby agree to pay all search and duplication fees in the amount of up to $[amount you are willing to pay]. If you estimate that fees will exceed this amount, please contact me. I am making this request as an individual seeking information for personal use and not for a commercial use, which I believe makes me an “all other requestor” for purposes of calculation of such fees. In support of the preceding sentence, I submit that I currently have no intention of selling the firearm described above and, therefore, any information obtained by virtue of this request letter would not contribute any significant pecuniary gain to me. I declare under penalty of perjury (pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746) that I am [your name] and, to the best of my knowledge, that I am the current lawful owner of the machinegun described above, the information set forth in this letter is true and correct, and that I understand the penalties provided in 5 U.S.C. 552a(i)(3) for requesting access to records under false pretenses. Respectfully, The first two hours of records search are free. FOIA searches for a single NFA item rarely take that long, and all my searches have been free. But under the rules an FOIA request must include a stated search cost limit, so I usually use $50 or $100. Over the years, BATFE policy has gone back and forth on whether FOIA request letters must be notarized. I do not know the current requirement, so I just go ahead and have 'em notarized anyway. Only costs a coupla bucks at most, and it may speed up the process. I have had FOIA searches take six months; other times, I've gotten the report in as little as two weeks. What you receive are either photocopies of the forms themselves, with the owner info blacked out, or a printout of the Weapons History Report (the actual NFA Registry computer file) again with names blacked out. Even without the names, you get the info on the original manufacturer, date of manufacture, type of form used for the initial registration(1 or 2, which tells you if it is a factory gun or not), the original configuration (barrel and overall lengths, caliber, etc.). Although you do not get the names of the subsequent owners, you do find out how many owners it has had; whether it was ever owned by an LE agency (two sequential Form 5s) or sold in an estate (a single Form 5 transfer). The date of registration can tell you if it was first registered in the '68 amnesty; whether your particular MG is old enough to qualify for C&R status, etc. A low-digit Colt M16, or an H&R M16, that was first registered in the 1980s means it is a reweld from scrap, since both were factory produced decades earlier. And a Form 10 registration is the kiss of death. Note that only the registered owner may legally file an FOIA request, so the process can't be used to screen MGs you want to buy. OTOH, an FOIA report on a gun documents its history, and if the owner ever does decide to sell it, it is proof that the MG is what it is -- sorta like a Carfax report. HTH. |
If it's a big purchase or something that's likely to be trouble, you can always ask the seller/current owner to do a FOIA. Just keep in mind that most sellers don't know much about the process. Offer to type, address, and mail the letter- all they need to do is to sign. Further, offering something in return (I always give a $50 for their trouble) can also help the reluctant. Mike |
That can get a little "iffy" because to get a free search, you must swear that you have no present intent to sell the NFA item. If you have already advertised it for sale, submitting an FOIA under the above conditions would be committing perjury. Once you have decided to sell an NFA item, you must submit the request for commercial use, which has different rules and fees: You are billed for every minute they spend on your request. I'm not sure how much the fee is or what the differences are in procedure, as I've never done a commercial request. Just mentioning this FWIW. Those more familiar with the ins and outs of the Freedom of Information Act are invited to chime in here.
|
As a dealer, I just left that part of the form letter out. Never had any issue..? Mike |
|
OK, question.... If this is an MG you already own, wouldn't it be better to just let the sleeping dog lie, rather than bring any problems to .gov's attention with a FOIA request? As they say, curiousity terminated the feline. (sorry for the mixed dog-cat metaphor) |
That's what I'm wondering. If you have no intention of selling it, there is no point in sending in the request. IF it comes back clean, nothing is gained. If it comes back dirty, you're screwed. If you are going to sell it, the same applies, and if it comes back dirty during the transfer, you are in the same screwed boat since you will have to refund the buyer and give up the gun. There is no potential penalty for not knowing the background of the weapon, and nothing to be gained from knowing it. The only person who benefits would be a potential buyer. Imagine the laughs at NFA branch if your FOIA comes back bad: "Ha! This dumb bastard just made us find out his MG isn't legal! Sucks to be him. Call his local office." |
|
In case I forget, remind me never to buy an MG from garandman or promptcritical. I like to know the history of the MGs I own. I don't buy questionable MGs, only those that I'm pretty confident are legal. IMHO, if you suspect an MG is illegal and you buy it anyway, you deserve what you get. I only sell a fraction of the MGs I buy. I do FOIA requests on almost all of my purchases, though. I recently did an FOIA request that turned a $3.5k MG into a $7.5k MG simply by documenting its history. IMHO, a free FOIA documentation that doubles the market value of an MG is a good idea. If you suspect that an MG you own has a shaky history, you are in trouble. You should not have bought it in the first place, and whether or not you ever sell it, simply being in possession of an illegal MG ain't a good idea. Check out the cost of a legal defense in court, and weigh it against the value of your home and your investments, and IMHO it is better to know right now and deal with it, rather than keep it until you die and let your widow/kids have to deal with an issue that may land them in prison. As I noted above, it is a very small fraction of "transferable" MGs that are at issue, and it is most common among particular segments of the market. If you want to buy in that particular market segment, you should be cautious. Hiding you head in the sand is not a viable approach. Thanks to Congress, NFA ownership is a risky biz. Yes, it sucks, but that's reality. Pretending to hide from that reality is not a viable approach. IMHO. YMMV.
|
|
Lucky for you I can't afford an MG. But you still have not enlightened me as to why I should care. How did an FOIA increase the value of an MG, turn a pre-sample into a transferable? I seriously doubt the ATF would go apeshit on a person who has an MG that has a bad transfer record. They would get ahold of you and tell you to turn it in. I doubt they would be interested in criminal charges unless you tried to avoid turning it in. They haven't busted down my door looking for "the stock that goes with this here spring". I really just don't see the point of tempting fate. What they don't realize, don't hurt me. If someone wants to buy an MG from me and wants a FOIA they can get one if they wish. IF it comes back dirty, I'll be rightfully pissed, but not at the buyer (much). I will just continue to add to my hatred of the NFA, GCA, and 922(o) and all the bullshit they have spawned. It won't burn me up, but it keeps me warm... 
|
If you are not planning to buy an MG, there is no reason for you to care.
It provided info that, with subsequent research, proved that this otherwise ordinary MG was present and played a role in specific events during World War II. Proof that a specific gun was present at historical events adds to its value. I did the research simply because I like old guns, I wonder what stories they could tell, and thanks to FOIA requests I can get some of that info, for free.
I seriously doubt BATFE would even notice a Form 10 transfer on an FOIA response. These requests are filled by entry-level clerks, not examiners -- they just go down to the basement (for old MGs), sort through dusty boxes for the original forms, then photocopy them, delete the confidential info and mail 'em out. Newer guns have records on microfiche and very new ones are electronic, but again, these are clerks who print them out and mail 'em. I have talked to several FOIA clerks by phone and, while they were quite nice, they clearly were clueless about what the forms meant. The MG in the case that started this thread was transferred several times before an examiner spotted the problem -- and examiners are trained to spot this. File clerks aren't trained or responsible for finding such errors. I guess there's always the chance you would get noticed on an FOIA ... but the odds are long. So no, the JBTs will not come looking for you. But still, if you discover you own a Form 10 gun, IMHO it would not be prudent to just ignore the issue. It needs to be dealt with, and (as in the OP's case) someone is going to be out some money. I prefer to spot and deal with landmines, rather than walk along in blissful ignorance and step on one. OTOH, a clean, complete FOIA record means you don't have to worry about such problems, and even if there is no historical impact, it proves to a potential buyer that his $10k-$15k investment is safe. |
|
I had a buddy who got in a cash crunch when trying to buy a house. He had a very nice Sten (IIRC) that he decided to sell He had bought it several years earlier from a CIII dealer When he went to do the form 4, he got a phone call and then an official visit from a BATF agent simply because it wasnt in the registry, ever. It was a mess to say the least |
I hope he still had the original of the Form 4 transferring the MG from the dealer to him. This has happened many times: It's not that it "wasn't in the registry, ever," the problem is that BATFE lost its copy of the records. In the 1980s, BATF hired a group of examiners who were self-appointed efficiency experts: They realized they could greatly reduce their workload by shredding the BATF copies of approved forms, instead of spending all that time filing them. No one knows how many were shredded -- at least hundreds, maybe thousands of records. And yes, the "voids" are still showing up today. This is why it's important that you keep your original paperwork in a very safe place. It may be the only document that proves your NFA is registered. |
No I believe that the dealer still had original form 3, but no longer had his CIII Somehow a deal was worked out which allowed my buddy the opportunity to sell it to a local CIII and not get in any trouble Shitty deal all the way around. This is part of the reason I am so anal about my form 4s I have originals in a fire safe inside mu gun safe One laminated copy in my safe One laminated copy in my shooting bag One laminated copy in my truck Pretty much where ever I go I have documentation that I own them |
