C&R status
quote: originally posted by spider7115 C&R status isn't about functionality; it's about collectability. A sporterized 1903 Springfield is no longer representative of an historical event or deemed a collector's item.
Spider,
My point in this being ridiculous is when a weapon can be returned to original configuration to be or represent something collectable it changes nothing. The main part of the weapon, the receiver and barrel haven't changed. Thus functionality. The other ridiculous thing is changes that can't be reversed are accepted!
Yet on the other hand you can do exactly that with a weapon, providing there is provenance of it, and still get the C&R status as with 'professionally sporterized' historic military rifles. FWIW, Griffin & Howe and Niedner sporterized 1903's ARE collectible.
I think they ought to do away with the C&R license completely. Too many loopholes to get away with. And especially too broad of interpretation by the ATF. What's fine during one administration is witch hunt fodder for the next.
Added:
Q: What is a firearm curio or relic?
Firearm curios or relics include firearms which have special value to collectors because they possess some qualities not ordinarily associated with firearms intended for sporting use or as offensive or defensive weapons. To be recognized as curios or relics, firearms must fall within one of the following categories:
Have been manufactured at least 50 years prior to the current date, but not including replicas thereof; or
Be certified by the curator of a municipal, State, or Federal museum which exhibits firearms to be curios or relics of museum interest; or
Derive a substantial part of their monetary value from the fact that they are novel, rare, bizarre, or from the fact of their association with some historical figure, period, or event.
Neidner, Griffin, Howe, Weatherby, Abercrombie, and many others...someday probably even our own nononsense will be a historical figure[;)] (if he isn't already[:D][}:)][:D]) that fits under this category. When a company modifies a rifle as many did more than fifty years ago, it will qualify as a C&R weapon. This also usually includes documentation that the rifle was modified. Many gunsmiths doing this 50+ years ago worked as individuals even though they owned the business. Documentation was few and far between except for a work order slip.
Spider, I agree with you about the point of no "clear" answer on this. Since, most of the weapons asked about don't really present any kind of threat in the 'gun violence' we deal with today, I don't think it's this weeks hot topic at the ATF.
Spider,
My point in this being ridiculous is when a weapon can be returned to original configuration to be or represent something collectable it changes nothing. The main part of the weapon, the receiver and barrel haven't changed. Thus functionality. The other ridiculous thing is changes that can't be reversed are accepted!
Yet on the other hand you can do exactly that with a weapon, providing there is provenance of it, and still get the C&R status as with 'professionally sporterized' historic military rifles. FWIW, Griffin & Howe and Niedner sporterized 1903's ARE collectible.
I think they ought to do away with the C&R license completely. Too many loopholes to get away with. And especially too broad of interpretation by the ATF. What's fine during one administration is witch hunt fodder for the next.
Added:
Q: What is a firearm curio or relic?
Firearm curios or relics include firearms which have special value to collectors because they possess some qualities not ordinarily associated with firearms intended for sporting use or as offensive or defensive weapons. To be recognized as curios or relics, firearms must fall within one of the following categories:
Have been manufactured at least 50 years prior to the current date, but not including replicas thereof; or
Be certified by the curator of a municipal, State, or Federal museum which exhibits firearms to be curios or relics of museum interest; or
Derive a substantial part of their monetary value from the fact that they are novel, rare, bizarre, or from the fact of their association with some historical figure, period, or event.
Neidner, Griffin, Howe, Weatherby, Abercrombie, and many others...someday probably even our own nononsense will be a historical figure[;)] (if he isn't already[:D][}:)][:D]) that fits under this category. When a company modifies a rifle as many did more than fifty years ago, it will qualify as a C&R weapon. This also usually includes documentation that the rifle was modified. Many gunsmiths doing this 50+ years ago worked as individuals even though they owned the business. Documentation was few and far between except for a work order slip.
Spider, I agree with you about the point of no "clear" answer on this. Since, most of the weapons asked about don't really present any kind of threat in the 'gun violence' we deal with today, I don't think it's this weeks hot topic at the ATF.
0
-
Please provide a link as to where it says Griffin & Howe and Niedner sporterized 1903's ARE collectible. I have been through the C&R list and I see no such wording. 0 -
I'd love to have an A.O. Neidner rifle. I once had Springfield that was punched out to 300 Gibbs, a very nice shooting rifle. 0 -
Based on what I read of ATF P 5300.11, page 2 under the definition of: What are curio and relics.
1.0) States: Firearms which were manufactured 50 years prior to the current date, but not including replicas thereof;
Therefore since the sporter was made before 1963, it would qualify as a C&R. At least IMHO unless I am missing something.
I actually called the ATF (It took a while having been transferred around) and asked about a Savage 99 made in the 50s if this gun was C&R elligible and the answer I got was yea, because it was over 50 years old.
Anyway if something has changed just recently, I am clueless. Given the present political climate, I would not be surprised.0 -
quote:Originally posted by chiefr
Based on what I read of ATF P 5300.11, page 2 under the definition of: What are curio and relics.
