Has anyone ever had a pre-sample become a transferable?

[ColdBlue]

I've got an imported H&K factory MG from the early 70s, when I gave up my FFL & SOT my IOI took the serial to verify it's status as a pre-sample in the registry with NFA branch before I was allowed to log the gun out to myself. 

He comes back with surprise it's a transferable gun and the paperwork has been updated on their end to reflect this. During this period the gun disappeared from my inventory for a few days on Eforms then reappeared as a white transferable gun instead of red when looking at my inventory under Eform 4.  Apparently this was all cleared and deemed kosher by the upstairs people at NFA branch. 

NFA's reasoning is that it was imported by a federal agency, used by said agency, then sold to a dealer on a Form 4 prior to 1986 and this action removed the import restriction.  

I have never heard of this happening before. Has anyone else? 

[taylorwso]

wow

[Christof Stehpinkler]

Christmas came early for you

[ColdBlue]

1 minute ago, Christof Stehpinkler said:

Christmas came early for you

 It did, and it helped brighten & offset some pretty big personal losses over the last few years. We've had a lot of death. 

I'll throw it out there now that I'm not interested in selling the gun regardless of status or establishing any kind of value. I've been floating this story around to other dealer friends and I've asked to sell it a dozen times before I even came here to post about it and it's consistently been a solid no from me even at the ridiculous offer of 100K.  

I like unique NFA history and for me that's the major appeal of the gun at this point. Before this happened it was just another gun to me. If this is truly a unique case then I feel like this is a really special piece of history which deserves to be documented and put up. 












 

[Chef]

Sounds like an error to me.
If I'm correct in my interpretation of the rules, anything imported into the USA after 1968 is a sample. And any sample imported between 1968 and 1986 is a pre sample.
Anything imported after 1986 is a post sample.
So for your item to be transferable, (unless it was "made" in the states before 1986) it would have to be imported before 1968. And you state it's from the '70's.
So the only way I can see an Hk manufactured rifle from the 70's can be transferable is if it was never registered when it was imported and someone before 1986 "made" it and registered it on a form 2. Assuming of course that it's a factory select fire weapon and not a semi auto that's been converted.
But since you didn't attach pictures or even give a description of it beyond it being a "H&K factory MG from the early 70s", it's hard to tel what exactly you have.
That being said, without filing a FOIA and seeing the original registration document, I would be leery of taking what your IOI as the full truth without some kind of letter or written documentation to back it up.
But it's a good decision to hold onto it. If I were a perspective buyer, I would be very hesitant to spend big bucks on it knowing that even if the transfer was approved, it may later be deemed a mistake and at best, the new owner would be allowed to retain it, but not transfer it unless it was to a SOT, or at worst, have to surrender it.

[ColdBlue]

6 minutes ago, Chef said:

Sounds like an error to me.
If I'm correct in my interpretation of the rules, anything imported into the USA after 1968 is a sample. And any sample imported between 1968 and 1986 is a pre sample.
Anything imported after 1986 is a post sample.
So for your item to be transferable, (unless it was "made" in the states before 1986) it would have to be imported before 1968. And you state it's from the '70's.
So the only way I can see an Hk manufactured rifle from the 70's can be transferable is if it was never registered when it was imported and someone before 1986 "made" it and registered it on a form 2. Assuming of course that it's a factory select fire weapon and not a semi auto that's been converted.
But since you didn't attach pictures or even give a description of it beyond it being a "H&K factory MG from the early 70s", it's hard to tel what exactly you have.
That being said, without filing a FOIA and seeing the original registration document, I would be leery of taking what your IOI as the full truth without some kind of letter or written documentation to back it up.
But it's a good decision to hold onto it. If I were a perspective buyer, I would be very hesitant to spend big bucks on it knowing that even if the transfer was approved, it may later be deemed a mistake and at best, the new owner would be allowed to retain it, but not transfer it unless it was to a SOT, or at worst, have to surrender it.

