TBT T36 UPDATE FROM BATF

[Mitchell]

Hello all,

I posted the other day that the “18” prefix T36’s were excluded from the machine gun ruling. However, I wanted to get this confirmed from BATF themselves since it would be considered an unregistered machine gun if it wasn‘t true which is no bueno. I contacted the Baltimore Field Office so I would have something in writing that my receiver was exempt from the ruling. After 3 weeks I got my reply a few minutes ago. According them ALL T36’s are considered machine guns regardless of serial number.

So, what I posted earlier is incorrect. The early T36’s are not exempt from the ruling and need to be sent back to Tom.

I know, someone might post that I shouldn’t have called and rocked the boat but there was no way I was going to risk having an unregistered machine gun without something in writing saying my gun was exempt. There was nothing in the BATF release that stated only a certain serial number range was affected so it was my responsibility to verify. I don’t really want to be a felon. The Special Agent I worked with was really helpful and made sure the info he gave me was accurate.

 

[AGG]

Thanks for the important update.

Tony

 

[flybynt]

@Mitchell I am sure he meant well but that is not correct and not what they told all parties central to this decision. Not every ATF agent can be considered the sharpest tool in the shed no matter how well meaning or nice they are.

Also FWIW, this is why there are serial numbers on guns as they identiy many aspects of its origins, manufacture, running changes etc.

Without wanting to say much more, I can tell you that there are t36 recievers that are not subject to that determination as they technically were not manufactured by TBT, but instead manufactured for TBT, and that is denoted by serial number.

This happens all the time. Another example I can give you that I also have personal knowledge of is where many s&w custom shop ARs were made by Sun Devil manufacturing which was a shop that suppied many oems for a long time. Thise ARs were packaged, sold, and warrantied by s&w again those are denoted and identified by serial number.

 

[Mitchell]

I understand. I took photos of the Choate info and sent it to them along with a brief explanation of the SN’s.

I totally agree that each individual agent can’t know everything and as you said, they are not all the sharpest tools in the shed. This is very foundation of my reluctance to take anyone’s word on the matter. The next inspection I get may or may not be by someone who understands all of the nuances of the situation. I need something in writing, from the agency, saying I am not in possession of an unregistered machine gun. I have an enormous amount of money tied up in firearms and I can’t take the risk of an uneducated agent seizing my inventory then the hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees which would be required to get them back.

The Baltimore bureau is spearheading this since TBT was based near there and I went straight to the source. Regardless of correct or incorrect information it is not worth the massive potential problems I could encounter vs. the ease of printing a shipping label to TBT to get it replaced.

I was hoping they would realize the different manufacturers and the variance filed and give me my get out of jail free card. It took 3 weeks to get an answer that I knew was contrary to what I have read and heard. Hell, I even asked it I could Form 2 it and turn it into a postie but that too was met with a ”no way”.

I hear what you are saying and totally agree, but I must go by what BATF have instructed me to do at this point. I simply have too much to lose.

 

[Nzfly]

I need something in writing, from the agency, saying I am not in possession of an unregistered machine gun.

The Baltimore bureau is spearheading this since TBT was based near there and I went straight to the source. Regardless of correct or incorrect information it is not worth the massive potential problems I could encounter vs. the ease of printing a shipping label to TBT to get it replaced...

I simply have too much to lose.

Let me make sure I have this correct. You felt it was easier to contact ATF in Baltimore, send them pictures, write up some sort of description, and try to get them to issue a super special exemption letter instead of simply doing an upgrade for the new receiver? You, yourself, posted your email where Tommy Built offered to replace yours, but you evidently declined their offer in favor of screwing over hundreds of other owners.

You should send your receiver to ATF for the determination.

 

[flybynt]

@Mitchell do you realize what you just did started a chain reaction of events that now has the potenial to effect those in the serial number range like yours as well as possibly even sl8 conversions? Now there is a team going back to Tom's shop to "review" everything he has ever done with G36's.

You appear to be an SOT based on your responses above, so you know better than most that atf letters are opinon and dont really carry any legal legal weight. The bumpstock fiasco and atf letters for bumpstocks readily come to mind.

Tom has since the beginning of this mess provided the option to people with unaffected receivers to upgrade which I am pretty sure you were offered. Instead of acting on that option you tried to get ATF to issue you a determination letter because you "simply have too much to lose." Never mind that others might lose their property because you wanted to safeguard your property even though this could have been a non issue if you really were that concerned and instead went ahead and upgraded. Also the legal costs you mentioned as an issue for you now fall onto Tom because of this additional "review".

