semi uzi build

Joined
Feb 4, 2013
Messages
33
Likes
0
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
hi i live in mass i would like to build a semi auto uzi 16'' with a fixed wood stock does anyone know if its now legal with our ag thanks
 
"Umarex Uzi Rifle" and "UZI Mini Carbine, UZI Model A Carbine, and UZI Model B Carbine" are an enumerated weapon on the original '94 Federal AWB and the '98 MA AWB. As such, this build would be a no-go even with the offending parts removed or modified (per the AGs unlawful enforcement notice).

There are plenty of prebans available, but they're pricey.
 
"Umarex Uzi Rifle" and "UZI Mini Carbine, UZI Model A Carbine, and UZI Model B Carbine" are an enumerated weapon on the original '94 Federal AWB and the '98 MA AWB. As such, this build would be a no-go even with the offending parts removed or modified (per the AGs unlawful enforcement notice).

There are plenty of prebans available, but they're pricey.

If this is a DIY build, under what obligation does one have in calling your kit-build an UZI?

If the receiver is 'the gun', and you make that yourself, you can 'call' it whatever you want-to.....
 
I've talked to a gunsmith about this, have you?

What does that even mean? I swear you're a ****ing troll or a moron.

I slept at a Holiday Inn Express last night! Did your "a" gunsmith?



^ drops mic

I don't agree with the AGs "guidance" (in content, or authority) but the OP asked where the AG stood on an uzi build. Michael James (as usual) is dead wrong.

Where the AG stands is very clear by reading the guidance:


  1. Similarity Test: A weapon is a Copy or Duplicate if its internal functional components are substantially similar in construction and configuration to those of an Enumerated Weapon. Under this test, a weapon is a Copy or Duplicate, for example, if the operating system and firing mechanism of the weapon are based on or otherwise substantially similar to one of the Enumerated Weapons.
  2. Interchangeability Test: A weapon is a Copy or Duplicate if it has a receiver that is the same as or interchangeable with the receiver of an Enumerated Weapon. A receiver will be treated as the same as or interchangeable with the receiver on an Enumerated Weapon if it includes or accepts two or more operating components that are the same as or interchangeable with those of an Enumerated Weapon. Such operating components may include, but are not limited to: 1) the trigger assembly; 2) the bolt carrier or bolt carrier group; 3) the charging handle; 4) the extractor or extractor assembly; or 5) the magazine port.

So based on "Similarity Test" of the AGs guidance, a scratch-built Uzi would be a "Copy or Duplicate" because both open-bolt (now NFA and should not be built from scratch) and closed bolt Uzis are "Enumerated Weapons" in the actual AWB, and your functional components would not just be substantially similar but identical to those of the enumerated weapon(s). Based on the "Interchangeability Test" (which states five types of 'parts' but suggests there may be more) you'd be in violation; two or more of the parts would be compatible. You could re-invent the wheel and get around the "Interchangeability Test" and scratchbuild all of these parts to slightly different specs so that they're not compatible, but then you'd be back to the "Similarity Test" which would make the weapon noncompliant.

Again - I'm not saying that these tests make sense, nor that the AG has the authority to proffer them (let alone charge anyone). Just answering the OP's question, which was asked in the context of whether his build would be OK with regards to the AGs guidance.

That you've built your own receiver and "called it something else" (as resident retard Michael James suggests) doesn't change anything; if the rifle is semi auto and has a detachable magazine, you need to comply with MGL. According to the AG, which is what the OP asked, his Uzi build would be considered a copy/duplicate weapon under her BS "guidance" which is a reinterpretation of the MGL. If a gunsmith tells you otherwise, assume they're blowing smoke. Look at all the gunsmiths/shops outed on NES for saying "sure you can buy a compliant semi/detachable rifle and add a folding stock with a pistol grip" or "you can't own Glocks in MA".

The tested/approved solution would be to both scratch-build a receiver AND make it a fixed-magazine model. There are shops in MA doing that right now with more popular rifle platforms; no detachable magazine, no obligation to comply with the AWB or any tortured re-interpretations of it. That'd also allow you to use a folding stock or any of the other evil features, even apply for an SBR stamp without awkward ATF questions. You'd just have to 1) manufacture your own receiver, as the AGs guidance suggests that a receiver has some weird sense of object-permanence and it's no longer OK to simply remove/disable non-compliant factory features, and 2) figure out a means of loading the weapon with a fixed magazine.
 
