hlfahnestock
Well-known member
A good read for those of us who are new to Uzi's.
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2013/06/20/open-bolt-explained-tale-uzis/
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2013/06/20/open-bolt-explained-tale-uzis/
Saw this article on The Firearm Blog
- Thread starter hlfahnestock
- Start date
rickyv
UZI Talk Supporter
BATF has already ruled against that back in 1982. I could be wrong, but I'd steer clear of a project like that.
EagleArmsHBAR
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2011
- Messages
- 152
I think you're wrong. http://www.uzitalk.com/forums/showthread.php?71544-Open-Bolt-Semi-Uzi&highlight=
rickyv
UZI Talk Supporter
Ummm.....ok....
That's what I was thinking,I don't like to flame people but shit that's just dumb to try and get some stupid shit like that approved.Theres a reason open bolts are not allowed unless registered there just too easy to make full auto.You are barking up the wrong tree and going to ruin my hobby.
EagleArmsHBAR
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2011
- Messages
- 152
To some of us, this is a Constitutional right, not a "hobby." And writing a letter to the ATF seeking claification is not going to ruin anything. Do you think they will read my letter and think, "Oh crap, we need to ban Uzis!"?
Since the thread has been derailed already I will put in my two cents. Eagle you can attempt anything you wish. Just so you know for research purposes the ATF has a link to all "Rulings":
http://www.atf.gov/regulations-rulings/rulings/index.html
Their are actually three rulings that deal with your proposed setup and why people basically state that open bolt semi's are illegal.
82-2 – KG-9 Pistol as NFA Weapon
82-8 – SM10, SM11A Pistols and SAC Carbines as NFA Weapons
83-5 – STEN MK II as NFA Weapon
Before you get your panties wadded up and start calling me a "Constitution Killer" and make claims that people like me are pro ATF etc. I would like you to realize some things. Going to a gun board and picking fights about the legalities of something is ignorant. Take it as said that people who frequent gun boards are pro-second amendment. They may not be able to articulate something precisely but, many have a great deal of experience and are well read concerning the law. ATF rulings have been challenged and for the overwhelming majority of them they are found legal and Constitutional. You can hate the ATF all you want but, that fact remain the same. If people would not take up Bower's cause over something as small as the Akins accelerator do you really think anyone will take up your cause? Especially as you are belligerent and agressive to the only people on the planet that would even be partially inclined to take up your cause. Bower's was and is a very nice guy who got shafted by a "letter writer" who could not possibly stand someone doing something he thought was against ATF rulings.
So, please read the rulings and instead of looking to squirm and worm your way around them try to actually understand them so that you can make reasonable decisions. You don't have to like them or agree with them but, try and see the logic to them. That will get you much farther along in your proposed design than picking fights on this or any other gun forum. I can assure you that anything you design for an open bolt semi will be picked apart by gun owners and many a letter will be written to the ATF asking questions. You must have things air tight and sewed up solid to withstand that scrutiny.
http://www.atf.gov/regulations-rulings/rulings/index.html
Their are actually three rulings that deal with your proposed setup and why people basically state that open bolt semi's are illegal.
82-2 – KG-9 Pistol as NFA Weapon
82-8 – SM10, SM11A Pistols and SAC Carbines as NFA Weapons
83-5 – STEN MK II as NFA Weapon
Before you get your panties wadded up and start calling me a "Constitution Killer" and make claims that people like me are pro ATF etc. I would like you to realize some things. Going to a gun board and picking fights about the legalities of something is ignorant. Take it as said that people who frequent gun boards are pro-second amendment. They may not be able to articulate something precisely but, many have a great deal of experience and are well read concerning the law. ATF rulings have been challenged and for the overwhelming majority of them they are found legal and Constitutional. You can hate the ATF all you want but, that fact remain the same. If people would not take up Bower's cause over something as small as the Akins accelerator do you really think anyone will take up your cause? Especially as you are belligerent and agressive to the only people on the planet that would even be partially inclined to take up your cause. Bower's was and is a very nice guy who got shafted by a "letter writer" who could not possibly stand someone doing something he thought was against ATF rulings.
So, please read the rulings and instead of looking to squirm and worm your way around them try to actually understand them so that you can make reasonable decisions. You don't have to like them or agree with them but, try and see the logic to them. That will get you much farther along in your proposed design than picking fights on this or any other gun forum. I can assure you that anything you design for an open bolt semi will be picked apart by gun owners and many a letter will be written to the ATF asking questions. You must have things air tight and sewed up solid to withstand that scrutiny.
EagleArmsHBAR
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2011
- Messages
- 152
I understand what you are saying. What I dont understand is the opposition to asking a question about a legal theory that has not yet been attempted. No one has built and marketed an open bolt semi that is not readily convertible to full auto, thus there can be no draw back to sending a letter to the ATF in this regard. And I am not picking fights, I am just defending my position. I will heed whatever response the ATF sends me in this matter.
Just playing the devil's advocate here. Even if you permanently affix the lower to the receiver of the Uzi what would prevent someone from filing or dremeling the two disconnector legs down? If they did that, would not the firearm function as a machinegun?
EagleArmsHBAR
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2011
- Messages
- 152
I think you are talking about the sear legs. No, that would be a runaway, not a machine gun since the trigger would never be pulled. That is not readily convertible. If your worried about stuff that is readily convertible, the m1 carnie requires nothing but m2 parts fitted to it. A colt sp1 only requires a lightning link to be fitted. There are many other designs that are more readily convertible than my proposed uzi design. Just because some designs are less or more readily convertible than others does not really mean that hey are actually readily convertible.
That is my point. A runaway is a machine gun. Nothing in law says a thing about something operating correctly as designed. The M2 carbine is a combination of parts that are a machinegun. A lightning link in and of itself is a machinegun. As Olofson a few years ago found out a malfunctioning slam firing pos AR-15 is a machinegun. Any firearm that can be readily made, as according to tech branch of the ATF, to fire more than one round in a single pull of the trigger is a machinegun. Even if they end up calling the charging handle the trigger and the actual trigger does no work. Numerous times the tech branch of the ATF has had to construct the machinegun from parts before it was entered into evidence. i.e. they took a conglomeration of parts found during a search were the receiver was not demilled in accordance to their specifications jigged, welded, and assembled by the ATF and the person was found guilty of a firearm related felony. So things come down to tech branch.
Tech branch has no oversight, published policies or procedures, they have no accountability, and can change their mind as they see fit. The rulings of the past and specific court cases can give a good idea on what types of firearm technology is held to be generally acceptable and what technology is generally held unacceptable. That is what people are warning about. That is what I am warning about.
Tech branch has no oversight, published policies or procedures, they have no accountability, and can change their mind as they see fit. The rulings of the past and specific court cases can give a good idea on what types of firearm technology is held to be generally acceptable and what technology is generally held unacceptable. That is what people are warning about. That is what I am warning about.
softaildeluxe
Banned
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2011
- Messages
- 797
you are correct, which will work to his advantage...they do have the authority (if they choose) to look at HIS design in and of itself...who is to say that someone is not capable of designing and submitting an open bolt semi that will satisfy any and all requirements...
- Status
Please Visit our Sister Sites Below
Please consider becoming an UZI Talk Supporter