Unfortunately you felt the best course of action was to poke the bear which I don't understand since you already had you "get out of jail free card" in the form of an upgrade. I hope this reclassification is not expanded as a direct consequence of your actions.

 

[ORL-LLC]

That is why I have waited so long to get into the Binary Triggers.
Lived through the Spring Return even after multiple ATF letters stated it was JUST A STOCK

 

[flybynt]

@Mitchell Without any hint of trying to sound like I am attacking, insulting, or belittling you for the outcome of your actions, I sincerely want to understand your motivations, actions, and thoughts on why you decided NOT to upgrade and instead pursue the course of action that you did.

 

[Mitchell]

@flybynt



Yes, you are correct, I SHOULD have simply taken the upgraded receiver (boy, I wish I had).

So you know, I DID send my receiver to Tom as instructed. I was told mine was NOT AFFECTED by the ruling and I could have it replaced or sent back. I chose to have it sent back only because I didn’t want to cause Tom or his family any more financial burden (more on this later). This whole mess sucks enough for them. So when I got the information my receiver wasn’t affected I was happy to have it returned. It seemed like everyone was on the same page and there would be no problems. After I got it back I re-read the BATF press release and it did not mention any such serial number exemption. I was going to print this exemption and keep it with my records. TBT seemed very sure of this and I had no reason to believe BATF wouldn’t agree, just like they have done so many times in the past. It is my legal obligation as an SOT to make certain I am in compliance at all times and an email from TBT stating the gun is “ok” is not satisfactory in the eyes of BATF and will not keep me or anyone else out of hot water. I have contacted BATF on countless occasions for clarification on items like this. Most of the time it’s a few hour process, ask a question, get a reply, print it out and put it in your files. That keeps everyone happy during the next IOI inspection. Believe me, if there is something in writing from BATF it absolutely helps during an inspection.

Back to the financial burden. Let me assure you if this serial number issue goes unchecked it will be Tom who will have the most to lose. The idea that this would be a “non issue” is downright scary (unless you think hundreds of thousands of dollars and a felony is a non issue). If they came back at a later date after this grace period he would be on the hook legally. The expense it would take to fight this at a later date is a fraction of the hurt this will incur to get this solved now, which is exactly what I was told, it was solved. Think about all of the people who have these, talk about a lot to lose, possession of an unregistered machine gun is a fairly big deal. If you think this would have just gone away and everyone would have lived happily ever after you are sorely mistaken. Remember those Chinese 3 hole AK receivers that came in years ago? That problem got out of control because of this exact same situation. People who were not the original buyers did not get the memo were threatened with felony possession of a machine gun. They lost their guns and a lot of legal costs. Believe me, I know, I was one of them.

I am totally perplexed why or how you could find fault in my desire to make sure the people who have these are protected from very serious charges. If this is an issue that could affect gun owners on this forum I would certainly want to know so if placed in a similar position they could simply just agree to take the upgrade as I wish I had done. The alternative is a ton of legal bills and a possible felony which I am guessing none of us want.

I certainly didn’t expect this outcome, nor had I any inclination this issue wasn‘t 100% solved. Had I known there was even a.1% chance this would happen I would have just cut up my T36 and never even sent it back for replacement. But sadly, I did exactly what the BATF/TBT press release said to do. My first mistake was not to take the upgrade, my second mistake was thinking this was actually finalized since TBT and BATF said it was. I should have known better.

 

[AGG]

@flybynt



Yes, you are correct, I SHOULD have simply taken the upgraded receiver (boy, I wish I had).

So you know, I DID send my receiver to Tom as instructed. I was told mine was NOT AFFECTED by the ruling and I could have it replaced or sent back. I chose to have it sent back only because I didn’t want to cause Tom or his family any more financial burden (more on this later). This whole mess sucks enough for them. So when I got the information my receiver wasn’t affected I was happy to have it returned. It seemed like everyone was on the same page and there would be no problems. After I got it back I re-read the BATF press release and it did not mention any such serial number exemption. I was going to print this exemption and keep it with my records. TBT seemed very sure of this and I had no reason to believe BATF wouldn’t agree, just like they have done so many times in the past. It is my legal obligation as an SOT to make certain I am in compliance at all times and an email from TBT stating the gun is “ok” is not satisfactory in the eyes of BATF and will not keep me or anyone else out of hot water. I have contacted BATF on countless occasions for clarification on items like this. Most of the time it’s a few hour process, ask a question, get a reply, print it out and put it in your files. That keeps everyone happy during the next IOI inspection. Believe me, if there is something in writing from BATF it absolutely helps during an inspection.