MP5A2  12/72 date code. This came from NFA branch not my IOI but like you said some pretty big errors have been made by NFA branch in the past so I wouldn't put it past them. 

Specifically the act of the firearm being purchased directly from H&K by a federal agency, then sold, removed the import restriction. As it was explained to me this is also the case with certain Title I semi-automatics and Benelli SBS shotguns. 

Edited August 16, 2023 by ColdBlue

[Chef]

If this is the way the ATF now interprets the regulations, I wonder if they consider LE agency owned items the same way.
I would hazard a guess that most MGs held by LE agencies were purchased directly from the manufacturer. But is a LE agency consider the same as a "federal" agency? 
Does the ATF consider all LE to be "federal" or just agencies like the FBI or DEA etc.

[ColdBlue]

9 minutes ago, Chef said:

If this is the way the ATF now interprets the regulations, I wonder if they consider LE agency owned items the same way.
I would hazard a guess that most MGs held by LE agencies were purchased directly from the manufacturer. But is a LE agency consider the same as a "federal" agency? 
Does the ATF consider all LE to be "federal" or just agencies like the FBI or DEA etc.

I'd be interested to know myself as I know for a fact I've read about some Benelli shotguns recalled by NFA branch after final F4 transfer.  What passes muster? State? County? Federal only? Is this another reversal? Should we write a dozen letters for clarification? (Please don't) 

I'd also be very interested to know what agency purchased it in 1972-1973. I don't know of any official adoption of an Mp5 by a US federal agency in that time frame. I was unable to get any info on the original purchaser from ATF. FOIA seems like the only option. 

Of note though, there are no import markings present on the firearm.  The only stampings are "HK MP5" "KAL. 9mmX19" "S/N" and "12/72"  

Also of note, my form lists the type of firearm as "Submachine-gun". I haven't ever seen that before either. 



 

Edited August 16, 2023 by ColdBlue
added last bit.

[Chef]

I agree with your statement about not writing letters. Let sleeping dogs lie.
Typically, calling attention to things only leads to more restrictions. It's not their goal to simplify things or they would just make everything transferable or even open up the registry.
Calling attention to loopholes or mistakes just makes them focus on such discrepancies and close them.

But nice score on the Mp5!

[Got Uzi]

Not sure how they can reclassify things like that. The whole eForms system is a complete mess with regards to pre samples. Its been discussed here several times that dealers have pre samples that are both “red” and “white” on their online inventory lists. I have that too. I have a couple Thompson’s that are “red” while my Swedish K is “white” all were imported after 68 so that makes them pre samples. Not sure how or why they would say your MP5 is now a transferable as it’s a 1972 gun made in Germany….it’s post 1968 and had to be imported. Guess I’m extremely confused here. 
 

I also know of guys in the past who sold a gun that was thought to be a transferable only for it to transfer one or two times and then it’s discovered it’s a pre sample….the person left holding the bag has a pile of money in a gun they can’t sell for for what they paid. Have to be careful on that one too. 

[duza9999]

Interesting 

Edited August 16, 2023 by duza9999

[okrana]

Wonder what became with all the MP5s that Miami (FLA) PD had,,,,,post,,pre,,or transferable...?

Okrana

[Aaron in Mohnton Pa]

"NFA's reasoning is that it was imported by a federal agency, used by said agency, then sold to a dealer on a Form 4 prior to 1986 and this action removed the import restriction." - It would be nice if the ATF provided you that in writing... Even if only in an email or something...  In case the gun transfers down the line some time (thik a decade from now for example) and it gets bounced back as a sample.... Which we know happens from time to time with guns that are supposedly transferable (and then come back as post samples or pre samples when they try to transfer them). 

[hkg3k]

$100k offer?  I'd sell immediately and then pick up a registered sear...

