Username or Email Address
Do you already have an account?
Forgot your password?
  • Log in or Sign up

    VWVortex


    Results 1 to 8 of 8

    Thread: So.. Post 86' select fire may be a possibility.

    1. Yesterday 12:48 PM #1
      From what I can tell it went down like this.

      huges act states no Person can own a post 86 Machine gun.

      ATF declares Trusts are not people.

      Therefore Trusts can own a machine gun.

      a bunch of folks tested the system sent in Trust form 1's for full autos.

      quite a few people got back approvals with stamps, before they realized they screwed up, a whole bunch more (I don't know numbers yet) Recived approval and stamp but were called by ATF and asked to please return the stamp, they were also sent dissaproval letters.

      Considering they've blown a hole in the law, based on what I'm seeing it may be possible for the a trust to manufacture a full auto, it would not be transferable except to descendants.

      theres a Arfcom thread that details it.

      http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/162...14.html&page=1

      if true, holy crap. no hopes up but I'm sure there doing mental gymnastics to figure out how to back out of this one

    2. Yesterday 02:57 PM #2
      How has noone figured this out in the past 20 years?

    3. Senior Member NoDubJustYet's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 25th, 2002
      Location
      WNoVA
      Posts
      27,645
      Vehicles
      MkV GTI and V70 3.2
      Yesterday 02:58 PM #3
      The ATF already asked for the Stamp back the same day it arrived in the mail...
      I don't see this going anywhere.

    4. Yesterday 04:22 PM #4
      This is BATFE, the same agency which kind of changes laws willy-nilly. Something tells me I don't want to risk anything trying to take advantage of a "loophole", etc. While it's all interesting to read about, I don't have the funds to get into a big legal battle, or risk jail time with stuff like that.

      Good luck to them though.

    5. Yesterday 05:36 PM #5
      Quote Originally Posted by NoDubJustYet View Post
      The ATF already asked for the Stamp back the same day it arrived in the mail...
      I don't see this going anywhere.
      I agree.. but considering they don't really have a legal reason for requesting the stamp back, opening themselves up to a lawsuit (being denied something they are technically in compliance to own). if the ball gets going it might be worth getting a denied letter and being part of the class action suit. I'm definitely going to kick some down towards the legal fund.

      unless someone gets stupid over returning a stamp/ regulated item no one's going to jail.

      hey, if we don't push the limits on these things (like the sig brace and sig muzzle device) we'll never have a chance of getting the laws changed in our favor.

    6. Senior Member NoDubJustYet's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 25th, 2002
      Location
      WNoVA
      Posts
      27,645
      Vehicles
      MkV GTI and V70 3.2
      Yesterday 05:38 PM #6
      The ATF loves fighting this stuff... Look at what SIG is going through right now with the MP-X.

    7. Yesterday 06:59 PM #7
      I think Sig likes pushing the atfs buttons. I'd bet they can make the mpx with a 16" barrel with only a small modification to the gas system, they are pushing the system. The brace got threw, that's a makeshift stock if I've ever seen one.

    8. Yesterday 07:05 PM #8
      Quote Originally Posted by NoDubJustYet View Post
      The ATF loves fighting this stuff... Look at what SIG is going through right now with the MP-X.
      Like you guys, I'm happy to see Sig push - someone needs to. Even if the end result is only a clarification, it's progress. The current laws are waaaay too vague and open to interpretation (oddly only by the BATFE, not citizens or manufacturers...). I'd get as many law suits going, so that strict, legal definitions are required to be put in place.

      Going to refuse something because you insist it's a suppressor? Show me the legal definition of a suppressor...in black and white. Write it up. "Suppressor: any object attached to the muzzle of a firearm which reduces muzzle sound by 20% or more." etc. Almost every other type of law in existence has been challenged enough that the simplest "you can't park there" law now has a 160 pages of definitions. We need 100% strict legal definitions which the BATFE must apply. This in turn will help manufacturers produce proper legal products and will help minimize the oft-over reaching BATFE vague legal reach.

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •