Sarco UZI Kits

[Golovko]

How about this:

Step 1. Do homework.

Step 2. Present request to BATF as a "verification", providing the homework that supports the point in question. By showing them that they supported a given ruling in the past, they *MIGHT* be less likely to change their ruling, since the possibility exists that some ruling changes were due to the BATF being unaware of their own prior rulings.

It's a shame the US ended up with a legal system instead of a justice system.

 

[mark214]

With the A.T.F., C.Y.A.

 

[stymie]

Golovko...

I can assure you that BATFE is quite aware of previous rulings. The '99 ruling change was in large part due to an influx of imported, slotted, Chinese Inglis pistols at that time. Sufficient quantities hit the shore to warrant the creation of reproduction stocks for that handgun. This was TECH BRANCH's way of wishing the *problem* away to the "cornfields".

Convenient, eh?

 

[stymie]

For you conspiracy theorists...

Perhaps the dear sir in the '99 letter was an ATF shill used to disallow the combination.

But, stymie... what about all those C&R Shansei .45 Broomhandles that IAR imported at the same time?

They were imported *earlier* by BTC (look for the import mark). The stocks came in on another boatload.

But... are those original stocks, as setforth under title 2 guidelines for NFA-exempt weapons?

Who knows? They were made in China! Who actually knows when they were made?

So what's the point?

Broomhandles were NEVER exempt from the original stock requirement.... hence, NO shill letter for a ruling was needed to accomplish ATF's goals. NOTE: Some people will tell you that there is a ruling allowing repro stocks on broomhandles.... funny thing.... they never can seem to come up with supportive documentation.

 

[stymie]

Gee, stymie... what does all this mean?

(*looks into his crystal ball... actually a magic8ball)

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that a company (or companies) design(s) a beltfed upper for an AR-15 &/or M-16 lower.... maybe even a MAC lower!

Sounds pretty KOOL! If the company got a *ruling* from BATFE to allow such a thing to be built.... could they possibly change their mind at a later date?

Dunno... you tell me! The timing would be just about right.... after all, they've been in development for years. (The gov/org types love genius tinkerers because they know there is that potential to tap for the military end-user).

But... what about the civilian end-user? Wouldn't that send repercussions throughout the NFA community. Investors would go absolutely bonkers... maybe even turn on each other!

(...to be continued!)

 

[mark214]

It has happened.
Open bolt MACs, KG9, FALs, AR15 auto sears, Group Ind. drop in open bolts...
OK one day, banned the next.

 

[KarlPMann]

It has happened.
Open bolt MACs, KG9, FALs, AR15 auto sears, Group Ind. drop in open bolts...
OK one day, banned the next.

I don't think all of those qualify as "OK one day, banned the next". Some of them are a matter of, "not ruled on one day, ruled on the next". In other words, some of those items were never approved of by ATF ruling and then later dis-approved. They were dis-approved of by ATF ruling near immediately, just not before some were sold on the market. Don't get me wrong, I know there have been cases where they did reverse an earlier decisions, just not all of those that you listed fall into that category. Karl.

 

[stymie]

Partz iz Partz...

Suppressor *replacement* parts were commonplace in the '80s. These included *over-length* tubes (anybody gotta pipe cutter, handy?)... & internal components. SGN was filled with ads for these items. You could go to virtually any gunshow & see the potential for "constructive possession" by passing just a few tables. One dealer had his tubes hanging from wires; he called them *windchimes*... lol. It was pretty blatant & it was only a matter of time before they were shutdown. Soon, any individual silencer part (with the exclusion of neoprene sheets & cookie cutters, later by ruling)... would be considered to be a silencer. Even adaptors were made to accept 2 liter plastic soda pop bottles. SWD joked that you must remember to register your bottles; ATF ruled the *adaptor* to be a suppressor shortly thereafter. These were ex post facto rulings.

On the other hand... ATF would not allow the importation of certain shotguns from S. Korea & S. Africa. The Daewoo USAS-12 & Penn arms/Sentinel Arms Striker-12 & Cobray Streetsweeper were to be built in the USA. One day, Lloyd Bentsen put 2 & 2 together .... ruling that since these weapons were *non-sporting* (whatever that means) + had a bore diameter over 0.5" = DESTRUCTIVE DEVICE. I suppose we are now at a point where ANY 12ga shotgun (including pumps) could be ruled *non-sporting*. Is that scoped deer rifle of yours a *sniper* rifle... perhaps, even an implement of war or weapon of mass destruction?

Phrases like non-sporting, semi-automatic assault weapons, military lookalikes, high capacity feeding devices & cop-killer bullets roll off the tongues of NWO liberals who seek to control every aspect of our lives; afterall... slaves can't own firearms!

Thank GOD for my pre-ban toilet & showerhead, but I'm expecting a new ruling any day now!

 

[KarlPMann]

:soapbox Feel all better now? :angel3 Karl.