[ColdBlue]

1 hour ago, Aaron in Mohnton Pa said:

"NFA's reasoning is that it was imported by a federal agency, used by said agency, then sold to a dealer on a Form 4 prior to 1986 and this action removed the import restriction." - It would be nice if the ATF provided you that in writing... Even if only in an email or something...  In case the gun transfers down the line some time (thik a decade from now for example) and it gets bounced back as a sample.... Which we know happens from time to time with guns that are supposedly transferable (and then come back as post samples or pre samples when they try to transfer them). 

Yes it would!  I have requested an updated form reflecting the new status. I'm told there will be an explanation on an additional page. 

One of the reasons I haven't posted pictures is because I'm waiting on that and transport paperwork to my new location. It's still in a safe back east. 

[Bill in Bama]

Like Got Uzi, I have several pre-samples in my inventory that are shown in white on my NFA inventory list, so that is no guarantee.

I have an M3A1 GG that I purchased as a pre-sample several years ago, but it transferred to me on a Form 4 (although I didn't pay the tax), and I thought for a bit, "Oh boy, I got a transferrable for the price of a pre-sample!"  Well, I have serious doubts that were I to try to sell it as such NFA Branch would slap me down on it.  That said, if I were to sell it as a pre-sample for pre-sample money and  then the Form 3 be denies because NFA tells me it is a transferrable, then what?  I just looked, this gun is currently showing "in the white" on my inventory.

[ColdBlue]

Just now, Bill in Bama said:

Like Got Uzi, I have several pre-samples in my inventory that are shown in white on my NFA inventory list, so that is no guarantee.

I have an M3A1 GG that I purchased as a pre-sample several years ago, but it transferred to me on a Form 4 (although I didn't pay the tax), and I thought for a bit, "Oh boy, I got a transferrable for the price of a pre-sample!"  Well, I have serious doubts that were I to try to sell it as such NFA Branch would slap me down on it.  That said, if I were to sell it as a pre-sample for pre-sample money and  then the Form 3 be denies because NFA tells me it is a transferrable, then what?  I just looked, this gun is currently showing "in the white" on my inventory.

Well a Pre-may gun or NFA item on a F3 can transfer back to another dealer on a Form 4 I've seen that happen when it's coming from a sole prop. who surrendered their license. I've bought a pre-may Uzi and a DD USAS-12 with an actual physical stamps that transferred from a former dealer to me on Form 4s  like that. They still showed up in my inventory and I was able to sell the Uzi on a F3 no problem. 

I've never had an IOI contact NFA branch to inquire about the status of a firearm at discontinuance of business only for the red non-transferable firearm to drop out of inventory completely for several days and be replaced with a white transferable item along with a phone call shortly after from NFA branch & an IOI who provided the explanation I received in regards to why this happened.  I was urged to keep contact details for both gentlemen and request an amended form which I have. 

This thing just didn't drop out of my Form 4 or Form 3 inventory like a pending transfer. It dropped completely from my inventory then reappeared a week later. 

I've never seen, or heard of anything like this happening before. Like I said earlier, this isn't about the money. I wouldn't sell the gun at any price. This is more me trying to figure out if I stumbled on some kind of unicorn event. 

[Chef]

I couldn't speculate on the situation being a unicorn event or not, but I can tell you that having a fully transferable, factory Hk Mp5 is a unicorn gun that a lot of collectors would pay through the nose to add to their collection.

[Bill in Bama]

All this discussion prompted me to look over my records, and several of my Form 3 guns don't have ANY notes as to their being Pre or Post samples, even though I know they are.  So, how does one determine if through the years the fog of age has eliminated the memories?  A couple of them say that accompanying documents state the status, but i find no such documents in my files.  I purchased two MP40's , one definitely a pre-86 as the bill of sale from the auction compnay states that clearly, but the accompanying Form 3 doesn't have any stamps or notes to that effect.  And on my NFA inventory sheet it isn't in red either.  The entire thing is a mess, and unfortunately we're the ones with the burden of proof but NFA has the last word. 

