Stupid, theoretical MG repair question

How much can you repair/modify a current NFA MG until you may have legal issues.
You can repair MG recievers, but can you modify them to “be” a different gun?
An example is cutting the magwell off a mac to take glock mags- people do this, although rare. Could you modify the reciever to accept AR uppers?
I know its not really possible, but could you theoretically modify or rig a RDIAS to fit and work with an ak, glock or other gun?

Purely from a legal standpoint- disregarding the high chance of trashing $20k.

You have the stamp on a serialized piece of metal. I would think that as long as the original serial number is present, the thing can be modded to your heart's desire. An MG is an MG is an MG.... more than one round per the pull of a trigger.

A dedicated caliber change notification to the goober squad would probably be advisable if the mod was permanent to something you'd be asked about.

Ok, so taking it all the way, could you take a mac 10 MG, cut out the serialized portion(destroy remaining reciever), and weld it flush with a semi m249 and have a “pre86” m249 that you could convert to FA legaly?

Edit:
I suppose youd have to make the reciever since you cant “deface” a real one.
And the tax stamp would still say “m-10”.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MegademiC

Ok, so taking it all the way, could you take a mac 10 MG, cut out the serialized portion(destroy remaining reciever), and weld it flush with a semi m249 and have a “pre86” m249 that you could convert to FA legaly?

Edit:
I suppose youd have to make the reciever since you cant “deface” a real one.
And the tax stamp would still say “m-10”.

---

No. There was a group of 3 or so SOTs about 10 years ago who were doing this. They were taking MACs and transferring the serial numbers and markings to m249s and other desirable MGs, selling for top dollar as “transferables”. They did this serially over multiple transfers back and forth among each other, each time altering the form until voila...form 3 from a m11/9 shows it’s a m249 made by SWD. ATF caught them. The guns were declared post samples.

The dealers were:
Hal Goldstein
Randolph Rodman
George Clark III
Lorren Kalish
James Arnberger
Idan Greenberg

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.ph...n-case.537907/

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastor...9/13-10337.pdf

These a-holes are the reason for ATF’s increased scrutiny of transfers - why they commonly ask for photos and clarification of caliber, model number, barrel length, etc on transfers.

ATF has a “rule” that a mg can only change a certain % from original before it becomes a post sample. This is why a Stenling (registered Sten tube built up with a Sterling parts kit) cannot have the the cocking slot width and location altered.

Yeah... I could see how that would be a total crap fest. Never heard of that case. Every time the Booger squad drops the hammer, there's some massive douche-baggery like this going on in the back ground..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoshNC

No. There was a group of 3 or so SOTs about 10 years ago who were doing this. They were taking MACs and transferring the serial numbers and markings to m249s and other desirable MGs, selling for top dollar as “transferables”. They did this serially over multiple transfers back and forth among each other, each time altering the form until voila...form 3 from a m11/9 shows it’s a m249 made by SWD. ATF caught them. The guns were declared post samples.

The dealers were:
Hal Goldstein
Randolph Rodman
George Clark III
Lorren Kalish
James Arnberger
Idan Greenberg

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.ph...n-case.537907/

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastor...9/13-10337.pdf

These a-holes are the reason for ATF’s increased scrutiny of transfers - why they commonly ask for photos and clarification of caliber, model number, barrel length, etc on transfers.

ATF has a “rule” that a mg can only change a certain % from original before it becomes a post sample. This is why a Stenling (registered Sten tube built up with a Sterling parts kit) cannot have the the cocking slot width and location altered.

---

I think I remember reading there is only 1 transferable M249, it boggles my mind how they thought they were going to get away with it.

There were also a few transferable SWD M11 9mm SMG lowers cut and welded to belt fed uppers, I think they were MG42s.

BATFE Technical Branch didn’t grant approval, said it was construction of a Post sample.

I think the guys were trying to copy Richard Lages concept of modified uppers for MACs.

This was about 10 years ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoshNC

No. There was a group of 3 or so SOTs about 10 years ago who were doing this. They were taking MACs and transferring the serial numbers and markings to m249s and other desirable MGs, selling for top dollar as “transferables”. They did this serially over multiple transfers back and forth among each other, each time altering the form until voila...form 3 from a m11/9 shows it’s a m249 made by SWD. ATF caught them. The guns were declared post samples.

The dealers were:
Hal Goldstein
Randolph Rodman
George Clark III
Lorren Kalish
James Arnberger
Idan Greenberg

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.ph...n-case.537907/

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastor...9/13-10337.pdf

These a-holes are the reason for ATF’s increased scrutiny of transfers - why they commonly ask for photos and clarification of caliber, model number, barrel length, etc on transfers.

ATF has a “rule” that a mg can only change a certain % from original before it becomes a post sample. This is why a Stenling (registered Sten tube built up with a Sterling parts kit) cannot have the the cocking slot width and location altered.

---

Ok, makes sense. I had never read the % part before, so you can repair - theoretically do what I described to a mac reciever (If it got desroyed), but it has to be identical- no change.