I see all these SMG kit cheap right now, Sten, Suomi, Bereta, ect, ect. So which ones are easlly converted? Does anyone make SA kits for any of these? I know one place for SA Sten kit, but allways out of stock. Any advise on how to do this?
This gets us back to the original open bolt position created by the batf that a gun that fires from an open bolt is considered a mg . The idea that a batf agent gave you an answer about the feed lips is sorry to say crazy as shit .as there have been congressional hearings on the fact that the batf does not have a stardardazation of what it considers illegal from one agent to the next . In fact it would be to everyones best interest to read the JPFO's article about the batf .
As for the rest of the story as Paul Harvey would say , it is best to read the decision handed down by the 9th circuit court , Stewart vs the US Goverment. However parts of the stewart vs us have been struck down by the us supreme courts decision due to medical marijauna , but the us supreme refused to hear arguments about the gun issue at that time. Also bear in mind that the 9th circuit has the highest amounts of thier rulings being struck down by the US Supreme court. It would also appear that due to this ruling that it is legal to posses homemade open bolt mgs , no matter if the batf likes it or not ( as long as it is almost completely homemade) as it is not regulated by the commerce clause which is what gives the batf its legal standing ( an arm of the irs). Only time will tell what the final decision will produce , and that partly depends on who gets into the us supreme court and into congress . No matter which position you take on smgs it is best to read the articles by the JFPO about the batf and the article about stewart vs the US goverment- and all relevant articles about robert stewart as this shows how f***ed up the batf can be .
Let me stick my toe in these turbulent waters and share a little something everyone might not have thought of,... and should not lose sight of. This thread started with some mention of staying off the books just in case there are future bans. I would like to point out that total avoidance of government paperwork is not going to do that for you. I bought an imported pistol competely legal and papered. Later I bought a replacement barrel, extended and threaded, completely legal- no paperwork. Years pass, and the FBI calls me asking about this barrel and whether I installed it in a pistol,.. and they want it for ballistics tests. I turn it over and quiz the agent about whats going on. He explains to me there is a west coast murder they're trying sew up. The forensics on the bullets in the body and the spent cases indicate a Russian Makarov with a aftermarket barrel. They go to the seller of the barrel, (FAC, Federal Arms Corporation) and they give them a list of customers that bought one of these barrels. I got my pistol back and the agent I dealt with was real nice, but the whole thing made me quite nervous for a while. The point is that sales records are a tremendous resource on top of background checks and paperwork,... any one part you buy may lead them to you.
Mauser, the Stewart decision said the 1986 machine gun ban did not apply to Stewart, it did not address the registration and tax issue since he was never charged with violating the NFA/GCA'68 registration and $200 tax requirements. Assuming Stewart stands and is interpreted to allow homemade guns to sidestep the '86 ban, the registration and tax requirements still exist. Many people have attempted to submit and get approved new MG paperwork based on Stewart and so far as I know, none have been approved.
Stewart is also not a clear cut case applicable to everybody who builds a homemade MG. Stewart was a convicted felon and could not legally possess a gun of any kind. When applying the interstate commerce test to the 86 ban in Stewarts case, they found his building MGs for his own use had no IC component. Since he could not legally obtain one, building his own had no effect on "affecting Interstate Commerce" by NOT buying one instead. Since we CAN legally buy one, IC might apply to our cases and Stewart would not apply.