[SGT Fish]

1 hour ago, Bill in Bama said:

All this discussion prompted me to look over my records, and several of my Form 3 guns don't have ANY notes as to their being Pre or Post samples, even though I know they are.  So, how does one determine if through the years the fog of age has eliminated the memories?  A couple of them say that accompanying documents state the status, but i find no such documents in my files.  I purchased two MP40's , one definitely a pre-86 as the bill of sale from the auction compnay states that clearly, but the accompanying Form 3 doesn't have any stamps or notes to that effect.  And on my NFA inventory sheet it isn't in red either.  The entire thing is a mess, and unfortunately we're the ones with the burden of proof but NFA has the last word. 

You could do a FOIA request on the gun to see if any of the previous Form 3s or 4s had been stamped as restricted. You may also end up with the form1/2, import paperwork or amnesty paperwork which would be proof of the gun's status

[bauerdb]

Why is it so difficult to understand that a 12/72 MP5A2 is not pre-68?

[har1690]

Interesting read here. I was a C3 dealer in 1990-1994 in CT. I had purchased a Dealer Sample MP5 for $1600.00 and on the ATF Form 3 it's stamped "LIMITED SALES SAMPLE" in red. Once I gave up my C3, I transferred the weapon to myself. And not that 50 years has anything to do with it, I do wonder is ATF is changing the goal post and allowing these to become transferrable? Mine is stamped exact same way. "The only stampings are "HK MP5" "KAL. 9mmX19" "S/N" and "12/72" I was once told my Mp5 is/was part of the Project 54 guns as mine does not have the mounting lugs on this gun. OP, does yours have the rail lugs on top of your receiver?

[Got Uzi]

If thats the case, then where would they consider the 50 years from?  Importation or date of manufacture?  If that were the case anyone with a pre sample Thompson, MP40, BAR, and so on WWII weapon would be in for a plesant surprise.  I got a feeling that someone has screwed up and is and will be a pre sample as it clearly was made in 1972 and was imported so that right there says its a pre sample...since the importation cut off for transferables was 1968.

[ColdBlue]

4 hours ago, bauerdb said:

Why is it so difficult to understand that a 12/72 MP5A2 is not pre-68?

 Why is it so difficult to understand that The NFA branch, their legal team, and ATF had provided an explanation for why the post-68 restriction no longer applies in this particular case? 

 

[ColdBlue]

3 hours ago, har1690 said:

Interesting read here. I was a C3 dealer in 1990-1994 in CT. I had purchased a Dealer Sample MP5 for $1600.00 and on the ATF Form 3 it's stamped "LIMITED SALES SAMPLE" in red. Once I gave up my C3, I transferred the weapon to myself. And not that 50 years has anything to do with it, I do wonder is ATF is changing the goal post and allowing these to become transferrable? Mine is stamped exact same way. "The only stampings are "HK MP5" "KAL. 9mmX19" "S/N" and "12/72" I was once told my Mp5 is/was part of the Project 54 guns as mine does not have the mounting lugs on this gun. OP, does yours have the rail lugs on top of your receiver?

My gun has no provision to mount an optics rail and it has a weird charging handle assembly which doesn't appear to interchange with modern parts. 

Beautiful gun btw. 

[ColdBlue]

1 hour ago, Got Uzi said:

If thats the case, then where would they consider the 50 years from?  Importation or date of manufacture?  If that were the case anyone with a pre sample Thompson, MP40, BAR, and so on WWII weapon would be in for a plesant surprise.  I got a feeling that someone has screwed up and is and will be a pre sample as it clearly was made in 1972 and was imported so that right there says its a pre sample...since the importation cut off for transferables was 1968.

Date of MFG has nothing to do with this. 

Specifically the act of a federal agency acquiring the firearm direct, using it, then selling it to a dealer as a surplus item prior to the 1986 cutoff is what ATF proposes removed the import restriction. 

