PDA

View Full Version : What to do when you see someone pulling a NFA "dumbass"?


full.tang.halo
October 27, 2009, 09:12 AM
What do you do if you see something for sale that you are more than pretty sure is against the law, but seems to be a "stupid kid" not knowing what's been made is not legal.

Aka a too short shotgun, pistol with a stock attached

ZeSpectre
October 27, 2009, 09:16 AM
What do you do if you see something for sale that you are more than pretty sure is against the law, but seems to be a "stupid kid" not knowing what's been made is not legal.

Aka a too short shotgun, pistol with a stock attached

We had just such an event a little while ago. Since the young man in question INSISTED that he had just bought it from a gun shop in exactly that configuration (and nobody had a ruler) the rest of us present agreed on the following course of action.

"We didn't see nuthin, go lock that back in your trunk until you measure it and are SURE it is of a legal length".

The young man agreed and did so.

Casimer
October 27, 2009, 09:19 AM
If it's an honest mistake, and not someone intentionally making a/o selling a firearm that they know to be illegal, I'd warn them. But do so in a manner that won't leave a record (i.e. don't send them an email), just in case.

full.tang.halo
October 27, 2009, 09:36 AM
...

Willie Lowman
October 27, 2009, 11:17 AM
I have seen more than a few auctions on Gunbroker for illegal SBS, SBR...

I usually send them a e-mail stating that what they are selling is illegal and if someone bought it they would BOTH go to prison.

More often than not I get a message back to the effect of "Thanks man! I didn't know this was illegal. You saved my ass!" Then I check the auction and it says SOLD!

Skans
October 27, 2009, 03:23 PM
I look at it this way. I don't work for BATFE. And I just don't give a dern about policing those people who violate NFA laws. What do I really care if some guy has a shotgun that is two inches too short? Or, has a stock or foregrip on his pistol? Can anyone, even law enforcement, tell me why someone else having these things should be any concern whatsoever to me?

rantingredneck
October 27, 2009, 03:28 PM
If I see it posted in a forum (usually where I see these things) I usually reply with the standard, "Please tell me you have a tax stamp for that".

Then when the person says, "What's a tax stamp?" you know there's a problem.

AJD21
October 27, 2009, 03:47 PM
I don't get all worked up. I just let them know what's going on. I remember one case where a guy said it he had a sawed off shotgun. I told him that anything under 18" and its a felony due to the 1934 NFA(which I then explained). He just looked at me and didn't say anything else. I just added that it he could do whatever but that was the law.

9mmkungfu
October 27, 2009, 04:40 PM
I mind my own business.

MTT TL
October 27, 2009, 06:17 PM
Can anyone, even law enforcement, tell me why someone else having these things should be any concern whatsoever to me?

It all depends upon your view of your community and your role in it.

Wagonman
October 27, 2009, 06:28 PM
I think that if it's a friend and you have info that would keep him out of trouble you should share that info. Otherwise, let your conscience be your guide.

javabum
October 27, 2009, 06:51 PM
I am of the mind that ignorance of the law is no excuse.But if it is a close friend i would inform him/her.Other than a close friend i leave it alone.Not my business.

dogtown tom
October 27, 2009, 07:00 PM
State & Federal firearms regulations are far from simple. What is legal here is illegal there. Purchase something as innocent as a magazine in one state requires not even a drivers license, yet in another state possession of the same item is a felony.

Pretty much everyone knows that a "sawed off shotgun" is illegal, right? Well, it's not- if you have a tax stamp for a Short Barreled Shotgun. But what length makes it a "sawed off"? Ask your non gun loving buddies (if you have any) and don't be surprised at the answers.

I understand why some would just mind their own business. That's their choice.

I was raised a little different I guess. If I see that someone, through ignorance of the law, is about to violate a firearms law, I'll let them know because it's the right thing to do. I would appreciate it if it were me in similiar circumstances.

One of the more common NFA violations I see on GunBroker is with the Browning Hi Power and a wood stock/holster (either repro or original). I love me my HP's :D, so I have a habit of running a search almost every night for the Hi Power. Quite often, I see someone offering a 1960's or '70's vintage FN Hi Power or 1940's fixed sight Inglis for sale that shows the Inglis style stock/holster attached. Both would be NFA violations. (Unless you have a SBR tax stamp).

To understand just how illogical and somewhat arbitrary NFA rules are takes a bit of background:

Just before the Germans overran Belgium and the Fabrique Nationale factory, the Allies moved several FN engineers to Canada to continue production of the Hi Power at the John Inglis Co. The Inglis Hi Power was produced not only for issue to the Canadians, but also the Chinese, British and Australians.

The contract for the Chinese was a Hi Power with a tangent style rear sight and a slot cut in the backstrap for the attachment of a wooden stock that doubled as a holster. This is called an Inglis MK1. This would enable it's use as a pistol or carbine. Most of these "Chinese contract" HP's never made it to China BTW. Inglis also made HP's with a fixed rear sight (the MK2) and a very few of these had the grip frame cut with a stock slot. Both versions were issued to the Allies and many were subsequently sold as military surplus for quite some time after the war.

