kt ordnance raid

[motorhead]

i've been following this. if this goes to court, it could end up as precedent for what constitutes an 80% reciever. also, thre has been some speculation that the build parties held onsite using shop cnc equipment will be charged as manufacturing. nice build with the product in this issue of sgn.

[josh]

I would like to suggest everyone check out the www.jpfo.org and listen to the interview with the owner of KT and also read up on their boot the BATFE campaign.

[16r40]

you're only getting one side of the story.....and that is his. does not prove that what he did was within the law......... I read the thread where he posted on, and no where does he say he submitted a sample of the so called "80 percent" receiver to the ATF tech branch to determine if what he is selling won't be a firearm.

only a idiot would go and make something like that, then sell the things, without first getting a determination that is isn't a firearm.

[Bret]

only a idiot would go and make something like that, then sell the things, without first getting a determination that is isn't a firearm.
I don't know anything about the particular circumstances so I won't comment on them. However, there is no law or regulation that says anything about an 80% receiver. It's just up to the ATF to determine.

[allesennogwat]

The AR receiver blanks have been getting more and more complete.Originally they were cast or milled without holes or threaded for the buffer tube.These were refered to as "80%".Later Tannery started selling "82%" and even "85%" blanks.Mainly these were thresded for buffer tube.The KT blanks I've seen had starter dimples where the holes went.The ATF reg is X number of man-hours to complete in a fully equipped shop.I think it's 8 hours but I'm not certain(could be 4hr).The percentage thing is just sales words.The standard used to be the time it took get it to fire one round.Now it seems it's just time to complete the bare receiver.Not counting heat treatment of the receivers that require it as this isn't needed to fire one round.

[KernelKrink]

The "standard" is whatever ATF wants it to be this week. I can make an AK flat into a finished receiver in under 15 minutes, yet flats are not receivers. I have seen approved Browning 1919 semi auto sideplates that were completed down to just needing the rivet holes drilled, and they were spotted already with a dimple. Not a receiver. I have seen "80%" receiver tubes for various SMGs sold at Knob Creek that had all the openings laser cut except for small tabs holding them in place. A few minutes twisting them loose like a knockout in an electrical box and you would have a completed SMG receiver. Not a receiver.

OTOH, ATF said a Maadi Griffin "kit" was a rifle not a kit because their tech was able to assemble it enough to fire a primer within 6 hours (IIRC). In 6 hours most folks here could start from a flat and have a fully functioning AK before the time was up.

Bottom line is ATF gets to decide what is and isn't a receiver based on unpublished and unrevealed "standards". I suspect they don't really have any hard and fast rules on what is and isn't a receiver, they just make it up as they go along. I'm sure "politics" plays a role as well.

[allesennogwat]

There is a published standard time to "complete".This used tio be complete to being able to fire not just a completed bare receiver.That may still stand.I have also seen side plates just missing the rivet holes.On side note I just tried one of those Yugo flats.I welded the lower rails first,then bent it in a press brake.It came out well.

[KernelKrink]

There is a published standard time to "complete".This used tio be complete to being able to fire not just a completed bare receiver.That may still stand.I have also seen side plates just missing the rivet holes.On side note I just tried one of those Yugo flats.I welded the lower rails first,then bent it in a press brake.It came out well.
Got a link or scan of the standard? Doing a weld build of an AK from a flat and a kit, not caring about cosmetics and just getting it to fire one shot, could easily be done in under an hour, maybe a half hour if you hurried.

[allesennogwat]

I'll see what I can find.It may very well be 6 hours.When building AK's we have all the "special" AK building tools.These may not be involved in the gunsmith/machine shop gear.KT may have been raided for reasons other than the receiver blanks.

[allesennogwat]

I did read the Maadi-Greffin story.The ATF tech guy said he finished the receiver in 35 minutes with a Dremel tool and assembled the rifle and fired a round in an hour and a half.The other thing that sticks out is those were sold as complete rifle kits.Not just receiver blanks.I also found out KT was selling bolt-together AR15 receivers.

[KernelKrink]

Also note that with the Maddi Griffin the original search warrant was issued due to this tech guy being able to assemble the rifle within a certain time frame. Convicted felon making and selling guns was the reason listed. Once the warrant was served and various illegal submachine guns were found, the original pretext for going after him was nowhere to be seen.

Prosecuters will dog pile ANY charge they can find on a case simply because it ups their odds that something will stick. It also gives them leverage during plea bargain negotiations, "we'll drop the Jaywalking and public intox charges if he pleads guilty to DUI".

In the Maddi Griffin case articles I have read, they never charged him with anything involving the .50BMG rifles. They did however confiscate his sales records as authorized by the original search warrant. A paranoid person might believe that was the whole point of the search in the first place and the machine guns were just a nice surprise.

