AK Rifles banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,632 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Would it be possible? I know it'll more than likely get denied, but would it be worth a shot? I'm SERIOUSLY considering doing a Form 1 to build my AK105 as a registered machinegun. I HAVE NO DESIRE OR PLANS TO BREAK THE LAW. I would just like to try it out and see if there's even an outside chance of it happening. I mean, the worst that could happen is the Form 1 gets denied and my $200 gets sent back to me. Then I'll just send in another Form 1 to make it into an SBR. But would it be worth a shot? I mean, after the Heller case and all these towns getting their gun laws repealed..who knows? Lemme hear some input..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,437 Posts
Blanco_Diablo said:
Would it be possible? I know it'll more than likely get denied, but would it be worth a shot? I'm SERIOUSLY considering doing a Form 1 to build my AK105 as a registered machinegun. I HAVE NO DESIRE OR PLANS TO BREAK THE LAW. I would just like to try it out and see if there's even an outside chance of it happening. I mean, the worst that could happen is the Form 1 gets denied and my $200 gets sent back to me. Then I'll just send in another Form 1 to make it into an SBR. But would it be worth a shot? I mean, after the Heller case and all these towns getting their gun laws repealed..who knows? Lemme hear some input..

You can try, it will probably get denied. Make sure you include a well written letter citing Heller as a reason for applying and explaining you are a collector looking to replicate a cool weapon. Just fill out the Form 1 as registering a MG.


You may or may not get your $200 back...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
796 Posts
As one who may be sending in a form that has a chance of being approved, I would appreciate it if you would not send in a form that will be denied and take away valuable resources from my form. Thank you.

M_P
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,498 Posts
It will get denied.

As of May 19, 1986, no new manufacture of transferable machineguns.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,054 Posts
I thought someone did this a year or so ago and it was approved.

Then the ATF came a knockin' a few months later....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,374 Posts
BigAL said:
I thought someone did this a year or so ago and it was approved.

Then the ATF came a knockin' a few months later....
:shock:

the ATF has a long history of changing their minds. i would NOT want to be the first guy with a "legal" post 1986 MG.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,916 Posts
modern_pirate said:
As one who may be sending in a form that has a chance of being approved, I would appreciate it if you would not send in a form that will be denied and take away valuable resources from my form. Thank you.

M_P
What he said.

:chair:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,437 Posts
Knowing that Templar doesn't joke around...



I'd wait on your form, white devil...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,760 Posts
Templar said:
modern_pirate said:
As one who may be sending in a form that has a chance of being approved, I would appreciate it if you would not send in a form that will be denied and take away valuable resources from my form. Thank you.

M_P
What he said.

:chair:
What would be a situation where one would be approved? Just curious! :smile:

Thanks,
T
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,507 Posts
There was a case a few years back, prior to the W Va era, were a form 1 for an auto-sear was approved, due to the examiner not knowing what an auto-sear was. When it came to the attention of other folks in the NFA it was rescinded.

I spoke with an individual that did a form 1 for a machinegun a few years after the 86 law was passed and of course it was rejected, he didn't know about the 86 law.

There were a few folks that submitted form1s for machineguns after the 9th Circuit Court ruling and these were also turned down. Just a big waste of time, unless you are prepared to appeal the denial, based on the Heller case, all the way to the Supreme Court.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,760 Posts
jithaca said:
There was a case a few years back, prior to the W Va era, were a form 1 for an auto-sear was approved, due to the examiner not knowing what an auto-sear was. When it came to the attention of other folks in the NFA it was rescinded.

I spoke with an individual that did a form 1 for a machinegun a few years after the 86 law was passed and of course it was rejected, he didn't know about the 86 law.

There were a few folks that submitted form1s for machineguns after the 9th Circuit Court ruling and these were also turned down. Just a big waste of time, unless you are prepared to appeal the denial, based on the Heller case, all the way to the Supreme Court.
I am sure someone will do this and take it all the way to SCOTUS! Just a matter of time!

T
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
495 Posts
JOHNO said:
It will get denied.

As of May 19, 1986, no new manufacture of transferable machineguns.
So I can build one for myself if it's non-transferable? :mrgreen: (yes I'm kidding)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,794 Posts
From the linked too article...

"Machine gun ban (The Hughes Amendment)
As debate for FOPA was in its final stages, Rep. William J. Hughes (D-N.J.) proposed an amendment to ban the civilian ownership or transfer of any fully-automatic weapon which was not registered by May 19, 1986. However, any such weapon manufactured and registered before the May 19 cutoff could still be legally owned and transferred by civilians.

Controversy exists regarding the validity of the amendment's inclusion into FOPA. The vote to include the amendment took place at night, when many of the lawmakers who would be opposed to its inclusion were not present. Also, the vote was an unrecorded voice vote, which some contend was inconclusive.[1]"


Is that true?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,037 Posts
Yes, its true. There are reports that it didn't even pass during the vocal "yay or nay" vote. A rollcall vote was called for and denied by the speaker. It was pushed through. I have read that Reagan only signed it because he thought the FOPA part was worthwhile, and expected the MG ban to be challenged right away. It never was.
I expect that the day the Heller decision was announced that a bunch of new MG Form 1s were sent in, and lawsuits are being prepped.

I would go for it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
556 Posts
I say do it.

It would be hard to argue that MGs are 'unusual' if the ATF was getting swamped with requests from law abiding citizens build them.

Are records kept reguarding the number of items in the NFA registry, or number of denied Form 1s? It seems to be this would be great information to have WHEN this gets challenged, just to use against the inevetable argument that MGs are 'unusual.'
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top