What does this have to do with a violation of the National Firearms Act of 1934?

The NFA prohibited a rifle with a barrel of less than 16" without the possession of a tax stamp. ATF has determined that a handgun is just that, a gun intended to be fired with one hand. Therefore in the eyes of the ATF, attachment of a stock to a handgun makes it not a handgun and brings it under the NFA. It doesn't make it illegal, as long as you pay the tax for an SBR.

The ATF however, has determined that CERTAIN handguns with a wooden stock/holster are exempt from the NFA: (Luger, Mausers, Berettas, and Browning HP's among them)

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/curios/1972-2007/section3.pdf

The Bureau has determined that by reason of the date of their manufacture, value, design and other characteristics, the following firearms are primarily collector's items and are not likely to be used as weapons and, therefore, are excluded from the provisions of the National Firearms Act.
Further, the Bureau has determined that such firearms are also curios or relics as defined in 27 CFR 478.11. Thus, licensed collectors may acquire, hold, or dispose to them as curios or relics subject to the provisions of 18 U.S.C. Chapter 44 and 27 CFR Part 478. They are still "firearms" as defined in 18 U.S.C. Chapter 44.

I've edited those firearms that are not Hi Powers

Belgian, Pre-war mfd. Hi Power pistols, in cal. 9mm having tangent sights graduated to 500
meters, slotted for shoulder stock, having S/Ns of less than 47,000 without letter prefixes
or suffixes and accompanied by original Belgian mfd. detachable wooden flat board type
shoulder stocks.

Browning Hi power pistols, 9mm having tangent sights graduated to 500 meters, slotted for shoulder
stock, having S/Ns less than T200,000 etched vertically on the right side of slide, barrel, or
frame and bearing crest of Emirates of Muscat & Oman, or mirror image of such crest,
accompanied by original detachable wooden flat board shoulder stocks.

Canadian, Inglis No. 1, Chinese Contract, Hi Power pistols, cal. 9mm parabellum, having a
tangent rear sight adjustable from 50 to 500 meters, slotted for shoulder stock, and having
the letters C in the S/N and accompanied by original Canadian mfd. detachable wooden
holster/shoulder stock.

In the last couple of months I've seen these NFA violations:
Inglis #2 Hi Power with an Inglis stock. (only the tangent sight version is exempt from the NFA)
Browning 1994 Hi Power with an Inglis stock. (not legal without a tax stamp)

I sent both sellers an email advising them of the possibility of being in violation. One thanked me, one didn't respond. Both pulled their auctions.

I'm convinced I did the right thing.



.

Willie Lowman
October 27, 2009, 07:45 PM
By issuing such a warning to someone, I learned there is no NFA stamps in Puerto Rico. They can have SBRs and I think some AOWs but no SBS or machineguns.

Superhouse 15
October 27, 2009, 09:45 PM
We had a younger kid come into the range where I work with a revolver with a shoulder stock. He had carved one side of the grips into a full stock from a piece of good wood. Obviously good workmanship. We asked if it was an SBR, neither he nor his family had any idea what we were talking about so we made him leave the range. Shame, it was neat (L frame S&W IIRC) but not worth trouble for us.

Tom Servo
October 27, 2009, 10:59 PM
Shame, it was neat (L frame S&W IIRC) but not worth trouble for us.
That does seem really neat! It's also quite tragic that we can't have nice things.

I see weird homebrew NFA stuff about once every three months. Usually, the conversation ends with, "OK. If you don't believe me, show it to a cop. See what he says. In any case, get it out of here. Now."

Case in point: a guy came out of the range complaining that his "223" was jamming. Turns out it was a bolt override. Fun.

He'd bought a Bushmaster AR-15 pistol from a competitor, then slapped a full-length buffer tube (but not the buffer) and a stock on it. As soon as I saw it, I stopped short and asked for his Form 4. He gave me a blank look.

It was obvious that he didn't know he was committing a crime, nor did he believe me when I told him so. He became very argumentative until I said, "no, I'm not even touching it. I don't want my prints on it." He kept his indignant air, claiming he was going to take it back to the competitor's shop and "give them what for."

Good luck with that.

On the flip side, I had a nice lady bring in some of her recently deceased husband's guns to sell. One was a Street Sweeper which, of course, the husband hadn't deigned to register in '86. It fell to me to explain to the poor lady that she couldn't sell it, and in fact, couldn't even legally own it.

I've got an attorney that specializes in such cases, but no matter what, she'll have to relinquish it with no compensation.

Skans
October 28, 2009, 08:07 AM
It all depends upon your view of your community and your role in it.

My point of view is that I don't like idiotic nonsense laws. While I will abide by them because I'm not one of those guys who basically has nothing to lose and I also don't have any desire to go to jail for breaking the law, I will not participate in enforcing those laws by policing others, WHEN it doesn't affect me. Now, if I see a blatent violation at the semi-private range I shoot at, I might say something because I don't want the range to disapear (has never happened, so I'm just speculating).