Edited August 17, 2023 by ColdBlue
mistype

[Got Uzi]

I’d like to see it all in writing. 
 

Failing to see how a gun made in 1972 that came into the country after 1968, doesn’t matter if it was agency direct or not, it was still imported after 1968. Seems fishy to me. 

[ColdBlue]

54 minutes ago, Got Uzi said:

I’d like to see it all in writing. 
 

Failing to see how a gun made in 1972 that came into the country after 1968, doesn’t matter if it was agency direct or not, it was still imported after 1968. Seems fishy to me. 

Are you familiar with any number of other non 922R compliant Title I firearms sold out from federal agencies and sold over the counter as title I firearms? Apparently there's some federal magic going on that allows them to just do what they please when they please. 

This is the exact scenario ATF used to explain how this worked. The import by, and use by, a federal LE agency satisfied and got rid of the post 68 restriction just as the SIG 550 rifles were imported, used, and sold by a federal agency rid them of any requirement to comply with 922R.  "Satisfied and got rid of" being their words not mine. 

In fact the comparison was made by someone in the "upstairs" of NFA branch whoever the hell that is. 

I've requested in writing the status of this gun along with the recently attached "notation" associated with it in the registry.  Until I receive something in the mail, and knowing them it's going to be a hot second, I can't do anything further. 

I'm curious to see if the other poster with a 12/72 SD has import markings?  Every other Pre-may mp5 I've ever seen is either marked SACO or HK on the mag well. My mag well is blank on both sides. 

[johnsonlmg41]

The thing is, gov. doesn't import guns AFAIK, they put out a requisition or PO and if it were to HK, it would have been HK USA who would have imported it then shipped it over to .gov.  Marking it may not have been an issue since it was going to gov and not in general circulation.    If it's stuff acquired by the military and brought back that might be a different deal, but it wouldn't have made it out into public circulation.   The MP5's in that auction made the same claim, but no one ever came forward who bought one and got it transferred as a transferable ever came forward IIRC.   As we all know, not too many people at NFA branch know much about NFA regs., it's just a sad fact.   A FOIA is your best approach to figure it out on your own.   After I sent a detailed letter to the "legal" team for an NFA issue (or whomever got it?) the response was a joke.  If you want a detailed legal response, you're going to have to go before a judge to get it. 

I guess the good news is  it could transfer tax free to a C+R SOT holder!  LOL

Hopefully you follow up in the future as to what their story of the day is if they ever follow up?  There are a number of factory HK's in the registry....just not 100% legit pedigrees, but they are far less risky than a post 68 pre-may that suddenly became transferable? 

[ColdBlue]

5 hours ago, johnsonlmg41 said:

The thing is, gov. doesn't import guns AFAIK, they put out a requisition or PO and if it were to HK, it would have been HK USA who would have imported it then shipped it over to .gov.  Marking it may not have been an issue since it was going to gov and not in general circulation.    If it's stuff acquired by the military and brought back that might be a different deal, but it wouldn't have made it out into public circulation.   The MP5's in that auction made the same claim, but no one ever came forward who bought one and got it transferred as a transferable ever came forward IIRC.   As we all know, not too many people at NFA branch know much about NFA regs., it's just a sad fact.   A FOIA is your best approach to figure it out on your own.   After I sent a detailed letter to the "legal" team for an NFA issue (or whomever got it?) the response was a joke.  If you want a detailed legal response, you're going to have to go before a judge to get it. 

I guess the good news is  it could transfer tax free to a C+R SOT holder!  LOL

Hopefully you follow up in the future as to what their story of the day is if they ever follow up?  There are a number of factory HK's in the registry....just not 100% legit pedigrees, but they are far less risky than a post 68 pre-may that suddenly became transferable? 

HK USA didn't exist at that time IIRC, it would have been SACO or maybe H&R 

FOIA is in the works, I have a buddy litigating for a large gun rights org. so getting a judge to look at it may be in the cards. He seems to think I have a very important key sitting in my possession for one of his upcoming cases. Who knows. 

