Glock switches

[livetoshoot82]

Am I missing something? I keep reading about states outlawing conversion devices that convert pistols to machine guns, and if I'm not mistaken, aren't these devices already illegal as defined by the machine gun ban of 1986?

 

[1KPerDay]

Yes

 

[Ohen Cepel]

I think the politicians sometimes pass laws to appease the people who think "something" needs to be done, but don't know enough to know that said law is worthless or redundant. However, come election time the politician can say they passed X law and their opponent (rightfully, as it was worthless) opposed said worthless law.

So, it is to make it look like they are doing something while doing nothing productive.

 

[Jim Watson]

The reason given here was that it allows state level prosecution without having to get a federal lawyer interested in the case.

 

[rust collector]

With limited resources, the locals are usually happy to let the feds, especially the BATFE, invest the time and effort. The feds, in turn, are happy to generate the publicity for fearless leader, whoever that may be at the time. I suspect that @Ohen Cepel has this right. After all, it is against the law to assault, batter or kill someone regardless of the tool used.

There is a method to this madness, however. More laws generate more plea fodder that help compel suspects to take deals. If one prosecutor fails to obtain a conviction, it is sometimes possible for her counterpart to prosecute under the law of a different jurisdiction or when different elements must be proven.

OP, the machine gun ban occurred with the 1934 National Firearms Act or NFA.

 

[livetoshoot82]

With limited resources, the locals are usually happy to let the feds, especially the BATFE, invest the time and effort. The feds, in turn, are happy to generate the publicity for fearless leader, whoever that may be at the time. I suspect that @Ohen Cepel has this right. After all, it is against the law to assault, batter or kill someone regardless of the tool used.

There is a method to this madness, however. More laws generate more plea fodder that help compel suspects to take deals. If one prosecutor fails to obtain a conviction, it is sometimes possible for her counterpart to prosecute under the law of a different jurisdiction or when different elements must be proven.

OP, the machine gun ban occurred with the 1934 National Firearms Act or NFA.

I don't think the nfa act of 1934 banned anything, but rather required a tax to be paid for those items. Up until Reagan in 1986, transferable weapons were plentiful and not very rare to access as far as I can tell. I may be wrong but that is how I read it. 1986 ban made new transferable machine guns impossible to produce as far as the general public is concerned.

 

[livetoshoot82]

I think the politicians sometimes pass laws to appease the people who think "something" needs to be done, but don't know enough to know that said law is worthless or redundant. However, come election time the politician can say they passed X law and their opponent (rightfully, as it was worthless) opposed said worthless law.

So, it is to make it look like they are doing something while doing nothing productive.

I agree with this explanation 100%

 

[rust collector]

I don't think the nfa act of 1934 banned anything, but rather required a tax to be paid for those items. Up until Reagan in 1986, transferable weapons were plentiful and not very rare to access as far as I can tell. I may be wrong but that is how I read it. 1986 ban made new transferable machine guns impossible to produce as far as the general public is concerned.

You are correct, the NFA restricted ownership of machine guns. Auto-sears, lightning links and the like were subsequently restricted. Many states have banned NFA items even though they were permitted by the NFA, so what is novel about a law restricting NFA items?

 

[livetoshoot82]

You are correct, the NFA restricted ownership of machine guns. Auto-sears, lightning links and the like were subsequently restricted. Many states have banned NFA items even though they were permitted by the NFA, so what is novel about a law restricting NFA items

I see what you mean.

 

[herrwalther]

My state, Alabama, recently passed a bill outlawing full auto switches. Glock switches. SB 116 was signed into law March 19. The press releases around the event usually mentioned that these devices are already illegal under federal law. But the state was passing its own law because the ATF was not prosecuting the switches under federal jurisdiction. I know of at least 3 federal indictments that were dropped for auto switches and any remaining charges were sent back to the state. Usually it was felon in possession of firearm under AL law.

 

[jmorris]

Usually it was felon in possession of firearm under AL law.

Too bad that's not illegal...