To me, this is similar to telling your neighbor who replaced his own roof without pulling a permit that he is breaking the law.

gyvel
October 28, 2009, 08:53 AM
Has it occurred to anyone that it could be a setup? It can and HAS happened. I was at a gun show in the '80s in Hollywood, FL when some prominent news reporter (I forget who it was; I want to say Dan Rather) sent his underaged, out of state son in to try and purchase a weapon. Not exactly an NFA sting, but the principle is the same. I wouldn't put BATF past anything.

This particular story has a happy ending, however: The Hollywood PD arrested the kid (or so I was told) and embarrassed the hell out of the big shot newscaster. I think they paid a fine and the charges were reduced somehow, but, still, justice was served in this particular case. Of course, it was completely hushed up and nothing was ever heard after.

Skans
October 28, 2009, 09:42 AM
You know, I always read about people describing possible ATF "sting" operations. Most of them concerning machinegun parts, parts sets, DIAS, lightning links, silencer parts, etc, etc. And, I've heard of ATF busting folks for being a dealer without an FFL, especially at gun shows. But, I've never heard of a 1st hand or even 2nd hand account of someone who has actually seen one of these sting operations. Nor have I ever heard of anyone being arrested or pursued by ATF for posting anything, including pictures of things that violate NFA.

I figure it's got to be one of several things:

1. BATFE is really good at running sting operations, and then wisking the perp off to a secluded prison where that person never has any contact again with the outside world;

2. BATFE arrests and punishes these perps, but then uses mind control drugs on them to make them forget the entire experience;

3. I'm an idiot living in a protective bubble because 50% of the folks I converse with on internet gun boards have personally had bad experiences with BATFE;

4. I'm just an idiot

5. BATFE is still gathering data on everyone who is potentially violating NFA, trolling internet sites and is waiting for a time when they can make the "Big Bust"

6. BATFE emplyees are just glad to have their government paycheck and government benefits and other than doing their 9-5 job description, just don't care what NFA laws are being broken;

7. BATFE is just a fictional government entity that doesn't really exist, sort of like the New Orleans Police Department.

8. There's no one out there breaking NFA laws and business for the BATFE is really bleak.

9. Unless the violation of NFA laws involves the import/export of over 100 illegal machineguns and munitions official BATFE policy is "don't ask don't tell".

Willie Lowman
October 28, 2009, 11:36 AM
I don't know about all that but I have seen a guy at one OGCA meeting with a USAS parts kit on his table with about 200 buckshot shells. Nothing else. When I asked about the parts kit he leaned in close and told me that he "knew where a receiver was. The only problem is, there's no papers for it."

When I asked how he came to have such a thing but no form 4 he told me that he had won it in a shooting match in Colorado back in the late 60's! He threw in a few more details that didn't make sense and didn't seem to fit with the rest of his story. At that point he told me he would trade me the parts kit for my 03-A3 and "We can work out a deal on the receiver later."

I walked away. I don't know if he was a Fed or a local cop or some jerk trying to sell an unregistered DD. Seemed like a trap to me.

Edward429451
October 28, 2009, 11:54 AM
Yeeahh, walk away from those guys. Don't touch their wares, don't show any interest, don't drop no dimes. MYOB and keep walking. Might be a sting, might be someone who is ignorant of the laws.

There's enough fun to be had in legal weapons, who need bad NFA crap?

flight954
October 28, 2009, 12:42 PM
Inform the person of the illegality and remove yourself from the item ASAP:confused:

Skans
October 28, 2009, 01:23 PM
In the USAS-12 scenario, is it a violation of the law to purchase the parts set - not the receiver, just the parts set? I have a registered USAS-12 and I could see where I'd be very tempted to just buy the parts.

Willie Lowman
October 28, 2009, 01:59 PM
I don't think the USAS parts are controlled. Just like a Bren parts kit or a Sterling kit. The receiver is the gun, legally.

In the few years after my encounter with the guy and his suspicious USAS deal, I have started to wonder... If it were really a agent/cop trying to set someone up, how would he have reacted if I told him I would trade for his parts and he could keep his illegal receiver.

webhead
October 28, 2009, 02:30 PM
A recent event showing what happens to someone w/out the right paperwork.

FORT PIERCE, FL — A 39-year-old Vero Beach man was arrested Saturday after being found with a short-barrel assault rifle outside a gun show at the Havert L. Fenn Center in Fort Pierce, according to a recently released arrest affidavit and a sheriff’s official.

full story - http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2009/oct/26/vero-beach-man-accused-having-illegal-weapon-outsi/

Skans
October 28, 2009, 04:01 PM
How come the BATFE didn't make the arrest - local cop had to do it?

dogtown tom
October 28, 2009, 04:28 PM
Skans: How come the BATFE didn't make the arrest - local cop had to do it?