1.0) States: Firearms which were manufactured 50 years prior to the current date, but not including replicas thereof;
Therefore since the sporter was made before 1963, it would qualify as a C&R. At least IMHO unless I am missing something.
I actually called the ATF (It took a while having been transferred around) and asked about a Savage 99 made in the 50s if this gun was C&R elligible and the answer I got was yea, because it was over 50 years old.
Anyway if something has changed just recently, I am clueless. Given the present political climate, I would not be surprised.
No, it would NOT be a C&R because it was considerably modified from its original configuration.
Q: What modifications can be made on C&R firearms without changing their C&R classification?
The definition for curio or relic ("C & R") firearms found in 27 CFR ? 478.11 does not specifically state that a firearm must be in its original condition to be classified as a C&R firearm. However, ATF Ruling 85-10, which discusses the importation of military C&R firearms, notes that they must be in original configuration and adds that a receiver is not a C&R item. Combining this ruling and the definition of C&R firearms, the Firearms Technology Branch (FTB) has concluded that a firearm must be in its original condition to be considered a C&R weapon.
It is also the opinion of FTB, however, that a minor change such as the addition of scope mounts, non-original sights, or sling swivels would not remove a firearm from its original condition. Moreover, we have determined that replacing particular firearms parts with new parts that are made to the original design would also be acceptable-for example, replacing a cracked M1 Grand stock with a new wooden stock of the same design, but replacing the original firearm stock with a plastic stock would change its classification as a C&R item.
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/curios-relics.html0 -
Springfield Armory manufactured some M1903 Sporter models. This is not the same thing as a "sporterized M1903 rifle".
Sometimes, it's all in how you ask the question.
Which is why ATF tells you that the only opinions issued by them that are legally binding are those made in writing.
Neal
EDIT: I think that we need to cease flagellating the departed equine. The Remington M1903 was made only during 1941-1943; the one in question was probably made in 1943. All of them were sold to the War Dept, all of them were complete, & Remington never sold receivers by themselves. All Remington M1903's in "issue configuration" are C&R; those that had the stock replaced with a sporter stock, or whose military stock was "sporterized", are not C&R. Period. It doesn't matter if the rifle was altered in 1944, or in 2013.0 -
quote:Originally posted by nmyers
Springfield Armory manufactured some M1903 Sporter models. This is not the same thing as a "sporterized M1903 rifle".
Sometimes, it's all in how you ask the question.
Which is why ATF tells you that the only opinions issued by them that are legally binding are those made in writing.
Neal
Yep. Call them three times and get three different answers, which they will all deny.0 -
One big question is............How do we know it was sporterized 50 yrs ago or longer? Did someone put a date on it?
The only way that rifle will be C&R is to individually summit to the ATF to have them declare it a curio or relic, and that it has collectable status.
This can be done on a individual case by case basis.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Spider7115
quote:Originally posted by chiefr
Based on what I read of ATF P 5300.11, page 2 under the definition of: What are curio and relics.
1.0) States: Firearms which were manufactured 50 years prior to the current date, but not including replicas thereof;
Therefore since the sporter was made before 1963, it would qualify as a C&R. At least IMHO unless I am missing something.
I actually called the ATF (It took a while having been transferred around) and asked about a Savage 99 made in the 50s if this gun was C&R elligible and the answer I got was yea, because it was over 50 years old.
Anyway if something has changed just recently, I am clueless. Given the present political climate, I would not be surprised.
No, it would NOT be a C&R because it was considerably modified from its original configuration.
Q: What modifications can be made on C&R firearms without changing their C&R classification?
The definition for curio or relic ("C & R") firearms found in 27 CFR ? 478.11 does not specifically state that a firearm must be in its original condition to be classified as a C&R firearm. However, ATF Ruling 85-10, which discusses the importation of military C&R firearms, notes that they must be in original configuration and adds that a receiver is not a C&R item. Combining this ruling and the definition of C&R firearms, the Firearms Technology Branch (FTB) has concluded that a firearm must be in its original condition to be considered a C&R weapon.
It is also the opinion of FTB, however, that a minor change such as the addition of scope mounts, non-original sights, or sling swivels would not remove a firearm from its original condition. Moreover, we have determined that replacing particular firearms parts with new parts that are made to the original design would also be acceptable-for example, replacing a cracked M1 Grand stock with a new wooden stock of the same design, but replacing the original firearm stock with a plastic stock would change its classification as a C&R item.
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/curios-relics.html
Spider, do not take this as a driveby as I appreciate your expertise, but what if the subject sporter was described as a Rem, WW, SA, etc 30-06 bolt action hunting rifle circa 1917 or any date prior to 1945. C&R eligible?
From what I see the > 50 year rule and a listed bonified C&R can be subjective.0 -
quote:Originally posted by chiefr
quote:Originally posted by Spider7115
quote:Originally posted by chiefr
Based on what I read of ATF P 5300.11, page 2 under the definition of: What are curio and relics.
