Where does it explicitly say that open-bolt guns are banned?
I was reading about ATF Ruling 82-2 (ruling that supposedly banned open-bolt guns) and all it said was that KG-9s made with an open-bolt are machine guns but that the ruling didn't apply to ones made before January 19, 1982.
Nowhere in the ruling did it say that all open-bolt semi-autos are now machine guns. So why is everyone saying that open-bolt semi-autos are banned?
>>30169465
Held
:
The KG
-
9 pistol is designed
to shoot automatically more than one
shot, without
manual reloading, by
a single
function of the trigger.
Consequently, the KG
-
9 pistol is a
machinegun as defined in section
5845(b) of the Act.
>>30169510
All that says is that KG-9s made after that ruling are now machine guns.
>>30169465
The ruling was because if you disassemble the gun, remove the trigger group, then put the gun back together. The gun will dump the whole mag on full auto when you pull back and release the bolt. This applies to all open bolt guns with a detachable magazine (with the possible exception of long recoil designs depending on how they work).
>>30169885
I was asking what ATF ruling said open-bolt semi-autos are maching guns. These ruling only target specific guns, why is everyone saying ALL open-bolt semi-autos are banned when that's not the case.
>>30170536
>>30169530
>>30169465
I get what you're saying OP
Bumping for interest
bumping for burp gun justice
>>30170606
I know, that's really fucking confusing because since 1983 only 5 different open-bolt semi-autos have been classified as MGs, there is no ATF ruling or publication that states you can't make a semi-auto open-bolt.
>>30170672
The ATF has never outright said that any open bolt gun is a machinegun however the current definition of machinegun under the NFA includes any gun that is "readily convertible to a machinegun" Since most open bolt guns can be made to fire full auto by simply removing or lightly modifying some components (i.e snap the disconnector tab off an open bolt semi MAC) the ATF almost always considers them "readily convertible" and thus machineguns in their own right. Despite not being designed to fire full auto.
>>30171001
I see. Is there anyway you can keep a open-bolt semi-auto from going full-auto. Like it won't go full-auto even if something like a disconnecter tab was snapped off?
>>30171067
The question is why?
Open bolt semi-auto's don't really offer any advantage.
>>30171077
I guess you could say better cooling since air is able to easily enter the chamber, but I see your point. I guess the biggest reason is that it's different.
>>30171001
So does this mean you can make open-bolt submachineguns as long as they are semi-automatic for personal use until the ATF say's otherwise?
>>30171102
In theory, yes. As long as it didn't meet the definition as "readily restorable" to fully-automatic fire. Which will be hard because open-bolts.
>>30171067
Not really. At the end of the day you can make most open bolt guns go full auto by removing everything but the bolt, receiver, and barrel. Their very nature makes them want to cycle unless they're stopped by some outside force such as a sear. The fundamental design is "readily convertible"
>>30171102
Sure. Until you show it off on youtubes and the ATF takes you to court cause they're bored and best case scenario you get your open bolt semi confiscated and have to pay thousands in court fees. All for a useless clown gun. The only reason anyone wanted an open bolt semi in the first place is so they cold convert it to F/A so if you're gonna make something janky might as well go all the way and just make a machinegun and keep quiet about it.