Well, from the linked article it appears the officer who observed him made the arrest. ATF probably wasn't there, but interviewed later.

mskdgunman
October 28, 2009, 06:09 PM
There are not as many BATF folks around as you might think. Like LEO's everywhere they are understaffed (despite what the web says). It's usually a local who makes a case like that and then picks up the phone and calls the feds. They can then elect to either let the State file the charges or pick the case up for Federal prosecution. Depending on the circumstances and the guys history, those kind of cases will usually, not always, stay at the State level. Now, if the guy is manufacturing and selling the things or he has a lengthly felony record, the Feds would probably take the case.

A lot depends on the Federal district and how aggressive they are. YMMV

webhead
October 28, 2009, 09:04 PM
A friend of mine is sure ATF was there.

I think a dealer at the show saw the rifle, alerted the onsite sheriff and the sheriff called ATF to verify the violation and then arrested the man. But that's what I think. Can't confirm that from the wonderful job of reporting since it's more hyperbolas than facts. Still trying to figure out the short barreled assault rifle part. No indication that it was fully automatic as well. I'd think the ATF is more concerned about that than being too short.

johnwilliamson062
October 29, 2009, 09:18 AM
I usually just send them an e-mail that says something to the effect of "it's hard to be sure from that picture, but it looks like that might be in violation of [insert law]. If I were you I would temporarily remove the ad and check to be sure it is not."

gyvel
October 31, 2009, 12:02 AM
There are not as many BATF folks around as you might think. Like LEO's everywhere they are understaffed (despite what the web says). It's usually a local who makes a case like that and then picks up the phone and calls the feds. They can then elect to either let the State file the charges or pick the case up for Federal prosecution.

True.

About 10 years or so ago, a local gunsmith in a very small town in northern AZ was making illegal MAC 10s. What got him was that he was test firing them out in nearby places (lots of BLM land around) and attracted "attention."

The County Sheriffs made the arrest, called BATF and were told that they had no interest in the case and go ahead and prosecute locally.

The guy was prosecuted, but received a minimal sentence and lost a rather large gun collection as a result.

Bartholomew Roberts
October 31, 2009, 10:58 AM
There are not as many BATF folks around as you might think. Like LEO's everywhere they are understaffed (despite what the web says).

In 1993, approximately 764 ATF Inspectors and 1,660 Agents monitored 282,000 FFLs. Today, 771 Inspectors and 2,441 Agents monitor 60,201 FFLs. Source (http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=353747&highlight=atf).

In relative terms, ATF has increased their manpower by approximately 33% at a time when the number of people they were watching shrunk by over 67%.

As far as NFA "dumbass" moments go, I don't see it as meddling or nosy to point out to someone that they are doing something that could earn them a minimum 5 years in a federal prison. I am not going to call the ATF if they ignore my advice; but I know I would much rather a fellow shooter give me a heads up if I was ignorant about something than get one from an ATF agent right before I get arrested.

Chipperman
October 31, 2009, 11:28 AM
gyvel said, ...a local gunsmith in a very small town in northern AZ was making illegal MAC 10s...

....called BATF and were told that they had no interest in the case and go ahead and prosecute locally....


That surprises the heck out of me. I would have thought ATF would be all over a guy making multiple illegal machine guns.

Was he selling them also?

gyvel
November 1, 2009, 01:29 AM
That surprises the heck out of me. I would have thought ATF would be all over a guy making multiple illegal machine guns.

Was he selling them also?

That part was unclear to me; I believe he was making them for his own use.

4thPointofContact
November 11, 2009, 07:15 PM
redacted pending further research

dogtown tom
November 11, 2009, 08:06 PM
4thPointofContact: redacted pending further research

How dare you?

This is the intarnets, no research allowed.:D

mrnkc130
November 12, 2009, 05:56 AM
go to you tube some time and type in homemade silencer...there are all sorts of videos of people making crude silencers out of bottles and even some more elaborate ones...I realize some of these people may have filled out the forms and paid the tax, but i highly doubt all of them did. Many were made of what looks like bottles and electrical tape, unlikely a $200 bottle...

All the ones I watched users were still active and making comments on thier videos so I wouldnt assume anything was ever done about it...I saw several comments from people who appear to be knowledgeable in NFA items, but couldnt find any comments from OP's replying to them...

10 min on the internet could probably turn up quite a few easily trackable violations...interesting at least i think in regards to enforcement...

JerseyDrez
November 12, 2009, 10:01 AM
I mind my own business.

I concur.

Oldfalguy
November 12, 2009, 02:14 PM
Other than the aforementioned youtube idiots I have not seen much in the way of blatant dum dum.
Mostly its folks having a weapon on a table with a short barrel for sale and not stating its NFA on the sign- I can sorta understand that but it makes me look which is the intent of advertising I reckon.:D

IdahoG36
November 16, 2009, 09:31 PM
I look at it this way. I don't work for BATFE. And I just don't give a dern about policing those people who violate NFA laws. What do I really care if some guy has a shotgun that is two inches too short? Or, has a stock or foregrip on his pistol? Can anyone, even law enforcement, tell me why someone else having these things should be any concern whatsoever to me?

My sentiments exactly. I don't work the for the BATFE, so what do I care. It doesn't affect me in the least.

