UZI Talk Forums
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 26

Thread: Medea M3A1 Grease Gun Transfer and Build Gone Bad

  1. #1
    Registered User jolague's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Prescott, AZ
    Posts
    448

    Medea M3A1 Grease Gun Transfer and Build Gone Bad

    This is an e-mail I received from the ATF Phoenix filed division. What a paradox! Is it legal to complete a Medea Grease Gun (registered sheet metal) post 1986? Or does it become a post sample defacto? Thanks, brothers.




    James,



    I spoke to ATFs Fire Technology Group in regards to what you are asking --- to do to your NFA grease gun, currently pending a Form 4 transfer to you. Since the changes you are requesting, require modifications to the receiver beyond welding, they will not allow --- to perform those changes without a request from you submitted to ATFs Fire Technology Group. The request may be sent to fire_tech@atf.gov. You need to be very specific about what the firearm is, what state it is in, and what you are wanting done as part of the assembly. Tech will evaluate the request and approve or disapprove it.



    You may also simply take possession of the firearm in its current state. Be aware that should you go elsewhere for the changes and they have not been approved, it may result in your possessing an unregistered machine gun.



    Thanks.

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    623
    How could it be an unregistered machine gun if it's already a registered machine gun. Why did anyone even consult the ATF regarding this?

  3. #3
    UZI Talk Supporter
    Mackjack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,734
    What are you trying to do? Something more than a regular grease gun?

  4. #4
    Registered User jolague's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Prescott, AZ
    Posts
    448
    Quote Originally Posted by Mackjack View Post
    What are you trying to do? Something more than a regular grease gun?
    No, I'm trying to make if a fucking Grease Gun, not an MG42. The 07/02 appropriated it and said it is contraband. Now Chucky Spano (Medea) is getting involved with ATF over this bitch.

  5. #5
    UZI Talk Supporter
    Mackjack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,734
    Wow. I feel for ya. I sure hope it works out. The ATF is really starting to get stupid these days...

  6. #6
    Registered User jolague's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Prescott, AZ
    Posts
    448
    Quote Originally Posted by Mackjack View Post
    Wow. I feel for ya. I sure hope it works out. The ATF is really starting to get stupid these days...
    Well, they did it to me...then who else?

  7. #7
    UZI Talk Supporter
    Villafuego's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    709
    Who is the 07/02 who "appropriated" your MG ????

  8. #8
    Registered User jolague's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Prescott, AZ
    Posts
    448
    Quote Originally Posted by Villafuego View Post
    Who is the 07/02 who "appropriated" your MG ????
    I'm going to leave them anonymous until this paradox gets solved. Wish me luck. FUCK.

  9. #9
    UZI Talk Supporter
    root's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    3,301
    So you bought a MG that is now not a MG since it needs bent & welded?

    Is this the case? if so you are indeed the 1st person I have read about that was unable to finish a registered flat.

    The old adage " Once a MG always a MG" should be used against them here.

    I see you are in AZ.

    I once sold a parts kit to a private person in that sate with a GI 80% receiver the dealer who was a SOT called the BATFE on me the seller, & the buyer and refused to turn over the kit or do the 4473 till the BATFE looked at it.
    BATFE told him it's just parts let it go do the transfer.
    It was the last time I ever sent a kit with any type of flat, receiver or anything that could even be though of as a receiver in the same box.
    My stance now id registered parts go to the dealer parts go to your home cost double shipping but I don't have some fucktard calling the BATFE when I ship.

    If it's the same dealer ( sounds like it is) I see he is up to his same save the world busy body shit.

    Gun owners are their own worst enemy most of the time.

    Hope you get this resolved.

  10. #10
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    340
    Quote Originally Posted by pjm204 View Post
    Why did anyone even consult the ATF regarding this?
    Bingo, no good ever comes with writing the ATF a letter...

    Assuming you bought one of Chuck's last split shells?

  11. #11
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    623
    Quote Originally Posted by b_saan View Post
    Bingo, no good ever comes with writing the ATF a letter...