Last edited:
What does that even mean? I swear you're a ****ing troll or a moron.

I slept at a Holiday Inn Express last night! Did your "a" gunsmith?





I don't agree with the AGs "guidance" (in content, or authority) but the OP asked where the AG stood on an uzi build. Michael James (as usual) is dead wrong.

Where the AG stands is very clear by reading the guidance:


  1. Similarity Test: A weapon is a Copy or Duplicate if its internal functional components are substantially similar in construction and configuration to those of an Enumerated Weapon. Under this test, a weapon is a Copy or Duplicate, for example, if the operating system and firing mechanism of the weapon are based on or otherwise substantially similar to one of the Enumerated Weapons.
  2. Interchangeability Test: A weapon is a Copy or Duplicate if it has a receiver that is the same as or interchangeable with the receiver of an Enumerated Weapon. A receiver will be treated as the same as or interchangeable with the receiver on an Enumerated Weapon if it includes or accepts two or more operating components that are the same as or interchangeable with those of an Enumerated Weapon. Such operating components may include, but are not limited to: 1) the trigger assembly; 2) the bolt carrier or bolt carrier group; 3) the charging handle; 4) the extractor or extractor assembly; or 5) the magazine port.

So based on "Similarity Test" of the AGs guidance, a scratch-built Uzi would be a "Copy or Duplicate" because both open-bolt (now NFA and should not be built from scratch) and closed bolt Uzis are "Enumerated Weapons" in the actual AWB, and your functional components would not just be substantially similar but identical to those of the enumerated weapon(s). Based on the "Interchangeability Test" (which states five types of 'parts' but suggests there may be more) you'd be in violation; two or more of the parts would be compatible. You could re-invent the wheel and get around the "Interchangeability Test" and scratchbuild all of these parts to slightly different specs so that they're not compatible, but then you'd be back to the "Similarity Test" which would make the weapon noncompliant.

Again - I'm not saying that these tests make sense, nor that the AG has the authority to proffer them (let alone charge anyone). Just answering the OP's question, which was asked in the context of whether his build would be OK with regards to the AGs guidance.

That you've built your own receiver and "called it something else" (as resident retard Michael James suggests) doesn't change anything; if the rifle is semi auto and has a detachable magazine, you need to comply with MGL. According to the AG, which is what the OP asked, his Uzi build would be considered a copy/duplicate weapon under her BS "guidance" which is a reinterpretation of the MGL. If a gunsmith tells you otherwise, assume they're blowing smoke. Look at all the gunsmiths/shops outed on NES for saying "sure you can buy a compliant semi/detachable rifle and add a folding stock with a pistol grip" or "you can't own Glocks in MA".

The tested/approved solution would be to both scratch-build a receiver AND make it a fixed-magazine model. There are shops in MA doing that right now with more popular rifle platforms; no detachable magazine, no obligation to comply with the AWB or any tortured re-interpretations of it. That'd also allow you to use a folding stock or any of the other evil features, even apply for an SBR stamp without awkward ATF questions. You'd just have to 1) manufacture your own receiver, as the AGs guidance suggests that a receiver has some weird sense of object-permanence and it's no longer OK to simply remove/disable non-compliant factory features, and 2) figure out a means of loading the weapon with a fixed magazine.


My information came from a bonded-and-licensed MA State gunsmith who has been in-business over 30 years, and has assisted recent builds of a wide-variety of firearms pre- and post-Healey ban. Since he has a valid Class 7 FFL, and I'll wager that YOU DO NOT, I call B.S. on your 'interpretations' and your 'expertise' on the subject.

My conversations hinged on the variety of 'mods' required to take an UZI kit from it's existing form to a BATFE-legal semi-auto. UZI kits are de-militarized open-bolt sub-guns, all pre-ban, from Israel. It is true that you need to mod the bolt, ejector, trigger, group, and receiver. DUH - we're making a closed-bolt semi from an open-bolt, Fixed-Firing-Pin auto. First step is to take the sub-gun bolt and have it professionally milled by a gunsmith to accept a sliding AR-15 firing pin.....FFP is now 'gone', and can't be used in a full-auto gun anymore. Three-position trigger group also needs to be modded so you can't slide to 'full-auto' selection. The receiver requires some semi-auto pieces to be welded-in for the new bolt configuration, and that means the charging handle gets a mod because the bolt gets closed when a round is chambered during closed-bolt firing, etc. etc. etc.