Tim R
November 24, 2009, 05:05 AM
I look at it this way. I don't work for BATFE. And I just don't give a dern about policing those people who violate NFA laws. What do I really care if some guy has a shotgun that is two inches too short? Or, has a stock or foregrip on his pistol? Can anyone, even law enforcement, tell me why someone else having these things should be any concern whatsoever to me?

So you see some gang banger and his buddies out shootin' a illegal gat and you don't call the po po on your way out?

jughead2
November 24, 2009, 05:37 AM
this old man would really be glad if he was unknowingly doing something like that one would enlighten him of his folly.:confused:

Crosshair
November 24, 2009, 08:36 AM
I look at it this way. I don't work for BATFE. And I just don't give a dern about policing those people who violate NFA laws. What do I really care if some guy has a shotgun that is two inches too short? Or, has a stock or foregrip on his pistol? Can anyone, even law enforcement, tell me why someone else having these things should be any concern whatsoever to me?
It may not be a concern to you, but the person who has the gun likely is unaware of the law they are breaking. It IS your job as a supporter of the 2nd to educate people about firearms and that includes NFA. It isn't any of your business what they own, however the gov will make it their business if they find out.

Do you tell someone when they have a burned out headlight on their car and may not realize it? If they have a flat tire? If you hear their engine pinging? If you see that they have a visibly bent tie-rod? If they have their trailer hooked up incorrectly? Sure it's none of your business, but informing someone of a problem they may not be aware of is the responsible thing to do

If they do know and don't care, then just go about your business. You don't have to report them to the police, I don't.

Skans
November 24, 2009, 08:55 AM
So you see some gang banger and his buddies out shootin' a illegal gat and you don't call the po po on your way out?

I have no idea what "gat" is. Is it an SBR or short barreled shotgun - because that's what I was addressing.

If I see a gang banger look at me the wrong way, at the very least, I'll snap a pictutre of him, and there's a 50/50 chance I'll call the cops just to let him know "We're watching". I don't care for "gangs" and punks hanging around causing trouble. I have no problem getting in their faces and demand that they leave, if I think I have justification to do so.

Skans
November 24, 2009, 09:16 AM
It may not be a concern to you, but the person who has the gun likely is unaware of the law they are breaking. It IS your job as a supporter of the 2nd to educate people about firearms and that includes NFA.

I am a supporter of the 2nd Amendment. Although I myself adhear to all firearms laws, I consider the NFA unconstitutional. If I want to work for BATFE, I'd send in my application, go through the interview process and collect my paycheck for the services you seem to think I need to do for them for free.

When someone goes up to another person they don't know and says, for example "hey, buddy, did you know that rifle of yours looks to be 2"'s too short and you could be looking at some serious penalties" - that person has no idea whether you intend to turn him in, or where you're coming from.

If someone asks me about NFA laws, I'll gladly inform them of what I know to the best of my ability. But, I'm not a BATFE agent snooping around for what I consider to be technical violations of an absurd, inconsistant and unconstitutional law.

Having mechanical problems with a car isn't comparable to people violating laws. Here are a list of other laws that I don't inform people that they are breaking:

- Speed Limits (unless you're speeding through my neighborhood)
- Zoning violations
- watering restrictions
- riding ATV's or dirt bikes on rural public roads
- fishing or hunting without a license
- Drinking beer at public outdoor events
- Bikes with loud pipes
- women who happen to flash me randomly (I wish)
- people who have black boxes that steal HBO or whatever other paid TV
- folks who copy their friends CD's, computer programs, etc.

There's a whole slew of things that other people do that break some technical law that I could totally care less about. If our government thinks it's beneficial in some way to pay people tax payer's dollars to go around and sniff these kinds of criminals out and prosecute them, then about the only thing I can do about it is keep on voting for "shrink the government" advocates.

It isn't any of your business what they own, however the gov will make it their business if they find out.

That's right, if you own a gun, you better know the laws. Unfortunately, it's the government's business to enforce stupid firearms laws that have no purpose whatsoever. It's not my business, and I have no intention of letting the government make it my business.

Willie Lowman
November 24, 2009, 10:45 AM
I have no idea what "gat" is.

Gat is very old slang for a gun. Typically a handgun. Gat is a term used by or associated with criminals that is around a century old.

freakintoguns
November 24, 2009, 01:46 PM
+1 skans, i find the NFA and AWB to be highly unconstitutional. the gun grabbers retiritic about criminals haing these weapons is flawed, they still have them with the NFA and AWB because, OMG!, there criminals

4thPointofContact
November 24, 2009, 04:13 PM
redacted pending further research

How dare you? This is the intarnets, no research allowed.

Still haven't found the information I was looking for, but from memory someone asked the AFT which replied that to 'make safe' a Street Sweeper the magazine could be removed so that it would no longer have a 12-gauge chamber (which was what brings the 'Sweeper into DD territory and that the USAS could have the barrel removed to take it out to make it a non-DD. There was something about it still being registered somewhere in the system (fuzzy memory) though.

