SilencerTalk

Sound Suppressor Discussion
It is currently Tue Mar 19, 2019 9:28 pm

All times are UTC-04:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: glock going full auto
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2019 10:17 pm 
Offline
New Member

Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2019 10:10 pm
Posts: 2
Location: PA
Hi I am an SOT in eastern PA and I just had a customer ask me if I can make him G19 full auto. I told him he needed a tax stamp first.
So I wanted to ask if I can modify it, after the stamp and the easiest way. I learned how in my Glock armorers cert, but am I correct that if I register the G19 for the stamp, I must be in possession of it until the stamp comes in and "then" I can make the change?
If anyone can verify or clarify, please let me know.
Thanks - Recon1911.
BTW - I hope this was OK to ask.


Top
   
BulletFlight for Android
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2019 10:43 pm 
Offline
Silent But Deadly
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 4:55 pm
Posts: 981
Unless your customer is the United States Federal Government, or an authorized law enforcement agency (with letterhead) you cannot legally make a transferable machinegun otherwise.

It's perfectly fine to ask. But expect most answers to contain hell fire and brimstone replies. Especially supposedly coming from an SOT.

You could make a post sample machinegun and only sell to the US gov't, police agencies, or other SOT's.

But no new civilian transferables after 1986.

_________________
I don't care what your chart says


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:34 am 
Offline
Silent But Deadly

Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 1:52 pm
Posts: 3791
John A. wrote:
But no new civilian transferables after 1986.


Sorta. If you have a "pre ban" semi auto weapon, which would have been made prior to the FOPA, then you can legally convert it. The rub is that the ATF's full auto NFA desk is now closed for business, so they have nobody to do the paperwork. :roll:

So the answer is, yeah, you can do it with a Glock 19 made in 1985, but no, you can't, because Big Brother says so.

I am kinda curious which Glock armorers course teaches how to make a full auto weapon.

_________________
The moments I was censored was the moment that I won. That's twice, now.Thanks jwbaker, et al, for my victories.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:48 pm 
Offline
Silent But Deadly
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2015 9:15 pm
Posts: 1307
Hold up...
What are you talking about poiki? Do you have a source or explanation?

Edit:
Quote:
it shall be unlawful for any person to transfer or possess a machinegun [...] except [...] any lawful transfer or lawful possession of a machinegun that was lawfully possessed before the date this subsection takes effect.

_________________
300 blackout form 1: http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=137293

5.56 form 1:
http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=141800&p=955647#p955647


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 3:01 am 
Offline
Silent But Deadly

Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 1:52 pm
Posts: 3791
https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/201 ... un-form-1/

For a while, after the FOPA, if you had a pre FOPA semi lower, they would approve it. Then they changed their minds. There was an article about ten years back talking about some politician who had a pre ban weapon converted legally, using just that method. They decided that “new manufacture” applied to weapons made after the FOPA.

They can still do it, they just won’t.

_________________
The moments I was censored was the moment that I won. That's twice, now.Thanks jwbaker, et al, for my victories.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 8:47 am 
Offline
Silent But Deadly
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2015 9:15 pm
Posts: 1307
Yeah, they can do a lot of things. That doesn't make it legal.

_________________
300 blackout form 1: http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=137293

5.56 form 1:
http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=141800&p=955647#p955647


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 10:35 am 
Offline
Silent But Deadly
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 4:55 pm
Posts: 981
There were several gun makers who rushed and submitted thousands of serial numbers prior to the shutoff too. Mac subguns especially.

ATF told them in no certain terms that if it was actually made (manufactured) AFTER the May '86 cutoff date, it was a postban machinegun and they couldn't do it or transfer it to civiies. Regardless of when the serial number was approved.

This also set the precedence during the AWB years that regardless of whether you had a stripped preban lower, that you couldn't legally make a preban feature rifle from it. It all revolved around when you actually assembled/made/manufactured/built it.

If you build it AFTER the cutoff date, you had to build it to post ban specifications.

The only exception that I am aware of to "make" a machinegun is a REWAT. Which was registered as a machinegun prior to the cutoff date. Lots of WW2 machineguns have been reactivated due to this, but that's still not exactly manufacturing a new one either. It was made as a machinegun to start with, it was registered as a machinegun, and that's all it'll ever be. All you're doing is repairing it and bringing it back to operational condition.

Though in context of the topic, I doubt you'll find a glock 19 or glock 18 DEWAT in the registry in the first place.

_________________
I don't care what your chart says


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 09, 2019 10:01 pm 
Offline
New Member

Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2019 10:10 pm
Posts: 2
Location: PA
Thanks for the replies. I led with NO and I am sticking with it. I have not ever done a conversion and nor do I feel like doing one.
It drives me nuts when I tell a customer NO about 5 times and they still persist. By that time I say "I'll ask", but don't plan on a different answer.
At least I can say I asked and the answer is still NO.
You guys are great and thanks for the help.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Mar 10, 2019 1:54 am 
Offline
Silent But Deadly

Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 1:52 pm
Posts: 3791
Recon1911 wrote:
It drives me nuts when I tell a customer NO about 5 times and they still persist. By that time I say "I'll ask", but don't plan on a different answer.


Repeated demands always make me think that the requester is a fed or a plant. Remember Ruby Ridge.

_________________
The moments I was censored was the moment that I won. That's twice, now.Thanks jwbaker, et al, for my victories.


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 

All times are UTC-04:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off | Load: 0.66 ]