View Full Version : making a TEC-DC9 full auto
August 6, 2001, 04:36 PM
There has been a recent court decision in favor of gun manufacturers that specifically targeted Navegar for their TEC-DC9 pistol. Many news stories have stated that the TEC-DC9 is easily converted to full auto and implies that this "capability" is responsible for many deaths particularly in a 1993 san francisco office shooting.
My question is: Are these news stories correct that,
1. the TEC-DC9 is easily converted to full auto
2. It was in fact converted to full auto in several mass shootings.
From what i've heard, the TEC-DC9 is a piece of junk and you'd be better off with someone trying to play rambo with one of these than a simple high quality semi-auto pistol.
disclaimer: I'm not interested at all in how to do this, mostly just curious if these news stories have a basis in fact to make these claims.
August 6, 2001, 04:56 PM
Sounds like crap to me... the TEC-DC9 was originally manufactured as the KG-9.
The KG-9 was killed when the ATF said it could be converted to full-auto easily.
So the KG-99 was introduced. ATF killed it for the same reason.
The TEC-9 was then introduced. ATF let this one sell; but Washington D.C. passed a law specifically naming this gun as allowing people to sue the manufacturer for liability if a crime was committed in DC with this gun. The manufacturer changed the name to the TEC-DC9 as a big middle finger to the city of DC.
My guess is that if ATF is OK with it, it is probably not that easy to convert. Part of the problem may stem from the fact that a Navgear employee apparently sold equipment to convert them and the know-how to do so by the truck loads before the ATF caught up to him.
August 7, 2001, 10:07 AM
From what I hear, a Tec-9 is lucky to get of three rounds in semi-auto without jamming. If you can get one to do any better in full auto, you could probably walk on water. :D
August 7, 2001, 10:44 AM
I had a Intratek (sp?) tec 9 a few years ago that couldnt shoot 5 shots in a row without a jam,tried several different mags too.
August 7, 2001, 11:07 AM
If I remember correctly, the KG-99 series fired from an open bolt, which are USUALLY easier to convert to FA, but the TECs I've seen all use a separate striker system. Having said this, it IS possible, but I'd have to wonder why you'd want to, with a POS like a TEC. A general rule of thumb to remember with ANYTHING dealing with firearms in the media is to assume that 95% of it is just plain WRONG, and the other 5% is too colored with deliberate misinformation or "slant" to make it worthless.:barf:
August 7, 2001, 11:43 AM
Full automatic fire on the street is merely special effects stuff.
Much as I enjoy shooting machine guns of all types, I am hard put to think up a scenario where there would be a real advantage to having a submachine gun in a fight. COOL is an entirely different matter. Law enforcement Tactical teams use them mostly for intimidation, and I believe the majority are trained for use in semi-auto, or at most, three-round burst fire. Yeah, I know this rule is often broken, and that the "machine carbine" is frequently misused.
How often is full auto utilized by police that someone doesn't get chewed out or written up? I can think of four instances in my immediate area when it caused a lot more problems for the user than it was worth, and when more conventional law enforcement weaponry would have been preferable.
The gang-bangas WANT machine guns because they SOUND so firghtening. Special effects stuff. Non-flash suppressed automatic fire also LOOKS impressive at night. Same thing: Fairly impressive to some, but seldom an advantage in "street combat."
Anyone who sets out to illegally convert a firearm to full auto, or illegally purchase one, shows that they have no regard for the law in the first place. Secondly, probably is bent on committing some additional crime, too. So, if that person was really knowledgeable about firearms use, they'd probably just pick up an automatic shotgun, saw it off, and stoke it up with buckshot. Hit probability increases, and, if the user is canny enough to have an extra barrel, there is a better chance of keeping the firearm undetected. Oh, but, I forgot my own premise: The purpose of the illegal weapon to begin with is to IMPRESS PEOPLE!
Or, if the goal is to SHOOT people efficiently, a semi-auto .22 rifle is easy to shoot well, ammo is cheap, mere ownership is not a federal felony, and so forth.
As a veteran peace officer, and with a son who's a street cop, I applaud the criminals' desire to use inefficient, expensive, piece-of-trash firearms. Even if they work, chances are that the user has not trained or practiced enough to know how to use one properly, I know I'd prefer an adversary who empties his piece, making a lot of noise, to one who has a good quality .22 rifle with ten or fifteen low-recoil shots that he might AIM at one of us. Not to mention the fact that, IF he is taken alive, he may face additional federal felony charges for just HAVING the full-auto.
Again--I am very much in favor of the law-abiding citizen's right to own and shoot Class 3 weaponry. I am merely disdainful of the street criminal who goes out of his way to obtain and convert a TEC-9 or the like.
August 8, 2001, 05:38 PM
Once again our able moderator has swerved into the truth! Must be why he got promoted to moderator.
If you know how to convert a TEC-9, you can convert any firearm. Remember, the Vietnamese made emmagees out of French bolt actions and stove pieces into zip guns ("Skyhorse") guns.
Ask any toolmark expert involved in criminal litigation, the best tool for a crime is a piece of pipe. If one wants a firearm, the hardest one to ID is the .22 revolver using soft lead bullets.
Hand held full auto is feckless, but lots of fun. I recommend an MP-38 (heavy with low recoil). Belt fed with a tripod is the way to go and can win battles, not just a fight.
While we have an absolute Constitutional right to own whatever firearms we wish, "Class 3" (Title II) weapons are inefficient tools that are only effective in the hands of the higly trained or in Hollywood.
August 8, 2001, 07:45 PM
1) The TEC-DC9 is a closed bolt weapon and cannot easily be converted to full auto fire, "easily" being a relative term.
2) The guns used in the San Francisco and Columbine shootings had not been converted to full auto capability.
Details are easily found in news reports available online, but it's so much easier and more dramatic to spew lies and distort the truth, even if only by innuendo and "'what if....?" scenarios.
August 8, 2001, 10:24 PM
Much of the press reporting on that decision was based on a press release from the Brady Campaign, and was loaded anti propaganda. They apparently had been tipped off on the decision and had their press packets ready to go, complete with lies and distortions. It is strange that most reports were even a little bit balanced.
The previous post about the guns is correct. Only the early guns were easy to convert. The one used in the SF shooting was not one of those and had not been converted to FA fire.
As to converting, it would be illegal to do so or even try to do so. That is manufacturing a machinegun, and can earn the person doing it a good long vacation at Club Fed, plus a whopping fine.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.