In the end, the only thing you don't touch is the barrel/nut and the magazine - all pre-ban anyway.
 
Last edited:
My information came from a bonded-and-licensed MA State gunsmith who has been in-business over 30 years, and has assisted recent builds of a wide-variety of firearms pre- and post-Healey ban. Since he has a valid Class 7 FFL, and I'll wager that YOU DO NOT, I call B.S. on your 'interpretations' and your 'expertise' on the subject.

My conversations hinged on the variety of 'mods' required to take an UZI kit from it's existing form to a BATFE-legal semi-auto. UZI kits are de-militarized open-bolt sub-guns, all pre-ban, from Israel. It is true that you need to mod the bolt, ejector, trigger, group, and receiver. DUH - we're making a closed-bolt semi from an open-bolt, Fixed-Firing-Pin auto. First step is to take the sub-gun bolt and have it professionally milled by a gunsmith to accept a sliding AR-15 firing pin.....FFP is now 'gone', and can't be used in a full-auto gun anymore. Three-position trigger group also needs to be modded so you can't slide to 'full-auto' selection. The receiver requires some semi-auto pieces to be welded-in for the new bolt configuration, and that means the charging handle gets a mod because the bolt gets closed when a round is chambered during closed-bolt firing, etc. etc. etc.

In the end, the only thing you don't touch is the barrel/nut and the magazine - all pre-ban anyway.

Cool story. I claim no expertise; I'm just not illiterate. And I slept at a Holiday Inn Express last night!

Going from open bolt to closed bolt does fix the NFA issue, but it doesn't change the AGs stance on "similarity" and "compatibility" tests. Closed-bolt, floating-firing-pin Uzis are enumerated weapons (Umarex Rifle, Model A, Model B), and the resulting rifle from such a build would fail both of the tests described in the AGs guidance / enforcement notice. Simply put, what you're describing is what was done to legally import Uzis in the 1980s, and those weapons were the ones banned in the 1994 Fed and 1998 MA AWBs by name.

What can the AG do about it? Does the AG have the right to do anything about it? Does her notice carry any weight? Is that really what the AWB means? Does the AG have the right to reinterpret it? Would you get "busted" for building such a rifle? Would you live happily unmolested by the evil gun grabbers? Not the OPs question here. He wants to know if the rifle he'd like to build is or is not considered "legal" by the AG and the answer is really, painfully simple based on the enforcement notice.

By the way, what's the street price on a preban barrel nut?
 
Last edited:
My information came from a bonded-and-licensed MA State gunsmith who has been in-business over 30 years, and has assisted recent builds of a wide-variety of firearms pre- and post-Healey ban. Since he has a valid Class 7 FFL, and I'll wager that YOU DO NOT, I call B.S. on your 'interpretations' and your 'expertise' on the subject.

My conversations hinged on the variety of 'mods' required to take an UZI kit from it's existing form to a BATFE-legal semi-auto. UZI kits are de-militarized open-bolt sub-guns, all pre-ban, from Israel. It is true that you need to mod the bolt, ejector, trigger, group, and receiver. DUH - we're making a closed-bolt semi from an open-bolt, Fixed-Firing-Pin auto. First step is to take the sub-gun bolt and have it professionally milled by a gunsmith to accept a sliding AR-15 firing pin.....FFP is now 'gone', and can't be used in a full-auto gun anymore. Three-position trigger group also needs to be modded so you can't slide to 'full-auto' selection. The receiver requires some semi-auto pieces to be welded-in for the new bolt configuration, and that means the charging handle gets a mod because the bolt gets closed when a round is chambered during closed-bolt firing, etc. etc. etc.

In the end, the only thing you don't touch is the barrel/nut and the magazine - all pre-ban anyway.
Actually, you should read my thread about building a demilled Uzi kit with a new receiver and semi-bolt. For an UZI the upper is the serialized component.

You can't use the full auto barrel as it can be used with a full auto bolt which is a big no no for a semi UZI. And if you get a barrel with a demilled kit it will be a short full auto barrel, not a 16" semi auto barrel (which is designed to not work with a full auto bolt) You also need to permanently modify the upper so the selector switch can't be put into the giggle position. It would also have to comply with import requirements and US made parts count.

In MA you are kind of screwed with new UZI builds due to our law making AG who thinks she is a legislature onto herself.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 
Actually, you should read my thread about building a demilled Uzi kit with a new receiver and semi-bolt. For an UZI the upper is the serialized component.

