1919 A4 Forums banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
361 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
All. I had a thought. What if you had a m134 mini gun parts kit and a 80% receiver. You can't legally make a machine gun as a individual. However hand cranked gatlings are perfectly legal. So could you permantly affix a crank to it and get rid of the motor. Yes, not nearly as fun but still cool.

Robert
 
Joined
·
118 Posts
In theory yeah, you can do that however some years back atf decided you cannot take that specific housing even if demilled and do what you are asking. They made a specific ruling on it even though there is really no basis for it. I know a number of people with kits heading down this road when the letter suddenly appeared. Even though demilled means "not a firearm" and when you rebuild it without motor mounts they seem to opine that because you've not followed old patents on gatling guns that anything other than that is a MG? They seem to neglect the fact that the m134 started off life by Mel Johnson as a gatling gun with an electric motor attached to it as the basis of the design? The only difference between a gatling and an M134 is the feed system, which they admit is irrelevant, and motor or possible attachment of a motor which is the only real difference that they fail to acknowledge. HTH

http://www.titleii.com/bardwell/atf_letter14.txt
That link is about limits to ammunition feed devices because the Assault Weapons Ban was in place at the time. Keep in mind I have no context for the letter, such as subsequent evaluation.

The OP is not talking about an M134 receiver (or frame or whatever the registered part is), he's talking about an 80% - an unregulated piece of metal. So it has nothing to do with a demil, it will start life as a semi. That being said, I would guess it is an existing machinegun part once completed, regardless of whether a motor is attached or a crank is attached. Because it is an exact duplicate of an existing machinegun receiver. I would assume some modification would be required to distinguish it from the known MG part. I think if you built a minigun from the ground up, with a completely new and unrelated design, with a crank, this would not be an issue.

I don't think ATF quoting their definition of a Gatling Gun means that any other gun is Title II. If I put a crank on a 10/22 is it an MG? No. If it has rotating barrels is it suddenly an MG? I've never seen anything to indicate that.
 

·
BeltFed GURU
Joined
·
4,394 Posts
When Gatling patented his gun he also patented an electric drive for it too ,a very forward thinking man !!

Halo Mfg tried it with a .22LR version and ATF killed it !! And that was a from the ground up design .............I think it has to do with the feed design is their reasoning behind why you can Not !
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top