    Assuming you bought one of Chuck's last split shells?
    I've had a handful of pleasant/useful conversations with the ATF but in this case it seems completely unnecessary to contact them.

  12. #12
    UZI Talk Life Member
    hkg3k's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    371
    Quote Originally Posted by root View Post
    I once sold a parts kit to a private person in that sate with a GI 80% receiver the dealer who was a SOT called the BATFE on me the seller, & the buyer and refused to turn over the kit or do the 4473 till the BATFE looked at it.
    Maybe I'm missing something, but what's in a parts kit and 80% receiver that requires a 4473? Could you have not shipped directly to the buyer?

    Also curious as to the identity of this 07/02 chucklehead in AZ? They need to be outed so that no other well meaning gun owner "falls into his rabbit hole."

    jolague...I sympathize greatly with your situation and hope you get this resolved quickly. No much help now, but had you sought advise here on the front end regarding the best SOT to finish your GG...I'm certain you'd have been directed elsewhere.
    Last edited by hkg3k; 03-19-2021 at 05:31 PM.
    hkg3k
    Browning, Maxim, Vickers
    Beltfeds: Real Machineguns

  13. #13
    UZI Talk Supporter
    root's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    3,301
    Hkg3k those gi shells were numbered and regestered as a receiver so a transfer needs done on one.

    My mistake was putting the weldment semi pieces and a parts kit less barrel in and sending it all one package.
    Guy claimed it was a ilegal mg.

    That was a time i was glad the batfe new what they were doing.

    Hopefully they get this gg straightened out since there are still a lot of flats and others things not built.
    Last thing the NFA community needs is being told flats & unbuilt tubes can not be finished.

  14. #14
    UZI Talk Life Member
    hkg3k's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    371
    Quote Originally Posted by root View Post
    Hkg3k those gi shells were numbered and regestered as a receiver so a transfer needs done on one.
    Gotcha. In that case...the receiver is technically / legally a firearm and not 80%?
    hkg3k
    Browning, Maxim, Vickers
    Beltfeds: Real Machineguns

  15. #15
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    59
    Wasn’t aware there were registered, unfinished, GGs on the market. What do they go for?

  16. #16
    Registered User jolague's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Prescott, AZ
    Posts
    448
    Please lock this thread. The journey is now with Chuck Spano and I. This is now page of history. Pray for me.

    Isaac Hecker forever.

    James,

  17. #17
    Moderator
    FFL/SOT
    UZI Talk Life Member
    arch stanton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Wisconsin-Indonesia-Thailand & Live @ The Blue Note
    Posts
    2,849
    no reason for a lock on this thread
    Be polite,be courteous,be professional,but have a plan to kill everybody in the room
    UZI 22LR FA conversion kits are in stock


    http://www.subgun-ordnance.com
    subgun-ordnance@sbcglobal.net

  18. #18
    Registered User jolague's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Prescott, AZ
    Posts
    448
    Quote Originally Posted by arch stanton View Post
    no reason for a lock on this thread
    Fair enough! Let it ride.

  19. #19
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    242
    Im confused, if you bought a pre-86 registered machinegun, why contact the ATF and ask permission to finish building it? You would already have the paperwork stating that it is a legal registered machinegun......

  20. #20
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    340
    Quote Originally Posted by fortyfive1911a1 View Post
    I’m confused, if you bought a pre-86 registered machinegun, why contact the ATF and ask permission to finish building it? You would already have the paperwork stating that it is a legal registered machinegun......
    The way I read it, he bought and transferred the unfinished but registered and fully transferrable Medea GG shell and after the F4 was approved he received the shell and took it to a gunsmith to finish building it with a parts kit. The GS took it upon himself to contact the ATF and prod them with likely half-assed information which caused them to declare it a post-sample MG if it was finished. Now it's gotten more confusing though with him stating it's only between him and Spano so I'm wondering if the shell was actually properly registered in the 1st place.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts


Please consider becoming an UZI Talk Supporter.