You can't use the full auto barrel as it can be used with a full auto bolt which is a big no no for a semi UZI. And if you get a barrel with a demilled kit it will be a short full auto barrel, not a 16" semi auto barrel (which is designed to not work with a full auto bolt) You also need to permanently modify the upper so the selector switch can't be put into the giggle position. It would also have to comply with import requirements and US made parts count.

In MA you are kind of screwed with new UZI builds due to our law making AG who thinks she is a legislature onto herself.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

If you're milling a full-auto bolt to run the dual-spring semi-auto with firing-pin setup, will they work with the FA barrels (provided you were going to apply for the tax stamp)?

Similar to this process:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q29BVTi-L5E
 
If you're milling a full-auto bolt to run the dual-spring semi-auto with firing-pin setup, will they work with the FA barrels (provided you were going to apply for the tax stamp)?

Similar to this process:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q29BVTi-L5E

I would just buy a semi-auto UZI bolt assembly and get a carbine uzi barrel for a semi-auto. I used a receiver and bolt from McKay, or others sell them as well.
 
My information came from a bonded-and-licensed MA State gunsmith who has been in-business over 30 years, and has assisted recent builds of a wide-variety of firearms pre- and post-Healey ban. Since he has a valid Class 7 FFL, and I'll wager that YOU DO NOT, I call B.S. on your 'interpretations' and your 'expertise' on the subject.

My conversations hinged on the variety of 'mods' required to take an UZI kit from it's existing form to a BATFE-legal semi-auto. UZI kits are de-militarized open-bolt sub-guns, all pre-ban, from Israel. It is true that you need to mod the bolt, ejector, trigger, group, and receiver. DUH - we're making a closed-bolt semi from an open-bolt, Fixed-Firing-Pin auto. First step is to take the sub-gun bolt and have it professionally milled by a gunsmith to accept a sliding AR-15 firing pin.....FFP is now 'gone', and can't be used in a full-auto gun anymore. Three-position trigger group also needs to be modded so you can't slide to 'full-auto' selection. The receiver requires some semi-auto pieces to be welded-in for the new bolt configuration, and that means the charging handle gets a mod because the bolt gets closed when a round is chambered during closed-bolt firing, etc. etc. etc.

In the end, the only thing you don't touch is the barrel/nut and the magazine - all pre-ban anyway.

The parts kits being preban means nothing, the age of the receiver is what matters, and a machine gun receiver is forever tainted in the eyes of the ATF. I saw an ad from some idiot advertising a preban c308... Yeah, right
 
The parts kits being preban means nothing, the age of the receiver is what matters, and a machine gun receiver is forever tainted in the eyes of the ATF. I saw an ad from some idiot advertising a preban c308... Yeah, right

The kit I have has 'pieces' of de-MILed OEM receiver (front/rear sights mostly) but the SA build requires a new receiver where your 'kit pieces' are welded-on to an 80% stamped unit. SA Receivers will also have a few other items welded-in so that a Subbie-bolt will NOT work within the receiver, and are no-longer interchangeable with anything FA.
 
The kit I have has 'pieces' of de-MILed OEM receiver (front/rear sights mostly) but the SA build requires a new receiver where your 'kit pieces' are welded-on to an 80% stamped unit. SA Receivers will also have a few other items welded-in so that a Subbie-bolt will NOT work within the receiver, and are no-longer interchangeable with anything FA.

Exactly, the point is that your build is not preban. A machine gun receiver must be destroyed ( 1/4 " torch cut for example) into not a receiver before it can be used for anything, and rebuilding one results in a new receiver, it is manufacturing
 
Man I wish I had seen this thread or thought this through before impulse buying a parts kit. It's a great looking kit too - everything is in great shape. At least the price was right. [laugh]

So I guess my options are to either flip the kit out of state, buy a preban and have a bunch of spare parts, or save it for a rainy day.
 
If you shop well, an old Uzi isn't that much money. Seems people in MA think they are worth gold. I picked up one right before Christmas for near half of what people were asking here. I haunted Gunbroker for a few weeks and found an individual sale that seemed to be great.

Not sure I'm a fan of the platform, but I've always wanted one. Plus I mistakenly bought some Uzi mags when buying mags for my Sten build. ROFL!!!! It was an omen.
 
Back
Top Bottom