 

[Neo-Luddite]

Since Illinois added a felony-level state offense prohibiting "Glock Switches" (and similar drop in conversion devices) we are beginning to even see a few stand alone prosecutions/convictions for possessing and using such devices. However, All I have come across so far were seemingly associated with other criminal and particularly gang related activity. In other words, the "switch" law is another lever prosecutors can use to give armed criminals some additional prison time in the IDOC.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

The reason given here was that it allows state level prosecution without having to get a federal lawyer interested in the case.

It may be hard to get a federal prosecutor to prosecute a criminal for NFA violation when the criminal's chief crime was under state law (murder, robbery, etc) and he was arrested by state or county or city LE. Sounds like it would require a federal trial for the NFA charge and local trial for the chief crime.

 

[AlexanderA]

The cynical approach to "Glock switches" would be to turn a blind eye, let the switches proliferate, and watch the gang-bangers wipe out each other. Anyone who would use a "Glock switch" has to be a complete idiot.

 

[dogtown tom]

It may be hard to get a federal prosecutor to prosecute a criminal for NFA violation when the criminal's chief crime was under state law (murder, robbery, etc) and he was arrested by state or county or city LE. Sounds like it would require a federal trial for the NFA charge and local trial for the chief crime.

Quite often the mere threat of federal prosecution results in the defendant pleading out on state charges.

 

[dogtown tom]

The cynical approach to "Glock switches" would be to turn a blind eye, let the switches proliferate, and watch the gang-bangers wipe out each other. Anyone who would use a "Glock switch" has to be a complete idiot.

What an incredibly anti gun thing to write.
It's not your first.

 

[AlexanderA]

What an incredibly anti gun thing to write.

Why do you say that? I wrote that anyone who would use a Glock switch has to be a complete idiot. Considering that this would be wild firing with a ridiculous waste of ammunition, not to mention endangering bystanders, in what way would this not be complete idiocy?

 

[reddog81]

It may be hard to get a federal prosecutor to prosecute a criminal for NFA violation when the criminal's chief crime was under state law (murder, robbery, etc) and he was arrested by state or county or city LE. Sounds like it would require a federal trial for the NFA charge and local trial for the chief crime.

I would guess this is probably the main reason. Often times someone get pulled over for some minor violation and has drugs and a gun. Allowing state prosecutors deal with the Glock switch makes sense.

 

[dogtown tom]

Why do you say that?

You have a history of anti gun sentiment.

It's akin to "nobody needs a 30 round magazine", "Saturday Night Specials are crime gun" or other ignorant observations.

I wrote that anyone who would use a Glock switch has to be a complete idiot. Considering that this would be wild firing with a ridiculous waste of ammunition, not to mention endangering bystanders, in what way would this not be complete idiocy?

A "Glock switch" doesn't mean "wild firing" or any other of your suppositions. "Wild firing" can occur with a single shot flintlock.
A "Glock switch" merely enables full automatic fire. Other than the selector switch being installed at the rear of the slide instead the left rear, there is zero difference in functionlity than a factory Glock 18. Ten seconds on Google will give you plenty of videos of Glock 18 usage that is easily controlled.

For sure, an idiot with a gun is still an idiot. But you say choosing to use a Glock switch makes one an idiot.......and thats just peak ignorance.
Here a good review by a well known idiot doing wild firing, wasting ammunition and endangering bystanders:

 

[rust collector]

There is quite a bit of ignorance about full auto handguns in the general population, largely because Hollywood uses them to make vast amounts of cash without regard to the laws we must follow, including the laws of physics and logistics as well as federal firearms law. Few of us have opportunities to sample the genuine article, but we see and hear stories about use and abuse. Arguments pro and con are fueled by emotion in the absence of experience and training, and we see the result in this thread. Forbidden (or at least regulated, administrated, slow-walked and taxed) fruits will always be regarded as the sweetest.

We have gotten quite far afield from the original post question, which seems to have been answered to the OP's satisfaction. I will close this thread, but if anyone would like to authoritatively relate the history of the G18 and the development of the "switch" attachment, or link us to that information, please post in the NFA section and most of us can learn a few things. Thank you.