I will be updating either way. Like I said earlier, it doesn't really matter to me if the gun is transferable or not. I wouldn't sell it even if it was. 

[SGT Fish]

9 hours ago, ColdBlue said:

Are you familiar with any number of other non 922R compliant Title I firearms sold out from federal agencies and sold over the counter as title I firearms? Apparently there's some federal magic going on that allows them to just do what they please when they please. 

This is the exact scenario ATF used to explain how this worked. The import by, and use by, a federal LE agency satisfied and got rid of the post 68 restriction just as the SIG 550 rifles were imported, used, and sold by a federal agency rid them of any requirement to comply with 922R.  "Satisfied and got rid of" being their words not mine.

IIRC,  922R only applies to the person who assembles/builds the gun. It isn't actually applicable to the gun itself and any future purchasers. Here you can see what a firearms attorney has to say about it at 4:10 

 

[Bill in Bama]

Well, I have an HK 33 pre-sample that I would love to magically become a transferrable, not to mention my pre Thompson and Mp40.  NFA can do whatever it wants, it seems, and can change its mind more times than my wife.  I did a FOIA one time on an NFA item, took about 9 months IIRC, and I don't have the patience to go down that road again. 

[SGT Fish]

On the flip side of this conversation/story. An SOT just posted a pic of a Stemple M60 on reddit, stating the gun came to them on a form 5 for destruction as the original registration date was the day after the deadline. The owner sold the gun but the transfer was denied. 

 

I wonder if it was actually built before the deadline but the paperwork was filled out the day after and the filer didn't think it'd be an issue. Makes you wonder cuz everything was mailed in/paper forms then.

 

https://reddit.com/r/NFA/s/5quED9l6fu

Edited August 18, 2023 by SGT Fish
Link added

[Got Uzi]

I know of an M60 that was like that, it was papered after the date and the owner was allowed to keep it, but couldn’t sell it. When he got to the point he didn’t shoot it anymore, we stripped the parts and I torched the receiver for him while he looked on. Was a sad day as I enjoyed shooting that M60 but them is the rules we gotta live by. 

[ColdBlue]

14 hours ago, SGT Fish said:

IIRC,  922R only applies to the person who assembles/builds the gun. It isn't actually applicable to the gun itself and any future purchasers. Here you can see what a firearms attorney has to say about it at 4:10 

 

Gee, my own firearms attorney. Who wants to use this gun to make all of yours worthless. 

Reading comprehension isn't any of your strong suits is it? 

Logic being the operative word here. 

I think we can call this topic, I've established that nobody else has had this conversation with ATF or NFA branch. That's the whole point of this topic. 

 

Edited August 19, 2023 by ColdBlue

[JJX]

It has been a while since I actually read the laws, so quote the statute to refute my opinion. I can see how the ATF can logically consider this MP5 as transferable. It was owned by a Federal LE org in the 70s. Feds are exempt from the NFA, but State and local agencies are subject to it and their guns are in the Registry. 

Military and Federal LE guns are not placed on the registry and import marking was not required. The subject MP5 was entered into the Registry when transferred to a dealer prior to 86. It was not imported AS a sales sample, so it did not, legally speaking, BECOME a sales sample. It was 'born' before 86, when first placed on the Registry and that makes it transferable. 

[Schmeisser Guy]

This is the clearest explanation I have read in this thread!!! Thank you!!! That does make sense once you explain it that way.

[johnsonlmg41]

43 minutes ago, JJX said:

It has been a while since I actually read the laws, so quote the statute to refute my opinion. I can see how the ATF can logically consider this MP5 as transferable. It was owned by a Federal LE org in the 70s. Feds are exempt from the NFA, but State and local agencies are subject to it and their guns are in the Registry. 

