Nice saw-cut Inglis Mk.I Bren Kit

[rcathey]

The ATF has some, shockingly, pretty well detailed information on this:
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/machinegun-destruction

The funny thing about this stuff is if the machine gun doesn’t meet these regulations it IS a machine gun. And in this case, probably an unregistered one.

It would hurt me emotionally but if I had that thing in my possession, I’d be firing up the oxy-acetylene torch as fast as I could. My gun rights are too important to be tip-toeing any legal fine lines.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[kpj53]

I was looking around the ATF site and didnt find that, but yes it is surprisingly detailed. Lot of interesting reading/debate on the subject around the internet also. Never really looked into it until now.

So the Stens I was looking at were nowhere near cut like those illustrations. I wonder if they were ever 'legal' demils. They were each in an old importer's box..

The Bren kit I used looks 'legal' with three diagonal torch cuts and there were some gaps, although not as enthusiastically melted like the latest parts kits.

I agree it would hurt to take a torch to that MK1 but I wouldnt want it in my house if its considered a MG. Most likely a semi auto builder wont even touch it as-is.

The ATF has some, shockingly, pretty well detailed information on this:
Machinegun Destruction | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

The funny thing about this stuff is if the machine gun doesn’t meet these regulations it IS a machine gun. And in this case, probably an unregistered one.

It would hurt me emotionally but if I had that thing in my possession, I’d be firing up the oxy-acetylene torch as fast as I could. My gun rights are too important to be tip-toeing any legal fine lines.

[rcathey]

I think there are two important details to take note of in regards to the Bren in question:
1. The cuts aren’t all the way through and
2. It doesn’t appear the cuts are displacing the 1/4” that the law requires.

So again, the OP may not be able to fire this thing but it is indeed a machine gun as far as ol’ Uncle Sam is concerned.

[Brit plumber]

It look like it’s been welded once already and then recut. One of the photos shows weld in the machining around the gas tube area and some heat colour in the blueing. Nothing seen around the back though.

[Syntax Error]

Actually the kit is cut three times through the receiver, just the last cut you can't tell easily as it was cut diagonally to the corner of the receiver behind the takedown pin hole.

[TactAdv]

Actually the kit is cut three times through the receiver, just the last cut you can't tell easily as it was cut diagonally to the corner of the receiver behind the takedown pin hole.

Sorry, I'm going to call BS on that statement. The pictures you posted clearly show that statement is not accurate. I've copied both pictures posted of the rear receiver area and enlarged them to a high magnification, and I stand by my original statement.

But that is not even an important point in that even IF cuts went all the way through, it is still not properly (read legally) destroyed.

I'm surprised those pictures are still up.
-TomH

[Syntax Error]

Sorry, I'm going to call BS on that statement. The pictures you posted clearly show that statement is not accurate. I've copied both pictures posted of the rear receiver area and enlarged them to a high magnification, and I stand by my original statement.

But that is not even an important point in that even IF cuts went all the way through, it is still not properly (read legally) destroyed.

I'm surprised those pictures are still up.
-TomH

You're welcome to believe what you want, but the receiver is cut in three parts with the rear cut being done diagonally so the cut is behind the rear takedown pin at the corner. I could upload a photo but it seems like this kit makes people uncomfortable, even though there are receiver kits that have been demilled in a similar way (well under 1/4" cuts), and just because the ATF regulations have changed going forward to a torch cut including barrel demilling, it does not apply to kits that have already been imported into the country in the past before the regulations were changed. What that would mean is that ATF regulations somehow apply ex-post-facto? Not seeing people rushing to destroy their saw-cut demilled kits.

I'm gonna ask a moderator to delete the images as it seems like I'm unable to edit the inital post.

[rcathey]

This is the fine line I was talking about earlier.
The link I provided earlier shows the ATF approved method to destroy a machine gun so it can be imported. Without doing what they say, with a torch, displacing 1/4” of material, they will not consider the machine gun destroyed and they will not let it enter the country.

Say an ATF inspector just “poofs” into your living room one day and says, “what’s that?” do you sincerely believe that he’ll be cool with the “ah don’t worry, I didn’t import it. Saw cuts are good. It’s just a paperweight.”
As in, stay out of federal prison and avoid thousands in fine type believe.

That’s what makes us uneasy and that’s why I wouldn’t touch it with a ten foot pole. It’s simply not worth it to me.
I couldn’t afford to feed the darn thing anyway 😉

---------- Post added at 08:49 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:45 AM ----------

Oh, and the ATF isn’t cool with those demil kits you speak of either.
http://www.machinegunboards.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=10746

[kpj53]

I thought the same but if you look at the rear of the full right side pic enlarged the rear corner of the receiver looks like its cut off on an angle, maybe.

No doubt by todays standards it is not a legal demil to be imported but I'm not a firearms lawyer and have no idea if it was legal to import at any time or if illegal just to possess. I have seen quite a few saw gut MGs on display assembled and offered for sale at shows and on the internet, I know that doesnt make it OK or legal..

Sorry, I'm going to call BS on that statement. The pictures you posted clearly show that statement is not accurate. I've copied both pictures posted of the rear receiver area and enlarged them to a high magnification, and I stand by my original statement.

But that is not even an important point in that even IF cuts went all the way through, it is still not properly (read legally) destroyed.

I'm surprised those pictures are still up.
-TomH

[WallyG.]

The gun in question might be a rewelded postie machine gun that the owner did not want to hastle with selling as an NFA full auto gun. If there have been no semi auto modifications made to the receiver... if it is a reweld then it was still a machine gun before the current attempt at demil and it still is a machine gun right now... just one made after 1986 manufacture ban - from a parts kit. The underlying problem here is that there is no way to determine when and in what condition the receiver originally arrived in the US. The pics so far do not give enough detail to determine if it is a saw cut rewelded MG or just a saw cut MG... in either eventuality... Run away fast.