What ever happened to the MKS reweld case

[n64atlas]

Calif Dept of Justice(!) has spent considerable time and effort telling dealers to alter M2 trigger housings. I know of many dealers in Calif who have sent their housings to machine shops to have them altered. I am not aware of any laws requiring this, but in Calif everyone knows the Bud Evers Story and all are afraid of DOJ.

California may have it's own laws regarding certain parts. Just as Ohio says a magazine holding more than 32 rds is a machinegun.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[John Kepler]

California may have it's own laws regarding certain parts. Just as Ohio says a magazine holding more than 32 rds is a machinegun.

That law in Ohio was repealed about the time I graduated from college...in other words, a LONG time ago!

[edlmann]

Calif Dept of Justice(!) has spent considerable time and effort telling dealers to alter M2 trigger housings. I know of many dealers in Calif who have sent their housings to machine shops to have them altered. I am not aware of any laws requiring this, but in Calif everyone knows the Bud Evers Story and all are afraid of DOJ.

This may be a matter of state law being more restrictive than Federal.

[Wink]

Quite simply, possession of an M-1 carbine and a handfull of M-2 parts is considered "constructive" possession of an unregistered machine gun. Same goes for AR15 and M16 fire control parts. This includes lightening links and disconnectors such as still being sold by Suppress-On even if they're in your pocket! A guy without a Carbine or an AR can own as many as he wants, just don't bring 'em together. Kinda like 151 Rum and fire!

[n64atlas]

" A guy without a Carbine or an AR can own as many as he wants, just don't bring 'em together. Kinda like 151 Rum and fire![/QUOTE]

Not true with the carbine, owning the all the parts is considered having a machinegun even if you don't own a M1.

From the NFA handbook put out by the BATFE:

The “designed to shoot automatically more than one shot without manual reloading by a single function
of the trigger” portion of the definition relates to the characteristics of the
weapon that permit full automatic fire. ATF has also held that the “designed” definition includes those
weapons which have not previously functioned as machineguns but possess design features which
facilitate full automatic fire by simple modification or elimination of existing component parts. ATF has
published rulings concerning specific firearms classified as machineguns based on this interpretation of
the term “designed.”15
Included within the definition of machinegun is any part designed and intended solely and exclusively,
or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun. This
portion of the machinegun definition addresses what are commonly referred to as conversion kits. The
“any part designed and intended solely and exclusively” language refers to a part that was produced for
no other reason than to convert a weapon into a machinegun. Illustrated below are examples of such
parts.
conversion sear for H&K semiautomatic firearms
Drop in Auto Sear for AR15 type semiautomatic firearms
The above parts are designed solely and exclusively for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun
and are classified as machineguns.
15 Appendix B (ATF Rulings 82-2, 82-8, 83-5)
12
The “combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun”
language refers to a group of parts designed and intended to be used in converting a weapon into a
machinegun. A typical example is those M2 carbine parts that are only used to permit fully automatic
fire in a US Carbine M1 or M2.

[Bob Womack]

Well, ya know, this was never about M1As or Garands or M14s and it has meandered a bit so I'm gonna stick it over in the GunTalk section for safe-keeping. Play on!

Bob

[Carl R]

Both the M14 rifle and M2 carbine were designed to shoot full auto. They can't be un-designed to semi-auto so they will always be "machineguns."

An M-14 can't be "undesigned" but it could be modified to render it impossible to shoot full auto and no more easily convertible to full auto than an M1A. Based on what I can recall from basic training 40 years ago: remove all the full auto linkage, cut off the selector switch lug, and presto, you have an M1A. Is there anything else that would have to be done? Think of all cash the CMP could have raked in if that would have been permitted!! Carl

[n64atlas]

"An M-14 can't be "undesigned" but it could be modified to render it impossible to shoot full auto and no more easily convertible to full auto than an M1A. Based on what I can recall from basic training 40 years ago: remove all the full auto linkage, cut off the selector switch lug, and presto, you have an M1A. Is there anything else that would have to be done? Think of all cash the CMP could have raked in if that would have been permitted!! Carl[/QUOTE]

Getting back to the original topic about the M14 case; Modifying is what got Mike Kelly in trouble: The BATFE's case revolved around being able to put the lug back on, as the take down notch was still present along with a groove under the op rod track.
Here is link to part of the case facts:
US v. Kelly - Altlaw

[joem]

You can have a barrel shorter than 16" for a UZI and install it if you have a tax stamp.

[Jim K]

The "handful" of M2 carbine parts has to be specific parts, since it takes the entire "kit" to convert and M1 carbine to full auto. No single part or combination of parts short of the full number will do it. BATFE pretty much has to take that position, since many M1 carbines sold throught DCM were upgraded with some M2 parts, like M2 slides and trigger housings. The latter, by the way, is not one of the six "magic" parts.

Jim