samnev
Member
My M249S had to be shipped back to FN yesterday due to the mandatory recall issued Friday. I'd only had it since mid December and never has a chance to shoot it.
Sad Day
- Thread starter samnev
- Start date
Welcome to ArizonaShooting.org!
Join today!
Suck My Glock
Member
Uh,...gee,...I would have thought you had sold it in a private sale at the gun show and had no idea where it was.
Explain to me how a recall can be "mandatory"?
Perhaps they can void your warranty if you don't comply.
Perhaps ATF could re-classify non-"repaired" units.
Perhaps the range police could arrest you if you are operating your gun in an "unsafe" manner.
But how can they force you to relinquish your property if you don't want to comply with the repair?
Perhaps they can void your warranty if you don't comply.
Perhaps ATF could re-classify non-"repaired" units.
Perhaps the range police could arrest you if you are operating your gun in an "unsafe" manner.
But how can they force you to relinquish your property if you don't want to comply with the repair?
Cubiclerevolt
Member
Suck My Glock said:
Crazy how people run into hard times with money.
You are correct, they probably can't, but if you don't, the BAT folks will be at your house and then you will have to comply. Sending it back to the manufacture is probably the best alternative. Some folks just want to fight their way into a serious problem...really dumb. YIQMV.Abbey said:
samnev
Member
delta6 said:
I agree, I played the wait and see game when they wanted the trunnion on some PPSh kits that were sold. Then ATF called me and in no uncertain terms said they wanted the trunnion back. The agent that came to my house actually was quite nice. So I didn't what to run into the same problem again if ATF decides it's time to get all the unmodified M249S's back to FN or face the consequences. Not worth the hassle.
delta6 said:
Don't take my original question the wrong way. I'm not saying this is the hill people should choose to die on. IMO it really depends on your personal situation. But I know 3 people with these FNs - every single one is new, unfired, still in the factory packaging. (I don't have one but I'm not opposed to collectibles by those with the means to build a nice collection.)
I don't think the BATFE is going to kick down anyone's door over a collectible they've never even fired. But I don't have a dog in this fight. My inner libertarian was just triggered by the concept of a mandatory recall. Did they actually reclassify the unmodified units as a MG? From what I read that didn't seem to be the case.
Suck My Glock
Member
If you can buffaloed into giving it up, you don't deserve it.
Suck My Glock
Member
You'll have to explain that one. I'm not up to speed on the latest abbreviations.delta6 said:
Here is why the comment "being buffaloed" is not well thought out. Obviously you have never seen a M249 blow up. That should be your first clue you should consider before you give your anti-whatever line.Suck My Glock said:
Think of this recall similar to you buying a new Toyota. You get it home and Toyota calls you and says, "Don't drive your new car because it is defective. The speedo doesn't work and the police may stop you and arrest you and oh, by-the-way, more importantly, the brakes don't work. So you not wanting to be "buffaloed", ignore them because this is your collector car. Your not gunna drive it!
A few years in the future, your son, daughter, grandson, decide to take the car out for a drive, they crash and are seriously injured or killed, because the brakes did not work.
This recall is really less about the Feds and more about safety for the current owners and the future ones.
Suck My Glock
Member
If FN made it sound like that, sure, your point would be wise. But they didn't make it sound that at all. It sounds like they got a trigger group that allows for something other than that.
Cubiclerevolt
Member
delta6 said:
Can you just tell us the acronym? That's all I care about.
I will change the analogy just a bit because I was stuck with something very similar, but it was deemed by the BATs to be a “suppressor” rather than a machinegun.
You don’t participate in the recall, 10 years later you die, and your daughter inherits your FN. The BATs started having the kinder, gentler agents making phone calls, followed up by initial kind visits. If your daughter doesn’t know and her sill factory-packed 249 has a bad trigger group she owns a machinegun, by choice. If she has sentimental bones in her body, she refuses to let the kinder, gentler BAT folks in to take the gun her dad left her.
Then the not so kind or gentle BAT folks show up with instructions they are seizing an illegal machinegun from an armed felon. Things go south and criminal charges are brought to justify the BAT raid.
You don’t participate in the recall, 10 years later you die, and your daughter inherits your FN. The BATs started having the kinder, gentler agents making phone calls, followed up by initial kind visits. If your daughter doesn’t know and her sill factory-packed 249 has a bad trigger group she owns a machinegun, by choice. If she has sentimental bones in her body, she refuses to let the kinder, gentler BAT folks in to take the gun her dad left her.
Then the not so kind or gentle BAT folks show up with instructions they are seizing an illegal machinegun from an armed felon. Things go south and criminal charges are brought to justify the BAT raid.
- Joined
- May 15, 2018
- Messages
- 202
If the "... reset failure within the hammer group may cause an unsafe firing event." as described on the FN website involves a runaway belt fed firearm I would consider that a significant issue. I don't know if this is the situation but I think it is likely. I would not be comfortable with any firearm that has a defect in the fire control group that causes it to do something it wasn't designed for.