1.0) States: Firearms which were manufactured 50 years prior to the current date, but not including replicas thereof;
Therefore since the sporter was made before 1963, it would qualify as a C&R. At least IMHO unless I am missing something.
I actually called the ATF (It took a while having been transferred around) and asked about a Savage 99 made in the 50s if this gun was C&R elligible and the answer I got was yea, because it was over 50 years old.
Anyway if something has changed just recently, I am clueless. Given the present political climate, I would not be surprised.
No, it would NOT be a C&R because it was considerably modified from its original configuration.
Q: What modifications can be made on C&R firearms without changing their C&R classification?
The definition for curio or relic ("C & R") firearms found in 27 CFR ? 478.11 does not specifically state that a firearm must be in its original condition to be classified as a C&R firearm. However, ATF Ruling 85-10, which discusses the importation of military C&R firearms, notes that they must be in original configuration and adds that a receiver is not a C&R item. Combining this ruling and the definition of C&R firearms, the Firearms Technology Branch (FTB) has concluded that a firearm must be in its original condition to be considered a C&R weapon.
It is also the opinion of FTB, however, that a minor change such as the addition of scope mounts, non-original sights, or sling swivels would not remove a firearm from its original condition. Moreover, we have determined that replacing particular firearms parts with new parts that are made to the original design would also be acceptable-for example, replacing a cracked M1 Grand stock with a new wooden stock of the same design, but replacing the original firearm stock with a plastic stock would change its classification as a C&R item.
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/curios-relics.html
Spider, do not take this as a driveby as I appreciate your expertise, but what if the subject sporter was described as a Rem, WW, SA, etc 30-06 bolt action hunting rifle circa 1917 or any date prior to 1945. C&R eligible?
From what I see the > 50 year rule and a listed bonified C&R can be subjective.
I'm not going to beat this to death. I gave you the ATF regs and link regarding C&R eligibility. Do whatever you want but don't call me to post bail for you. [;)]0 -
quote:Originally posted by Spider7115
quote:Originally posted by chiefr
quote:Originally posted by Spider7115
quote:Originally posted by chiefr
Based on what I read of ATF P 5300.11, page 2 under the definition of: What are curio and relics.
1.0) States: Firearms which were manufactured 50 years prior to the current date, but not including replicas thereof;
Therefore since the sporter was made before 1963, it would qualify as a C&R. At least IMHO unless I am missing something.
I actually called the ATF (It took a while having been transferred around) and asked about a Savage 99 made in the 50s if this gun was C&R elligible and the answer I got was yea, because it was over 50 years old.
Anyway if something has changed just recently, I am clueless. Given the present political climate, I would not be surprised.
No, it would NOT be a C&R because it was considerably modified from its original configuration.
Q: What modifications can be made on C&R firearms without changing their C&R classification?
The definition for curio or relic ("C & R") firearms found in 27 CFR ? 478.11 does not specifically state that a firearm must be in its original condition to be classified as a C&R firearm. However, ATF Ruling 85-10, which discusses the importation of military C&R firearms, notes that they must be in original configuration and adds that a receiver is not a C&R item. Combining this ruling and the definition of C&R firearms, the Firearms Technology Branch (FTB) has concluded that a firearm must be in its original condition to be considered a C&R weapon.
It is also the opinion of FTB, however, that a minor change such as the addition of scope mounts, non-original sights, or sling swivels would not remove a firearm from its original condition. Moreover, we have determined that replacing particular firearms parts with new parts that are made to the original design would also be acceptable-for example, replacing a cracked M1 Grand stock with a new wooden stock of the same design, but replacing the original firearm stock with a plastic stock would change its classification as a C&R item.
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/curios-relics.html
Spider, do not take this as a driveby as I appreciate your expertise, but what if the subject sporter was described as a Rem, WW, SA, etc 30-06 bolt action hunting rifle circa 1917 or any date prior to 1945. C&R eligible?
From what I see the > 50 year rule and a listed bonified C&R can be subjective.
I'm not going to beat this to death. I gave you the ATF regs and link regarding C&R eligibility. Do whatever you want but don't call me to post bail for you. [;)]
(I see that last comment as mostly joking, but will mention) realistically, can you show any cases where a collector with a C&R license has been arrested and jailed for sending/receiving a "modified" 50+ year-old firearm that was determined to be disqualified as a C&R because of the modification?
Realistically, the worst one is probably looking at, if one violated something in the grey area around "original condition" is losing one's C&R license.
I'm not suggesting one "push any limits" in that area, but the area is not always "cut and dry" when it comes to issues of "original" condition.0 -
I am not an 01FFL holder, but I do have a C&R. I have never sold any of my C&Rs nor would I ever sell one that is modified. Original condition or pass for me.
Having said that, it is not uncommon to find modified milsurps listed and being sold as C&Rs. I found several in about 10 minutes of seaching.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
11 comments