Is it possible to be a Class 2 SOT and refuse to sell to Government?

[AZRedhawk44]

Think of it as a form of tax protest.  And stockpiling, I guess.

Build DD's, MG's and such legally, and tell DoD and secret squirrel agencies to GFY if they decide they might want to buy your stuff.

Will your SOT FFL just get yoinked (even if you get it at all)?

[cordex]

I haven’t seen any reg that says an SOT has to do business with .Gov types.

[charby]

Someone else will sell and profit, while you're sitting with inventory. Probably a lot of inventory since you are trying to tease the alphabet soup agencies to buy from you. I've never eaten a machine gun, but I don't think there is enough ketchup to make it palatable.

[Nick1911]

Someone else will sell and profit, while you're sitting with inventory. Probably a lot of inventory since you are trying to tease the alphabet soup agencies to buy from you. I've never eaten a machine gun, but I don't think there is enough ketchup to make it palatable.

I think the point is more to be able to develop a cache of otherwise restricted and expensive weapons by getting a class 2 SOT and engaging in manufacturing in house.  The Class 2 SOT is there for someone who wants to setup a business to doing this, to sell their restricted items to gov/military/police/other SOT holders.

The question is: Is being a class 2 sot holder and engaging in the activity of manufacturing weapons that the license allow for still legal if there is no intent to engage in commerce?

This would depend on the specific verbiage of the Class 2 SOT law.  I don't know it well enough to know that answer.  In my opinion it's well into poking the bear territory - I would at least maintain a very serious pretense about being engaged in the research and design of weapons systems as a commercial activity.

[charby]

I think the point is more to be able to develop a cache of otherwise restricted and expensive weapons by getting a class 2 SOT and engaging in manufacturing in house.  The Class 2 SOT is there for someone who wants to setup a business to doing this, to sell their restricted items to gov/military/police/other SOT holders.

The question is: Is being a class 2 sot holder and engaging in the activity of manufacturing weapons that the license allow for still legal if there is no intent to engage in commerce?

This would depend on the specific verbiage of the Class 2 SOT law.  I don't know it well enough to know that answer.  In my opinion it's well into poking the bear territory - I would at least maintain a very serious pretense about being engaged in the research and design of weapons systems as a commercial activity.

I have a friend that does that, but he does sell a bit of stuff to LEOs

http://www.controlledchaosarms.com/firearms/nfa/

[cordex]

Agreed that you have to be able to claim you are engaged in business, but offering suppressors and SBRs for sale to non-LE should suffice for that if that was your wish.

[MechAg94]

What license is required for a 0% lower?

[230RN]

What license is required for a 0% lower?

Details at the quoracdm.net site in the URL, I guess, but I never went there myself.  The pic alone was enough to amuse me.

And once again, you see why for years I've bellyached about us using the terms "upper receiver" and "lower receiver." 

Terry, 230RN

[AZRedhawk44]

In my opinion it's well into poking the bear territory - I would at least maintain a very serious pretense about being engaged in the research and design of weapons systems as a commercial activity.

I think it'd be neat to have a weapon design that the alphabois and DoD salivate over, that's new and unique... and say "you can't have it."

Maybe sell it to one rural bupkis sheriff's office out of spite.

Maybe have an accidental breach of your cloud storage that results in your CNC files being publicly available.  And it being a simple and modular design.

There's just no way to make such a weapon in the first place without being prosecuted, unless you have the Class 2 SOT papers though.

[Devonai]

I have heard colloquially that one might submit bids too high for serious consideration, while meeting the letter of the law, and while maintaining one's legitimate business by doing $10 FFL transfers a few times a month.  Colloquially.