Parts kits for the USAS-12, sans barrel [means 'without' for you government school types] were available in Shotgun News for a while after the USAS was taken off the market. It was a shotgun, but without a 12-gauge barrel it wasn't a DD. I guess if someone were to make a USAS-12 in .410 then it would be a non-DD firearm. and quite useless, too.


I'm wondering what the BATF's position would be if someone had a USAS parts kit (without the barrel) and then wanted to make it a DD by finding a barrel on Gunbroker or some such?


(( Skans.... ever take a look at the receiver of your USAS to see if it has that thing I mentioned? ))

Willie Lowman
November 24, 2009, 05:16 PM
It is perfectly legal to build a DD on form 1.

There is a guy on UT selling a USAS barrel and piston.

hknut
November 24, 2009, 10:38 PM
During the Clinton AWB. I noticed a 11.5 with 5.5 pinned AR for $1000. Everone else was asking $1200-1500 for theirs. the seller told me it had some Full Auto parts in it. I passed on the deal and told the show security staff. For the next 6 months that gun sat on the same dealers table, I again told the show staff. It had to be a sting if our show promoters didn't do any thing about it. Our promoters don't want another black eye. Our VP of our club got busted for having illegal machine's in his home. He is/was doing Fed jail time for it.

Crosshair
November 24, 2009, 10:55 PM
Skans, I think you are missing my point, confused, or both.

I am a supporter of the 2nd Amendment. Although I myself adhear to all firearms laws, I consider the NFA unconstitutional.
I agree with you on both.

If I want to work for BATFE, I'd send in my application, go through the interview process and collect my paycheck for the services you seem to think I need to do for them for free.
It is not the job of the BATFE to educate people about guns laws, it is their job to ENFORCE those gun laws.

When someone goes up to another person they don't know and says, for example "hey, buddy, did you know that rifle of yours looks to be 2"'s too short and you could be looking at some serious penalties" - that person has no idea whether you intend to turn him in, or where you're coming from.
Are you saying that you are afraid that that person is going to kill you and bury your body behind the berm? Not trying to be obtuse, but that is the only conclusion I can draw from that statement.

That's right, if you own a gun, you better know the laws.
and you apparently are not going to lift a finger to ensure that people are aware of the laws. We were all young and stupid at one point. You should have seen my first attempt at 922r compliance.

Unfortunately, it's the government's business to enforce stupid firearms laws that have no purpose whatsoever. It's not my business, and I have no intention of letting the government make it my business.
Nobody is asking you to have the ATF hot-line number on speed dial and turn everyone in, just educate people when you see potential violations.

From what I am reading from your post, you are saying you would rather a young gun owner get a felony conviction and a decade in prison because you don't want to be bothered to educate them so they could correct the problem before the BATFE found them?

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

Skans
December 1, 2009, 09:32 AM
Are you saying that you are afraid that that person is going to kill you and bury your body behind the berm? Not trying to be obtuse, but that is the only conclusion I can draw from that statement.

No, not at all. What I'm trying to say is that someone whom I don't know might take my education as a warning to "fix the problem, or else...." The "or else being that I might just decide to go to the local PD or BATFE officer and make mention of it. Not that I ever would, but a complete stranger doesn't know that. Who knows, maybe the guy knows it's completely illegal and he likes it that way and doesn't want others poking their noses into his business.

What would you do if you encountered a situation where some guy had a rifle with a barrel 3" too short (without registration); you approached him on your own accord and educated him on the particular NFA law he's violating; and the guy says "yeah, I know - you're not going to tell anyone about it are ya?" Now you know the guy is knowingly breaking the law - are you going to argue with him about it? Turn him in? Scare him by telling him he's going to be doing time in Club Fed for 10 years? Or, simply say "that's cool, good luck with that."?

Do you see the problem? I simply choose not to look for problems with other people's firearms.

However, if I am seriously considering purchasing a firearm, then I will ask whatever questions I need to to make sure that the gun hasn't been screwed with and is 100% legal. But, that's a completely different situation. A while back some guy tried to sell me a Cobray Streetsweeper for what most would consider a great price. I asked him if it was registered on a Form 1, and he pretended not to know what I was talking about. I just told him "No F-ng way" - not interested. Because the guy didn't ask me something like "what's wrong, Buddy" or "what's a Form 1", I highly suspect that he knew and wasn't simply "uneducated". As far as I see it, that's where my responsiblity ended - walking away form a gun that I suspected wasn't right.

From what I am reading from your post, you are saying you would rather a young gun owner get a felony conviction and a decade in prison because you don't want to be bothered to educate them so they could correct the problem before the BATFE found them?

No, I certainly don't want to see that happen. Look, if the person with an illegal firearm was a friend or someone whom I thought genuinely didn't know he might be violating the law and is completely oblivious to the fact that he is hanging his pee-pee out there to be wacked off I would probably say something. I don't mean to make it sound so absolute that I'd never discuss NFA laws with a possible violator under certain conditions.

