Why Not More Simulated Full-Auto Guns

[AK103K]

This is how we'll win.

It would be nice, and I would like to think so, but.....

Im still a little jaded and dubious about anything good happening. Having lived in the NFA realm for 35 some odd years now, and seeing how little the rest of the gun world seemed to care when the 86 ban went through, or even cares now, as nothing has been pursued since. I dont have a whole lot of faith in anything positive happening.

From what Ive seen personally, people will gladly give you up, if they think theres a chance they will be left alone, and they can keep theirs. I used to hear it all the time at a couple of ranges I used to belong to, and still do now from time to time. All from gun people who were very pro gun, and staunch NRA members.

 

[Sam1911]

Oh, I know what you're saying. But 20 years ago the same thing was said about concealed carry. Who would have EVER thought, back in the 1980s, that nearly every state would have a "shall-issue" CC permit system and a very thriving population of gun-toters? I mean, the thought of what's happened in WI and IL, and now CA would have been laughed right out of the room!

Sure, we can't say for sure what will happen next, but look how many SBRs there are now. Look at all the thousands of suppressors there are being sold! Folks joining the "NFA-owners" ranks by the bucketfull every year. It isn't 1986 any more and I'm pretty jazzed up to see where we'll go next!

 

[JRH6856]

This isn't the end of the NFA. But it is a VERY important lever in the toolbox we'll use to disassemble it.

What, (once BATF reads this thread), stops them from simply deciding that any firearm capable of firing more than 3 rounds per second qualifies as an automatic weapon regardless of mechanism? If they use Jerry Miculek as an example, they could put just about everything on the NFA list.

 

[Sam1911]

Because that's not what the law they're enforcing SAYS?

Believe it or not, they don't just make this stuff up.

These trigger systems are legal specifically because they avoid, carefully, exactly what the legal definition of a machine gun is.

 

[JRH6856]

Granted it is harder to get Congress to change the law or pass a new one than just make it up, but the Courts could more easily find something in the "shadows and penumbras" of the law's intent to restrict rapid-fire devices. The current SCOTUS probably would not. A future one might if the balance were to be shifted to the left.

 

[wally]

Unless something has changed, I believe the gun in your first pic, with the "SIG not a stock" is in fact in violation of the NFA, due to that vertical front grip. Is it not?

Get out the tape measure, I believe if the OAL is greater than 26" then the vertical grip is legal, instead of it making it an AOW (Any Other Weapon). Hopefully the owner posting the photo has verified this.

The "rules" make no sense, never will.

Based on my pistol buffer tube(7") a 12.5" barrel would exceed 26" OAL, looks to be close. You can use a rifle tube with the SB15 to get more OAL or push the trigger a bit further forward.

Vertical grips do nothing for me, YMMV.

Granted it is harder to get Congress to change the law or pass a new one than just make it up, but the Courts could more easily find something in the "shadows and penumbras" of the law's intent to restrict rapid-fire devices.

What exactly is a rapid fire device? Hand cranked Gatling Gun is legal and has been for ~150 years. Kits to mount two guns and alternately fire them as you turn a crank have been around for a long time and are legal as well. Sportsmans Guide had one for a pair of 10/22 rifles in a recent catalog.

 

[Sam1911]

That's a pretty far stretch. The law is written very simply.

(b) Machinegun
The term “machinegun” means any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.

So there's no shadows or penumbras for a rate-of-fire distinction to hide in. Literally, if you hold the trigger down and it fires again -- TEN MINUTES FROM NOW -- that's a machine gun. If you can operate the trigger 1,000 times a minute, but each operation fires only one shot, then it isn't.

I don't trust some future court any more than you do, but I know what the law says which they are working with, and unless Congress wants to lift the hood on the 80 year old National Firearms Act and re-write the definition of "machine gun" this just isn't possible.

However, what IS possible, is a well-thought-out challenge case being presented which gets the Court to face the question of whether it is in keeping with the principles of good legislation to say that two items, identical in practical function, can be both completely contraband and worth the destruction of a citizen's life over, on the one hand, and perfectly lawful to own and use, on the other.

 

[JRH6856]

However, what IS possible, is a well-thought-out challenge case being presented which gets the Court to face the question of whether it is in keeping with the principles of good legislation to say that two items, identical in practical function, can be both completely contraband and worth the destruction of a citizen's life over, on the one hand, and perfectly lawful to own and use, on the other.

And it is in the deliberations over such a question that the questions regarding the intent of the law will be raised and examined. A historical study will reveal that an unstated but defining characteristic of a machinegun is rapid fire. At the time, this was accomplished by holding the trigger, but times have changed new mechanisms developed to accomplish this. History will also show that no machinegun has been produced for the purpose of delayed automatic fire and that rapid fire has always been the purpose. And it is this purpose that the law was intended to restrain.

I'm just saying, be wary of the path you choose, there may be dragons...

 

[Sam1911]

The other factor we have in our favor is "common useage." In Heller, Scalia made it clear that part of how the Court looks at what might be protected by the 2nd Amendment is by observing what arms are commonly used by the people for these purposes.

(A bit of circular logic, no doubt, but largely beneficial to us.)

To his purpose at the moment, he wanted to point out that by and large HANDGUNS are the most common defensive arm used in the USA, so there's no legitimacy in outlawing handguns as some kind of special case of "criminals' guns" or whatever.

But at the same time, that point spreads quite a happy blanket of protection over our nation's beloved AR-15s and similar weapons which are now not just "common," but pretty nearly "universal." Extend that to firearms capable of being fired at rates of over 2, 3, 4, 5 times a second, and you're talking about 1/2 of all the firearms owned, most likely. That's just untouchable.