Back to the financial burden. Let me assure you if this serial number issue goes unchecked it will be Tom who will have the most to lose. The idea that this would be a “non issue” is downright scary (unless you think hundreds of thousands of dollars and a felony is a non issue). If they came back at a later date after this grace period he would be on the hook legally. The expense it would take to fight this at a later date is a fraction of the hurt this will incur to get this solved now, which is exactly what I was told, it was solved. Think about all of the people who have these, talk about a lot to lose, possession of an unregistered machine gun is a fairly big deal. If you think this would have just gone away and everyone would have lived happily ever after you are sorely mistaken. Remember those Chinese 3 hole AK receivers that came in years ago? That problem got out of control because of this exact same situation. People who were not the original buyers did not get the memo were threatened with felony possession of a machine gun. They lost their guns and a lot of legal costs. Believe me, I know, I was one of them.

I am totally perplexed why or how you could find fault in my desire to make sure the people who have these are protected from very serious charges. If this is an issue that could affect gun owners on this forum I would certainly want to know so if placed in a similar position they could simply just agree to take the upgrade as I wish I had done. The alternative is a ton of legal bills and a possible felony which I am guessing none of us want.

I certainly didn’t expect this outcome, nor had I any inclination this issue wasn‘t 100% solved. Had I known there was even a.1% chance this would happen I would have just cut up my T36 and never even sent it back for replacement. But sadly, I did exactly what the BATF/TBT press release said to do. My first mistake was not to take the upgrade, my second mistake was thinking this was actually finalized since TBT and BATF said it was. I should have known better.

In the bigger picture, it seems that everyone now has a conclusive answer and can proceed accordingly--- and not be concerned about anything in the future.

Tony

 

[Nzfly]

Retracted.

 

[flybynt]

@Mitchell I have been thinking about your response and a been a bit busy so excuse the delayed response.

If there was a low impact option to get resolution I am thinking with all the leg work, phone calls etc that it took for you to get the the ATF clarification it still does not make sense why you did not send your receiver back to Tom for upgrade. I myself could understand the CYOA and documentation aspect because of your past experiences if there was not an alternative, but your explanation does not help me to understand the work and effort that you put into this because it was your legal obligation as you stated. I am a bit concerned that you did not consider the fact that the ATF document that inspired your actions does not state anything about being more binding on one potential class of individual i.e. FFL/SOTs over the public at large. It does however say this:

"The contents of this document do not have the force and effect of law and are not meant to bind the public regarding existing requirements under the law or department policies".

There have been many makes and models of firearms over the years that were manufactured one week to the next that are classified and treated differently WITHOUT the variance in manufacturer as noted in this case. I think there is more to be said on this subject and could go on but I don't want this response to be seen as a personal attack or assault.

 

[Mitchell]

@flybynt

Attacked? Not at all, It’s a valid question. While I doubt we will ever completely agree on the topic at least we will understand the what and why things happed as they did, and better yet how to keep them from happening again, which is why you posted to begin with I believe. It is important these topics get brought to light and all readers will be better informed because of it.

Like I stated before I did send the receiver back. I sent it back as instructed and I got an email stating it was a 18 prefix and didn’t need replacing but if I wanted it replaced I could. I have 6 or 7 of Tom’s conversions, various G36’s, UMP’s, and his original XM8 prototype so I wasn’t sure if this was a courtesy or if they were offering that to all dealers. Because I have done business with them before and they are stand up people I didn’t feel like I should put more financial strain on their family than what is already happened. So, I said to send it back.

I must confess I figured I would get a box back from TBT with a letter of explanation and a ruling number indicating the receiver was exempt. Also, for the love of God, if there was any question on their part why not just upgrade it and never have to worry about it again? To give an option on such a serious matter seems cavalier - especially knowing I am an SOT and subject to random inspections at any time.

Normal gun owners, or “the public at large” as you put it, need not worry about inspections. Nobody can come into your home and ask to see your T36. And the chances of you being out on your uncle’s 50 acres plinking aluminum cans when John Q Sheriff shows up are slim. Not to mention John Q Sheriff won’t have any idea what a T36 is or if happened to be affected by some arbitrary ruling.

However, as a SOT, it is guaranteed I will have an inspection. And this inspection will be conducted by someone very well versed in the aforementioned T36’s and the rulings there of. It won’t be an inspection by TBT so whatever they think/believe is inconsequential.