Military and Federal LE guns are not placed on the registry and import marking was not required. The subject MP5 was entered into the Registry when transferred to a dealer prior to 86. It was not imported AS a sales sample, so it did not, legally speaking, BECOME a sales sample. It was 'born' before 86, when first placed on the Registry and that makes it transferable. 

This still assumes gov imported the guns directly from overseas and somehow received them via commercial channels/carriers with no paperwork or importing dealer/rep that booked them in without import paperwork, then out to the Fedgov without any paper trail?  It still means they were imported post 68 and at the time fedgov was not bound by sales sample restrictions....since they are not bound by any rules generally, but there is still paperwork of origin and dates.  I don't see a magic nexus to that transferring back to the public domain without complying with rules in place at that time for the private sector?  Of course I don't see a scenario where a gun like that leaves federal property ever, post 68?   I'm sure there's a story there about how a agency gun went into the private sector?  Pretty sure that info will not be in a FOIA filing?  Rumors abound about how a number of guns brought in post 68 got put into the registry as transferable by people "who knew people".  Perhaps this is one of those?

Foreign made guns imported post 68 only got into the registry as transferables by first being destroyed, then "re-manufactured" and registered.

[JoshNC]

8 hours ago, JJX said:

It has been a while since I actually read the laws, so quote the statute to refute my opinion. I can see how the ATF can logically consider this MP5 as transferable. It was owned by a Federal LE org in the 70s. Feds are exempt from the NFA, but State and local agencies are subject to it and their guns are in the Registry. 

Military and Federal LE guns are not placed on the registry and import marking was not required. The subject MP5 was entered into the Registry when transferred to a dealer prior to 86. It was not imported AS a sales sample, so it did not, legally speaking, BECOME a sales sample. It was 'born' before 86, when first placed on the Registry and that makes it transferable. 

That’s a very interesting perspective. Certainly could be the case.

[Ryo]

eforms colors change.. seen it on mine.

Maybe that atf guy is justifying it it. Not the first time they marked presample as transferrable and got a person screwed.

[SGT Fish]

On 8/20/2023 at 1:01 PM, johnsonlmg41 said:

This still assumes gov imported the guns directly from overseas and somehow received them via commercial channels/carriers with no paperwork or importing dealer/rep that booked them in without import paperwork, then out to the Fedgov without any paper trail?  It still means they were imported post 68 and at the time fedgov was not bound by sales sample restrictions....since they are not bound by any rules generally, but there is still paperwork of origin and dates.  I don't see a magic nexus to that transferring back to the public domain without complying with rules in place at that time for the private sector?  Of course I don't see a scenario where a gun like that leaves federal property ever, post 68?  

Maybe they carried the guns back on a government plane or ship? How many military units brought back captured weapons as a unit(not individual soldiers). Look at all the cannons that have been shipped back military cargo. 

 

Guns leave federal ownership quite often. Especially if they were trading them in for new guns or such. Heck we still see a lot military guns come to market from the GWOT.  Lots of newer 1911s, M17s, and bolt action rifles have made it to the market through warranty replacements and such. I'm sure it was easier for MGs to do so before 86. Dan Shea used to do a lot of work with trying to get transferable machineguns out of fed custody. He has mentioned there are transferable miniguns on the NFTR that are in federal ownership but they don't care.

[AGG]

On 8/16/2023 at 2:09 AM, ColdBlue said:

Of note though, there are no import markings present on the firearm.  The only stampings are "HK MP5" "KAL. 9mmX19" "S/N" and "12/72"  
 

Generally denotes a SACO import:

82531-82688 serial range seen  (SACO/Arlington)(“SEF” lower)(MG/pre-86)  

 - left receiver (nothing)

- right receiver (Made in Germany/excl. for SACO/Arl. Va. 22209)

- top receiver (left- HK MP 5; right- Kal. 9mmx19 serial number  12/72)

Never seen a 12/72 factory SD.

Can you PM me the full serial serial number?

Tony

Edited August 24, 2023 by AGG