 

[Sam1911]

And it is in the deliberations over such a question that the questions regarding the intent of the law will be raised and examined. A historical study will reveal that an unstated but defining characteristic of a machinegun is rapid fire. At the time, this was accomplished by holding the trigger, but times have changed new mechanisms developed to accomplish this. History will also show that no machinegun has been produced for the purpose of delayed automatic fire and that rapid fire has always been the purpose. And it is this purpose that the law was intended to restrain.

Right, but the Court can't re-write the text of the law to make it say what they think it was trying to say, but didn't. They have to rule on the law as it is written. And when they look at the precedents that the BATFE has created by the decisions it has rendered -- specifically saying that these slide-fire and bump-fire and 3MR type setups are LEGAL and acceptable for citizens to own and use -- they'll have no basis for a decision against us.

I'm just saying, be wary of the path you choose, there may be dragons...

That's why we have to study our history and our law well and have the courage to fight!

 

[JRH6856]

Right, but the Court can't re-write the text of the law to make it say what they think it was trying to say, but didn't. They have to rule on the law as it is written.

LOL, According to Justice O'Scanllain in Peruta v San Diego, 3 circuit courts haven't even ruled as SCOTUS directed. Why do you think they have to rule on the law as written? As Frank Ettin is always telling us, the statute is how the law reads, the case law tells us what it says. I haven't looked for at any case law on this so I don't know what the courts have already said. I'm just speculating what they might say if they haven't clearly spoke already.

 

[Sam1911]

LOL, According to Justice O'Scanllain in Peruta v San Diego, 3 circuit courts haven't even ruled as SCOTUS directed. Why do you think they have to rule on the law as written?

Because the plain wording of the law itself is compelling, and what the other three circuit courts did or didn't take away from the Heller decision (appears to be) going back to the SCOTUS to get sorted out.

This is getting circular. You seem to be arguing, "well, anything could happen, so best not try anything..."

I haven't looked for at any case law on this so I don't know what the courts have already said. I'm just speculating what they might say if they haven't clearly spoke already.

Ahhh, so yes, you're just arguing "hey, anything" because of "well, whatever."

If you don't know what you're talking about and don't have a cogent argument and don't have any facts or founded theories with which to support your opinion ... well...it sure is hard to shoot ya down! Believe whatever you want, or nothing, or neither.

 

[Warp]

What, (once BATF reads this thread), stops them from simply deciding that any firearm capable of firing more than 3 rounds per second qualifies as an automatic weapon regardless of mechanism? If they use Jerry Miculek as an example, they could put just about everything on the NFA list.

They don't get to make laws.

And there would practically be an armed national uprising if they did that. They'd get hung out to dry and, at the least, be out of a job right quick.

 

[JRH6856]

This is getting circular. You seem to be arguing, "well, anything could happen, so best not try anything..."

No, I'm just saying something could happen so don't get overconfident that is won't happen and get caught by surprise.

If you don't know what you're talking about and don't have a cogent argument and don't have any facts or founded theories with which to support your opinion ... well...it sure is hard to shoot ya down! Believe whatever you want, or nothing, or neither.

Hey! This is an internet forum, not a court of law. I'm just responding to posts in an online conversation. I didn't start reading thinking I needed to prepare a legal case for debate. I hope you're correct, I really do. I'm just saying be prepared for the unexpected. If you don't need the warning, that's great.

 

[Skribs]

I wasn't even alive in 86!

I think 2004 and the expiration of the AWB and the failed efforts to reinstate it prove that we've hit our limit on compromise, and I think most people in DC are smart enough to know what will happen if they push gun owners too far. The whole reason for 2A, ya know?

 

[Warp]

I wasn't even alive in 86!

I think 2004 and the expiration of the AWB and the failed efforts to reinstate it prove that we've hit our limit on compromise, and I think most people in DC are smart enough to know what will happen if they push gun owners too far. The whole reason for 2A, ya know?

They just pushed too far last year. We will see exactly what happens from that later this year.

Colorado already found out.

 

[MagnumDweeb]

Wow, I'm thrilled with how this thread has been going and I'm glad some folks have seen my tech as a political bit bit. I think part of it also is that we have have to push the envelope and never stop.

I just got my mini-mill setup as a CNC mini-mill and the things I'm able to do with it is....awesome. Imagine if we were able to setup a company that built affordable ($1,000 or less) CNC mini-mills that are able to make handgun receivers. California just got onto home-builds and we'll see how that goes but if we were to really push the technology behind homebuilds, we could start a whole new front for entry into firearm ownership and hobbying on guns.

We need to abide by the law but push the limits of what we can get away with to blur the lines between the NFA and non-NFA. We have to strive to make the distinctions, limits, between the two more and more insignificant so as to create a possible judicial notice of arbitrary and capricious differences between the two.

 

[JSH1]

I just got my mini-mill setup as a CNC mini-mill and the things I'm able to do with it is....awesome. Imagine if we were able to setup a company that built affordable ($1,000 or less) CNC mini-mills that are able to make handgun receivers. California just got onto home-builds and we'll see how that goes but if we were to really push the technology behind homebuilds, we could start a whole new front for entry into firearm ownership and hobbying on guns.

What is the advantage to milling your own receivers and building a gun from scratch? I understand that there is a small minority of gun owners that worry about the government knowing what guns they own but the vast majority of people are happy to to just go the the store and walk out with the gun of their choice.

 

[wally]

I always like sending the antis on a fact finding mission:

How large are the combined armies of China and Pakistan?

How many guns have been sold since Obama was elected" (use NCIS checks as a surrogate for actual data).

 

[baylorattorney]

http://youtu.be/d3KhiySFFJg
That's me with my taccon 3mr and it's as fast as any full auto I've shot.