So, in the absence of any verification or explanation of why my particular T36 was exempt it then turned into my responsibility to verify. You will ask why I didn’t call TBT for verification and I will reply it didn’t matter what TBT thought.

It is for this reason I went to BATF. They are the only people who can say yes or no, it is legal or not. And, as mentioned in my above post, I didn’t have the slightest clue BATF and TBT weren’t on exactly the same page. I won’t go into it again but suffice it to to say, simply, I believed TBT and had 100% confidence BATF would confirm.

As for the “legwork” and “effort” I put into this. It consisted of this:

Mitchell emailing BATF Baltimore - Hi this is Mitchell FFL/SOT blah blah blah, are there any exemptions on the TBT T36’s?

BATF calls Mitchell - Hi Mitch, this is your friendly BATF agent, how are you today? You asked about the T36, huh? Does it say T36 on the side of the receiver? Mitchell replies, ”Yes. But I believe BATF have some exemption, perhaps a serial number or something?” Friendly BATF agent - “Hummm, I worked that case myself and I don’t know of one.” Friendly BATF agent, “What is the serial number of your T36 Mitch? Do you have a photo?” Mitchell - “Sure, it’s a 18 prefix, pretty sure this is the key here.” Friendly BATF agent - ”I remember a variance mentioned.” Mitchell - ”Yeah, these things often times have obscure rulings none of know about until a couple of years later.” Friendly BATF agent - “Boy that’s the truth! I will get back with you, Mitch. Thanks for the call.”

Obviously not verbatim but pretty close.

Few weeks go by.

Friendly BATF agent email - “No Mitch, T36’s are all subject to the ruling.”

I am guessing there was a total of 7 minutes time speaking and emailing.

As for the disclaimer you mentioned from BATF... It’s on almost all public correspondence. I am not sure what you are implying. Are you implying you agree with me? It is this very ambiguity that forces us to cover our asses? Or, are you perhaps suggesting this vacates the ruling altogether and nobody really needs to send their T36 in? I would strongly discourage this line of thinking. This disclaimer is little more than the standard, “Results may vary”, or “Use only as directed”. It is their CYOA so they can be wrong, but still right. I would seriously recommend you not make decisions based off disclaimers, they are, well, disclaimers after all.

Being right or wrong it boils down to this. 2 parties have a problem, not 3. I didn’t build the T36’s nor did I reclassify them. I sent it in and TBT could have upgraded it, that’s why I sent it. I was told mine was fine, if this was incorrect I shouldn’t have been told this in the first place. I got no verification or explanation on the matter and staring in the face of potential severe legal issues I tried to verify. If I have done something wrong I just can’t see it.

I welcome your thoughts or advice on how I should have handled it or what you would have done differently.

 

[Sweersa]

Why anyone would reach out to the convenience store corporate headquarters about something like this, blows my mind. Tommy said your rifle was exempt, that is where it should have ended. He gave you the option of replacing the receiver, at most, you could have gone that route. "Problem" solved. Let's say you kept the original "naughty" T36, for the eventual inspection, and if the T36 was called into question by the friendly inspector person who by some miracle knows what even a G36 is, just maintain a copy of the correspondence/confirmation your receiver was not included in that. The relevant agency also does not have the final say on what is legal and what is not. We have the judicial branch for that.
This is one of many bullshit determinations by that agency. No T36 receiver, unless modified deliberately to be a postie, fits the definition of a machine gun under federal law. Many take the words from the revenuers as law, but it is not so.
They are like the parent or girlfriend that will more than likely say no to something or that something is not OK, when it is in fact, OK, and in this case, legally so as someone would have to modify the hell out of a recalled T36 receiver to make it fit the definition of a machine gun, when assembled with a kit. I hate to think of what the FTB fun-making center did to break a T36 into what they believe was an MG. Hell, someone could mail them a chunk of aluminium or a tube and ask if it's an MG, and they could probably machine something out of it to get a burst to slap a naughty label on it and say it is readily convertible. Our tax dollars at work.
I get playing by the rules, even being cautious around gray areas, but it seemed like you went out of your way to cause a problem. I don't know your reasoning, nor do I care. But I believe it was a bad choice, and unnecessary. Reminds me of the guy who sent in photos of a single cut M16 lower and asked the overlords if it was OK, even though an intact M16 lower doesn't fit the federal definition of a receiver period, they of course had an issue with his two chunks of scrap aluminium and demanded he surrender it.
[Retracted portions for brevity and cleanliness]