Woman calls full-automatic machine gun charges misplaced

St. Louis Post-Dispatch ^ | 3/30/05 | Paul Hampel

[TalonDJ]

Compared to the cost of a class 3 firearm the 200 is not a lot. The cost is high only because there is a very limited number of legal ones out there. It is my understanding you also give then federal government the right to search where you store them at any time with no warrant. Might be wrong on that but someone here could probably confirm it.

[boofus]

No they still have to get a warrant to search your home. The only case they can do an audit uannounced is if you have a Federal Firearms License.

[TalonDJ]

First of all, hardly a fair comparison. Second of all, I think that protected by the second amendment also.

[Atlas Sneezed]

However, isn't it just a matter of paying a $50.00 tax per year per weapon? Not an excessive tax for a hobby.

---

It's $200, but that isn't much. However, it is the ~6 month wait for approval and background check, and months' long wait for each transfer from seller to dealer, to buyer.

But here is the big one. In 1986, the law was passed to ban all future machine guns from private hands. That means that the supply of ownable guns was fixed at about one per thousand citizens. This has caused guns that would sell for $500 (plus $200 transfer tax) now to go for $10,000. Those guns wear out, become obsolete, and end up accrued by wealthy collectors like Steven Spielberg.

Entirely contrary to the purposes of the 2nd amendment, which is that an armed citizenry be a bulwark against tyranny by a standing army (today's standing army is our militarized law enforcement agencies, by the way.)

[TalonDJ]

Ever read that case? It basically says since the sawed off shot gun is not a normal military weapon then it is not protected by the 2nd amendment. There by implying that everything that IS a normal military weapon IS protected.

[Dead Corpse]

Above and beyond that, a short shotgun was a most effective weapon in clearing Trenches in WWII. Kinda does away with the whole thing when seen in that light.

Should, at least. Sanity hasn't been part of the equation since FDR.

[TalonDJ]

Yeah, so the whole premise for that case being lost was but pro-2A by todays standards and also wrong. Kinda sucks.

[boofus]

The military is currently using short shotguns for door breaching. Look up the Knight's Armament Company Masterkey. It's a 12 gauge shotgun designed to be mounted underneath a M16 or M4 rifle. They named it that because it can be loaded with special rounds to destroy doors.

The justices that ruled that short barreled shotguns have no military use had their heads up their asses.

[Dead Corpse]

Well, here is what the DOJ has to say about it. Kinda refutes the Miller decisions "militia" test as well as later lower courts decisions on the "sporting purposes" test.

F*ck 'em. I do NOT need permission to exercise a Right. Period. And yes, I'm willing to go to jail for that belief as well. Although, I STILL don't own what they are calling a "Class III" firearm or other "destructive device".

[Dead Corpse]

It was a different world in the 1920's.... Eugene Stoner hadn't even dreamt up the M-16.

[boofus]

They used trench guns in the great war, these were nothing more than cut down pump shotguns.

[boofus]

There's a picture of a Winchester 1897 trench gun, complete with evil assault bayonet.

[GrandEagle]

It was a different world in the 1920's
True, but the BAR was prevalent, along with the Thompson and others.

GE

[Dead Corpse]

Looks like a cut-down 870 action. Maybe some day I'll be able to get one for my next AR. My current one is set up for tack driving. ;-)

[GrandEagle]

Don't forget storage regs.. and maybe end up in jail.

We didn't have any of those issues here in Alabama; at least up to three years ago. (I have no first hand knowlege after that).
The only problem I had was finding a place to shoot. Most shooting ranges didn't want you there. The called it "rapid fire".

Regards,
GE

[BCR #226]

Correct for the purposes of criminal intent. That definition specifically relates to having the full auto parts along with a semi only gun.

For the purposes of taxation, they only consider the receiver on most guns, a lightning link or auto sear, and on a few guns the bolt to be the actual machine gun. These items when recognized in this manner will have the manufacturers information on them along with the serial number.

Mike

[Dead Corpse]

Back to the M-16/AR-15 example though, owning ANY of the trigger parts along with a semi-auto rifle is considered verboten. Even if it is only the selector switch or bolt carrier. If you have any of the parts, even if not enough to actually assemble into a functional machine gun, then you are considered out of compliance.

As I said, you don't need permission to exercise a Right. The government is in the wrong on this one and has been for quite some time.

[BCR #226]

Yep, you hit the nail on the head. Sad isn't it? And just to think, I told Deputy Director (or whatever his title is now) Malone of the BATFE last night that they need to clean up their image and stop the JBT BS if they want any cooperation from the citizenry on the issue of gang violence... Will they get it? I won't hold my breath.

Mike