[allesennogwat]

Looks like Canada got him too.

http://www.jpfo.org/tta060714.htm

[panaceabeachbum]

I dont think there is any set time frame to completion, its just based on the individual set of parts and the general mood of the techs and agents working on your project . There is no set time frame and no set percentage of completion, anybody selling anything that could be construed as a reciever without first sending it to tech for clarification is just asking for trouble.

I also believe holding build parties in which the host is deriving profits by selling the attendees the unfinished reciever and then allowing them to create a working firearm on premises is simply inviting a charge of manufacturing without a licensce or some other violation. Its one thing for a group of buddies to get together and help each other rivet aks and parkerize etc but when they introduce commerce and profit into the eqaution an entirely set of rules probably come into play. my .02

[2KN1Z28]

I allways thought a reciver or frame "the part that makes a gun a gun" was the part with the serial number. Don't all Aks have the serial no. on the front trunion making that the FFL part? You could make some kind funky bolt action zip gun out a barreled trunion but not a "reciver" No?

[allesennogwat]

I allways thought a reciver or frame "the part that makes a gun a gun" was the part with the serial number. Don't all Aks have the serial no. on the front trunion making that the FFL part? You could make some kind funky bolt action zip gun out a barreled trunion but not a "reciver" No?


Originally stamped AK's had the serial number on the front trunnion.B-West messed things up but may have paved the way to allow trunnions to be imported as non-firearms.B-West had many complaints against them for too soft sheetmetal,loose rivets and even loose barrels.B-West also started selling bare stamped receivers without trunnions.ATF visited B-West to see what alll the complaints were about.They found that B-West wasn't making the stamped receivers but was contracting the work to an unlicensed sheetmetal company.Now if they had sold receivers with trunnions or just stuck with selling complete rifles things may not have been so bad for them as the sheetmetal company wasn't originally making the serialized trunnion but as soon as B-West started serializing bare sheetmetal receivers there was no doubt the sheetmetal company was making firearms.The only good to come of this was to declare the front trunnion a non-firearm.This may not stand much longer though and they may be classed with the PPS-43 trunnions,which aren't firearms themselves but can no longer be imported.A gunsmith once received a letter from ATF stating it approved of removing the front trunnion from the sheetmeta AKl for repair/service.The problem with this letter is neither the gunsmith's letter nor the ATF response mentions that the serial number is on the front trunnion.

[KernelKrink]

I allways thought a reciver or frame "the part that makes a gun a gun" was the part with the serial number. Don't all Aks have the serial no. on the front trunion making that the FFL part? You could make some kind funky bolt action zip gun out a barreled trunion but not a "reciver" No?
IF the gun was made in this country and had to follow ATF regs, the serial number would appear on the receiver shell. ATF has determined the sheet metal shell is the receiver but accepts foreign made receivers with only a trunnion #. Domestic ones all have a number on the shell to comply with ATF regs. The serial number also appears on the bolt and carrier of most AKs as well, none of those parts a receiver either.

Foreign manufacturers put the serial # where they want it. I have a Romanian trainer .22 rifle that has a factory stamped serial # on the bbl and a hand engraved matching number on the receiver. The importer marked the receiver to make it legal to import, but Romania was fine with it on the bbl.

As for a "zip gun", I could buy a chambered .22LR bbl from any number of sources with no transfer paperwork required. Drop in a live round and whack it with a 3 lb sledge hammer. Round goes off, the hammer acts like a huge bolt, and all is well as you pluck the fired round out by hand and reload. Hell, back in the 50s gangs were doing the same thing by stuffing .22s into broken off car antennas. That was the origin of the "zip gun" name in fact.

[2KN1Z28]

So why don't we have to stamp our "homemade" sheet metal recivers with "the" or "a" serial number. If our guns are compliant aren't they US made? And fall under those domestic regs?

[KernelKrink]

US regulations regarding firearm markings only apply to guns that were made by licensed manufacturers. Guns/receivers made for personal use (the only way we can make them without a license) do not require any markings at all as the marking regs don't apply to unlicensed individuals. ATF has said in a tech letter that if the receiver/firearm is ever sold or otherwise transferred from the person who built it, the receiver must be marked the same as a commerically produced one would be.

There has been some discussion over whether or not ATF can require this under the curent regs, but that is their position and would probably take a court case to prove who was right. Most people would not sell their creations anyway due to liability issues, and most consider the markings as not a problem should the firearm ever be passed on as a gift or inherited.

[Adventurer_96]

Here's a recent BATFE letter to TAPCO re: their Yugo flats.

http://www.tapco.com/proddesc.aspx?id=6f029036-d953-4157-95f7-d508b6413371