STG-44 Advise.
- Thread starter Dr. Mauser
- Start date
For what its worth, this is the reply I got... he was not happy in the least
What I wrote:
His response:
I sent him a nice letter of apology. Hopefully I didn't overstep my bounds here, but I was curious.
I hope he doesn't get arrested though...
Edit:
I'd also like a bit of a clarification. You guys are tossing around the word "constructive possession" like it means possession of the parts necessary to "construct" and full auto weapon. I though it was originally a law definition for having possession of a item, without actually possessing the item. I can see how the two definitions overlap, I was just curious as to which one was more correct. Thanks.
Further edit:
He also changed the description, adding this bit:
What I wrote:
His response:
I sent him a nice letter of apology. Hopefully I didn't overstep my bounds here, but I was curious.
I hope he doesn't get arrested though...
Edit:
I'd also like a bit of a clarification. You guys are tossing around the word "constructive possession" like it means possession of the parts necessary to "construct" and full auto weapon. I though it was originally a law definition for having possession of a item, without actually possessing the item. I can see how the two definitions overlap, I was just curious as to which one was more correct. Thanks.
Further edit:
He also changed the description, adding this bit:
While I am no expert on this subject, I wouldn't want to do business with someone who personally insults people for legitimate concerns. Bad karma for him...
Last edited:
If the gun has BATFE approval, he's good to go.
The original wording of his ad was what set my spider sense tingling. You have to admit he made it sound like he's selling the gun, plus everything you need to make a buzzgun out of it.
The thing everyone's been calling a "lower receiver" is a trigger pack, and is not the "receiver", as defined by the BATFE. I'd imagine, given the similarity of construction between the StG-44 and its lineal descendant, the G-3, that legal precedents established for the HK rifle would apply here. As long as adding the FA trigger group won't make it a buzzgun, there should be no legal problem, but you're out in a gray area with a lot of these parts kit guns that rely on BATF opinion letters.
"Consrtuctive possession" means what you say it does, and has been used by the BATFE to describe the situation where one, say, owns an AR-15 and all the M-16 fire control bits. Even if they are not in the gun, the BATFE considers you to be in "constructive possession" of a machine gun.
The original wording of his ad was what set my spider sense tingling. You have to admit he made it sound like he's selling the gun, plus everything you need to make a buzzgun out of it.
The thing everyone's been calling a "lower receiver" is a trigger pack, and is not the "receiver", as defined by the BATFE. I'd imagine, given the similarity of construction between the StG-44 and its lineal descendant, the G-3, that legal precedents established for the HK rifle would apply here. As long as adding the FA trigger group won't make it a buzzgun, there should be no legal problem, but you're out in a gray area with a lot of these parts kit guns that rely on BATF opinion letters.
"Consrtuctive possession" means what you say it does, and has been used by the BATFE to describe the situation where one, say, owns an AR-15 and all the M-16 fire control bits. Even if they are not in the gun, the BATFE considers you to be in "constructive possession" of a machine gun.
If you really want to see some fun, tell him you are forwarding his offer to BATFE to confirm his claim that the gun is legal!
Note that he never said the gun was BATFE approved, he said it is 922 compliant, which applies to the percentage of US made parts in a semi-auto rifle, nothing to do with the gun's status as an auto weapon.
Tamara, those parts kits can be made into semi-autos by a licensed manufacturer, or even into automatics for demos or for LE use. But the parts kits don't include the receiver or (recently) the barrels, so he wouldn't have the original receiver. There is something very fishy here. There were a fair number of StG DEWATS sold in the early 1960's and I suspect someone got hold of one that was never registered and decided to make it "legal" by converting it to a semi-auto. That may not be done, as I pointed out above.
The 1968 law required registration of ALL machineguns, including DEWATs which had been sold as "non-guns." If a DEWAT had been registered, it could have been reactivated to full auto by paying the $200 tax. Making it a semi would be very stupid.
The seller here is either very ignorant, or playing games with his own and his customer's freedom. He is also very arrogant and nasty, characteristics that often go along with stupidity and ignorance. My advice is to give him a very wide berth. He already has given himself enough rope for a hanging.
Jim
Note that he never said the gun was BATFE approved, he said it is 922 compliant, which applies to the percentage of US made parts in a semi-auto rifle, nothing to do with the gun's status as an auto weapon.
Tamara, those parts kits can be made into semi-autos by a licensed manufacturer, or even into automatics for demos or for LE use. But the parts kits don't include the receiver or (recently) the barrels, so he wouldn't have the original receiver. There is something very fishy here. There were a fair number of StG DEWATS sold in the early 1960's and I suspect someone got hold of one that was never registered and decided to make it "legal" by converting it to a semi-auto. That may not be done, as I pointed out above.
The 1968 law required registration of ALL machineguns, including DEWATs which had been sold as "non-guns." If a DEWAT had been registered, it could have been reactivated to full auto by paying the $200 tax. Making it a semi would be very stupid.
The seller here is either very ignorant, or playing games with his own and his customer's freedom. He is also very arrogant and nasty, characteristics that often go along with stupidity and ignorance. My advice is to give him a very wide berth. He already has given himself enough rope for a hanging.
Jim