Once a machine gun always a machine gun

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

bamawrx

Member
Joined
May 11, 2004
Messages
460
Location
ALA-FREEKING-BAMA!
Whats with the rumors about the new BATFE director changing the "once a machine gun always a machine gun rule"? If that is correct, then it is possible to one day see a modified M-16 or M-14 for semi-auto only sold by CMP. It would be a simple matter to modify those lowers to semi only. Anyone know for sure if this happened or is it internet rumor mill stuff?
 
I wouldn't think it would be cost effective to turn a M16 receiver into an AR15 receiver. You can buy brand new high quality AR type receivers for 90 bucks if you do a little shopping.
 
There are NO surplus M-14's. The military needs all the remaining few M-14's in inventory to support the current operations. Clinton gave away most of the remaining M-14's as military aid in the '90s. The military is hard up not only for rifles, but spare parts and magazines as well.

Even if the BATF changed the "once a MG, always a MG," there will never be M-14's sold through the CMP. There just aren't enough left.
 
I doubt that's a "good" thing. It is likely the BATF attempt at FURTHER restriction and will prevent import of surplus "parts kits".
 
Why can't CMP sell all the M16s made before '86 to anyone eligible?
 
Why can't CMP sell all the M16s made before '86 to anyone eligible?
Click to expand...

Because the way the '86 machinegun ban works is the government does not allow you to register a machinegun for civilian use. In essence, they are preventing you from paying the NFA tax and if you cannot pay the tax, your machinegun is unregistered aka illegal. Only those machineguns registered prior to the '86 ban are legal for civilians.
 
Ah, but 18 USC 922(o) states:

(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful for any person to transfer or possess a machinegun.
(2) This subsection does not apply with respect to—
(A) a transfer to or by, or possession by or under the authority of, the United States or any department or agency thereof or a State, or a department, agency, or political subdivision thereof; or
(B) any lawful transfer or lawful possession of a machinegun that was lawfully possessed before the date this subsection takes effect.
Click to expand...

Although machineguns owned by the federal government are not in the NFRTR, they are lawfully possessed. So theoretically, I don't see why machineguns the federal government has posessed since prior to May 19, 1986 couldn't be put in the NFRTR.

A lot of policies would have to be changed, but they're just policies, not law. Of course in the real world, it'd probably be easier just to repeal 922(o) outright than get those policies changed.
 
Sounds good to me. Perhaps you could also get them to rule all MGs made prior to 1968 GCA are legal for importation. :) I'd love an MG-42.
 
First, BATFE did NOT originate the "OAMGAAMG" rule. It is just a sort of shorthand for the wording of the law, which was specifically written to PREVENT BATFE from ever allowing another "DEWAT" program or ever declaring a machinegun to be a non-gun or non-machinegun without a law change by Congress. So that LAW would have to be changed BY CONGRESS if a machinegun is to become a non-machinegun.

Second, the 1986 law banning further registration of machineguns by "civilians" would have to be changed if the rifles are to be transferred as machineguns.

Either way, ain't gonna happen.

Jim
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top