Tony - First off, no need to insinuate I'm an illegal gun owner. I bought my SMG from a reputable dealer. If ever my guns are for sale, and if ever you want to buy one, then YOU can do the FOIA request. I got nothin' to hide. Secondly, if YOU want to poke the hornets nest so you can get a little historical bio about your guns, fine. But you haven't answered the question - Where's the upside of poking this hornets's nest? Lastly, no one's "hiding from reality." We're merely saying "The info to be gained ain't even close to worth it for the potetial of being screwed." Relatedly, I don't intentionally speed past police stations either. Why make trouble for yourself? |
I did not mean to insinuate that you're the owner of an illegal gun. If anyone took it that way, I sincerely apologize. I have a habit, when among friends, that if a buddy does something that I wouldn't do -- usually involving shooting or driving -- my standard wisecrack is, "Remind me to never buy a (car; truck; gun; whatever) from you." I say it with a smile, of course, because a friend is a friend. Sometimes on the internet, I choose the wrong smiley, and just have to hope people forgive me. 
Here is where we disagree: I do not consider filing an FOIA request for an MG I already own as "poking a hornet's nest." --As I said above, I do like to learn about the guns I own, so that's one reason. --Another is that if mine is that one-in-10,000, or whatever the odds are, that turns out to have a paperwork problem, I'd like to be proactive, and work with an attorney to maximize the chance of my either keeping the MG or recovering some of the cost before BATFE comes calling. --From my contact with the BATFE staff in D.C. that fills FOIA requests, I am very confident that an FOIA response that contained an error would arrive in my mail without anyone at BATFE recognizing it as being a problem. It's the sort of guy I am. I check out my attic every year for roof leaks, because I live in coastal Florida. I do routine maintenance on my vehicles (well, my gearhead son does) because I like to spot small problems before they turn into large ones. I go to the dentist and the doctor twice a year, not just when I'm in pain. Because if there is something wrong, I prefer to find out about it as soon as possible and on my timetable, not when things have deteriorated into a crisis. To me, there is nothing blissful about ignorance. If there's a problem with something I own, I would rather not find out when I go to sell it, and have to deal with an unhappy, panicked buyer (and only friends manage to pry 'em outa me, so that means freaking out a friend) -- or have my wife and kids find out when I'm gone and they need to liquidate my collection. For them, it would be a hornet's nest. Throwing friends or family into that hornet's nest because I didn't want to kick it ... well, that is just not what I would do. That's my reasoning for doing FOIA requests. I've given it a lot of thought. It's both reasonable and understandable that another person would put as much thought into it and come up with the opposite stance, and I respect that. This is a perfect example of where Your Mileage May Vary. HTH. And in the spirit of fun smilies, 
|
|
Tony - I see your reasoning. In some cases, I too use the logic "leave nothing to chance." In other cases, I use the logic "Don't fix what ain't broke." I'm still just not sure the info is worth the potential hassle. If ever I decide to sell (unlikely) , I'll prolly do the FOIA then. MMDV(my mileage does vary) I suppose.  |
|
A bit off-topic but, sometime last year we received word that our National Guard was freezing all DRMO allocations of surplus weapons until all were accounted for because some PDs were selling them off like regular firearms. I imagine they were offered fancy new 6920s in lieu and thought they were getting great deals. A local dealer stated one department wanted to trade an M-14 to him and he initially was going to accept but "did some research" and found out he couldn't do it and turned them down. (Can't believe he had to research it, I've known about certain NFA no-nos since I was in 8th grade i.e. less than 16" barrels on carbines, etc.) As Tony's been stating, there are probably a lot of these firearms out there because if unknowing administrators are trying this in this day and age, I can only imagine what occurred in the happier and freer times of the 60s,70s, and 80s. To the OP: Sorry for the dilemma, Scott |
| Sucks for the OP,.. Nowhere near as frightening but the only forms I have without Typos or mistakes are the Form1's that I filled out. I have a Factory SBS that Mossberg papered as a "590a1" when the receiver is clearly marked "500a", Serials match so I figured Its not a Biggy.? |
Armory Sponsor