Skans
December 1, 2009, 09:40 AM
Are you saying that you are afraid that that person is going to kill you and bury your body behind the berm? Not trying to be obtuse, but that is the only conclusion I can draw from that statement.

No, not at all. What I'm trying to say is that someone whom I don't know might take my education as a warning to "fix the problem, or else...." The "or else being that I might just decide to go to the local PD or BATFE officer and make mention of it. Not that I ever would, but a complete stranger doesn't know that. Who knows, maybe the guy knows it's completely illegal and he likes it that way and doesn't want others poking their noses into his business.

What would you do if you encountered a situation where some guy had a rifle with a barrel 3" too short (without registration); you approached him on your own accord and educated him on the particular NFA law he's violating; and the guy says "yeah, I know - you're not going to tell anyone about it are ya?" Now you know the guy is knowingly breaking the law - are you going to argue with him about it? Turn him in? Scare him by telling him he's going to be doing time in Club Fed for 10 years? Or, simply say "that's cool, good luck with that."?

Do you see the problem? I simply choose not to look for problems with other people's firearms.

However, if I am seriously considering purchasing a firearm, then I will ask whatever questions I need to to make sure that the gun hasn't been screwed with and is 100% legal. But, that's a completely different situation. Just recently some guy tried to sell me a Cobray Streetsweeper for what most would consider a great price. I asked him if it was registered on a Form 1, and he pretended not to know what I was talking about. I just told him "No F-ng way" - not interested. Because the guy didn't ask me something like "what's wrong, Buddy" or "what's a Form 1", I highly suspect that he knew and wasn't simply "uneducated". As far as I see it, that's where my responsiblity ended - walking away form a gun that I suspected wasn't right.

glocktoys
December 4, 2009, 01:09 AM
i guess it depends on the person selling as i have seen the glock stocks for sale with guns atached and questioned the sbr legality and was atacked by the guy selling them so just went on. same with short 10" ar-15 uppers being sold with lowers (told to just wait to assemble them till the paperwork came back, just keep them in the safe seperate till the stamp comes back) questioned intent and was told i dont work for the atf so i dont know the law. on the other side seen a kid with his dad selling a colt ar-15 with a a2 upper (14" or less). asked and they just got the upper and put it on the lower to sell. talked about the sbr stamp and did not know about it. pulled it apart and sold the upper and lower seperate and got more than he was selling the rifle for. guess it depend on the seller

royke
December 16, 2009, 11:33 PM
This term comes from Gatling Gun......

Ricklin
December 17, 2009, 07:47 AM
That's the bottom line here, as has been pointed out a couple of times already. If someone is trying to sell you a suspected illegal weapon, sure, if you are the RO and someone has a sawed off on your range, sure. If the guy on the range two lanes down from you is firing an SBR, not so much. Unless of course he invites you to try out his cool SBR. Those that go looking for trouble, are very likely to find trouble.

4thPointofContact
December 17, 2009, 09:19 AM
Discretion

It's the same principle law enforcement officers use to justify issuing or not issuing a ticket, either to other drivers or drivers who have badges.

I knew someone who had a M1 Thompson that 'daddy done brought back from the war'. I knew it was unregistered. I also knew there was no way for them to register it after the fact. I guess I'm in collusion with them to disobey the law, but I told them to just keep it under the bed and not display it in public (telling them not to use it for criminal purposes didn't cross my mind, it wasn't something they were likely to do).

I had another person who cut a Ruger 10/22 down to pistol size :eek:, less than 16 on the barrel and probably under overall length as well. I told them that the safest course of action was to Immediately separate the barrel from the receiver and to file ATF paperwork if they wanted to stay out of prison. Didn't to a lot of good, their reply was "All I'm going to do is use it for 'coon hunting, I don't need any paperwork for That. Besides it's a rifle and that's more powerful than a .22 pistol."

glocktoys
December 22, 2009, 06:23 PM
had one at a show(carry in) and had a ar-15 w/12" barrel. claimed he got it at the last show that way. informed him of the law and after looking at the inside it was built from a m-16 parts kit on a ar-15 lower (cant remember make). after talking i got a email and sent him doc's on useable parts from m-16's. the thanked me and told me it was a private seller with no info. he sold the upper and got another and a lpk to fix the lower too. some people will listen and others dont care till the atfe knocks on the door.

Skans
December 29, 2009, 12:30 PM
I had another person who cut a Ruger 10/22 down to pistol size ,

For coon hunting? I'm trying to picture what such a 10-22 would even look like! I reckon some people butcher perfectly good rifles for no good reason at all. Just bored, I guess.:confused:

hogdogs
December 29, 2009, 12:45 PM
I had another person who cut a Ruger 10/22 down to pistol size ,
Mighta been a store bought Charger?
http://www.ruger-firearms.com/products/22Charger/index.html
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/picture-26-4.png
Brent

Skans
December 29, 2009, 12:49 PM
Mighta been a store bought Charger?

Well look at that - that's not a bad looking piece. I was picturing a hack job with part of the stock sawed off and part of the barrel sawed off.

