Printable View
This has come to light in connection with making semi auto Stens in Canada.
According to Daniel Guay, Senior Technologist at the RCMP's SFSS (Bill Etter's replacement), a Sten receiver is now deemed to be the combination of the magazine housing and the tube. Previously, the magazine housing alone was considered to be the receiver.
As a matter of interest, the magazine housing was always the 'master component' of the Sten Gun and was never available as a spare part from Ordnance. That was the part that had to be returned with the condemnation certificate when the gun was written off
I think in both cases it was because the serial number was there...I wondered when they'd sober up here about those.
The BATFE’s control part is the tube. It’s the “receiver” in the US.
A Sten can be fired without a magazine housing by putting a round in the chamber by hand.
You can’t fire a round with just a magazine housing, so it’s considered a part in the US.
You could use the same analogy with the AR15/M16 or the SA80. You could fire one without the mag housing/trigger mechanism housing. But that part is still the 'master component'
Yes.
There’s no consistency when it comes to what the BATFE considers the “receiver.” My semi-auto MG42 and PPSh41 both use AR15 fire control systems, but the trigger mechanism housing is not the control part on those guns.
Serial numbers are a real mess here too. Would you believe there are often two different serial numbers on a gun? It’s because there’s no requirement to remove the original serial number from a non-controlled part. In some cases it’s even illegal to remove the original serial number, even though it’s on a non-controlled part.
Sten and Sterling clones still have the original serial number on the magazine housing and a different number on the receiver tube. On a lot of AK’s the original serial number is on the trunnion and a different serial number is on the receiver. There’s no telling how often people use the wrong number.
My favorite serial number story is the one about the collector who noticed he had two Vickers with the same serial number on the BATFE Form. It turned out they had both been registered with the water jacket part number.
We have that too...Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent
I've seen this here, any number will do sometimes. It's a problem when you have people doing the job that have no actual knowledge of firearms. I recently was dealing with (them) accounting for handguns and the didn't use the serial number on the butt of the revolvers, but instead used the model number on the crane...good thing there weren't two of each...Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent
I had a Nambu pistol. It had two numbers on it. 25 and 16.10. It was registered with serial 16.10. It was the 25th pistol made by that particular manufacturer in October, 1941. The Canadian Firearms Program just gave up with the alphanumeric serials on Russian guns. The Cyrillic script was beyond them.
I encountered that as well back when it was a "thing".Quote:
Originally Posted by tiriaq
Please read me the number located on the firearm.
"It's Ka-De-1234."
It's what-Dee-1234?
"It's Ka-De-1234."
I don't understand.
"Its a Russian rifle the letter prefix of the rifle are Cyrillic characters"
What are the English letters?
"There aren't any"
long pause... ... just give me the numbers then.
"We are going to have a lot of fun with the next 6 rifles..."
Reminds me of someone trying to get his imported SA80 rifle put on the licensing database. He told them that it was an SA80 rifle, serial number AB1234, as you do. Back came the paperwoprk attached to his licence listing a SAKO rifle. He told them that it was an SA-80 rifle. The girl went away and came back to tell him that the supervisor had looked again but there was no SA80 on the computer data base but SAKO was the nearest............. So that would have to do!
So far as I still know, there's a rifle owner in darkest Taffy-land (that's Wales.......) with a SAKO SA80!!!!!!!!!
Ahh yes! It is a proven fact - If anyone doubts this statement, read the previous - that beauracrapts are by and large mostly all IDIUTS!!!
Sarge
Does this mean that either STEn part separately is NOT considered a receiver? e.g. two parts = receiver, one part = uncontrolled hunk of metal? If so then an uncontrolled (and un-serialized) tube can still go bang.Quote:
Originally Posted by tiriaq
Did they happen to mention/change anything about a deactivated Sterling? If the mag housing (with serial number normally permantly brazed to the tube) is removed but otherwise intact, is the mag housing considered a receiver? or because the tube "assembly" with all the brazed bits is no longer intact, it is not considered a receiver anymore?
The email which was forwarded to me referred to the combination. I don't know the answer to your question. I would not ask for clarification. Might get an answer I didn't like.
Exactly, because they didn't think of it the first time...Quote:
Originally Posted by tiriaq
atf consider the tube to be the receiver which is why on demilled guns the tube must be cut. Nothing is said about the mag housing be it Sten, MP 40 or what ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by lima
Sarge
I have a Sterling Mag Housing 'Blank'. It has never been fitted to a receiver, has all the nomencleture stamped on it. EXCEPT a Serial Number, & has not been drilled for the Screw, Mag, Catch........It is an uncontrolled item in the UK as it is. VERY unusual to encounter one of these, unless you worked at the now Defunct Sterling Factory that was at Dagenham.
The Sterling guns deliberately had the serial number engraved as deep as possible to prevent any fiddling or grinding out. On the other hand Fazakerley made Sterlings were true to form - with shallow engraved or etched numbers that were occasionally 'lost' or easily obliterated during major rebuilds when they went through the bead blaster. You'll often see these with the lost number sequence SA XX A xxxxx over engraved