FALPhil
December 29, 2009, 04:22 PM
Ya know, reading this thread just reinforces for me how insane the gun laws are in the USA.

WoofersInc
January 29, 2010, 02:35 PM
I just had one. There was someone posting on AR15.com. He had an HK94 pistol clone. He wanted to consign it with all of the accessories. Only problem was one of the accessories was a stock. I at first just let it go. However later in the thread he said it could be used for a sear or a SBR project.

I sent him an E-mail asking if it was already registered as a SBR. I also sent him a link to the story about Jesus Amador. The photos were gone from the thread within hours if that says anything.

FreakGasolineFight
February 1, 2010, 10:47 AM
I am a supporter of the 2nd Amendment. Although I myself adhear to all firearms laws, I consider the NFA unconstitutional. If I want to work for BATFE, I'd send in my application, go through the interview process and collect my paycheck for the services you seem to think I need to do for them for free.

Skans,

You win. If I was wearing a hat, it would be off to you.

4thPointofContact
February 2, 2010, 12:21 AM
Wasn't one of the newer Ruger Chargers, this was close to ten years ago. It was just hacked off like you'd see on a cut down shotgun from the days of Bonnie and Clyde.

publius
March 29, 2010, 04:38 PM
I haven't seen a person violating NFA laws but if I did I would probably say something like "Hey man, you need to be careful who you're showing that too it is not legal to the ATF and they are serious about it." This does 2 things, I have either just educated someone who didn't know any better or have just informed someone doing it intentionally doing it that they shouldn't be doing it. I have done both in a nice way, the first guy knows to fix his unintentional problem and I have avoided a possible ugly confrontation with the second guy by not appearing as the enemy.

gyvel
March 29, 2010, 05:10 PM
You're not breaking any law just because you don't want to play BATFE-agent.

Unfortunately, this is not always the case; If you have knowledge of a felony and fail to report it, you are guilty of "misprision," which is also a felony. See how it gets trumped up?

SSgt Facebreaker
March 29, 2010, 06:26 PM
Are bad laws meant to be broken? It hasn't gotten to the point where I'm willing to break any. But, at what point would even a police officer (which I'm not) declare that a "law" is so oppressive that he would refuse to enforce it?

If you are a police officer, or to any police officers out there - would you be a party to rounding up all of the legally purchased semi-auto "assault weapons" if your Congress and President pass a law making them illegal?

I think you may have misunderstood me. There are a plethora of laws I do not agree with, but that does not mean I think they should be broken.

I am not a police officer, but I am an active duty member of the military. While I do not think I will be asked to round up legally purchased firearms in the near future, I would not be a party to such action. I would rather be court martialed than to trample on the rights of my fellow Americans. THAT BEING SAID, There would be several steps in between now and then, and I firmly believe that if Congress or the President ordered such action, there would be very few members of the military(or the LE community for that matter) who would blindly obey such orders.

My opinions are my own and I have thick skin, two things that appear to be in short supply on this and other forums.

RGR3/75
March 29, 2010, 08:17 PM
army>airforce

dogtown tom
March 30, 2010, 08:09 PM
gyvel Quote:
You're not breaking any law just because you don't want to play BATFE-agent.

Unfortunately, this is not always the case; If you have knowledge of a felony and fail to report it, you are guilty of "misprision," which is also a felony. See how it gets trumped up?

Nope.
Misprision requires active concealment of a known felony rather than merely failing to report it.

United States v. Johnson 546 F.2d 1225: "The mere failure to report a felony is not sufficient to constitute a violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 4."
http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F2/546/546.F2d.1225.76-1581.html



.

Skans
March 31, 2010, 08:19 AM
In all reality, if I were to find some thugs farting around with illegal machineguns, I'd report this. Most of us probably would. But, in my mind, this is different than running across a friend or acquaintence who might have a forward grip where he shouldn't, have an AK with too few US parts (I know, not NFA, but still...) have a barrel cut down a little too short, etc.

gyvel
March 31, 2010, 01:47 PM
Nope.
Misprision requires active concealment of a known felony rather than merely failing to report it.

United States v. Johnson 546 F.2d 1225: "The mere failure to report a felony is not sufficient to constitute a violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 4."
http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/...5.76-1581.html


Interesting. In that case, if you have knowledge of a felony and don't report it, are you then merely an accessory or "aiding and abetting?"

Gunplummer
April 8, 2010, 11:37 AM
Are you sure about that 18" barrel rule on shotguns. I thought that was rifles and shotguns were 16". I actually bought a new .410 stainless "Snake Charmer",which was a single shot, that had a 16 1/8" barrel. I think I bought it in the mid 1980s, but am not sure. I do remember the measurements because I made a regular stock and grip for it. The original stock was a plastic weird pistol grip and the forearm was plastic.

Delaware_Dan
April 8, 2010, 02:06 PM
18 inches for Shotguns, 16 for Rifles.

dogtown tom
April 8, 2010, 09:16 PM
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/guides/identification-of-nfa-firearms.html#short-barreled-shotgun