Pistol Grips& Gun Accessories

• Today we start off with Gun Legislation & Politics in New York blogging their very own Mayor Bloomberg’s crusade (anti-gun, that is). It boggles the mind to think that this guy thinks he is a viable national candidate.
• mAss Backwards goes after the Boston Globe in Boston Globe Anti-Gun - Who Knew? and again in Do Boston Globe Editors Read the Globe?.
• Alphecca has posted his Weekly Check on the Bias but you probably already knew that.
• From the NRA:

1. States Allow Expanded Self-Defense
2. Remember New Orleans: Defenseless Decision
3. ATF Team To Target Atlanta`s Violence
4. Wisconsin: Carry Backers Work To Protect Privacy
5. NYC Mayor Bloomberg Thrusts Self Into Spotlight

• Of Arms & the Law brings us FLA bill on firearms in cars. Apparently it was flushed.
• In the department of 'Know your enemy' is Winning on issues: How to be a successful citizen lobbyist'. Consider a primer in Brady tactics. Hat tip to Of Arms & the Law.
• Pro-Gun Progressive tells us Why Does Gun Control Make This Progressive So Angry?.
• SayUncle talks about Women and guns. Not to be confused, it is about women with guns.
• SayUncle also brings us TN Gun law in the works. - Castle Doctrine
• For you NFA types the NFA Owners Association is moving to expand their effectiveness.
• And finally, SayUncle goes after the Chicago Tribune in More AWB lies.
• The Ten Ring says Massachusetts Bothers Me. Can't say as I blame him. As an alternative: 'Massachusetts, this is New Hampshire. Get out."
• The Volokh Conspiracy mentions Glenn Reynolds getting published in England in "Armed Against Genocide":.
• Since you are still reading, we will reward you with Of Arms & the Law discussing Second Amendment Wording with Don Kates.

Adam

tony

Mikus

There's a scary combination.

The root of the problem is this:

• 26 USC 5845(b) defines a machinegun as "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."
• 26 USC fails to define "designed to shoot".
• 26 USC fails to define "can be readily restored".

So, we are left with the ATF defining the pertinent terms.

Along came MKS Specialties who got a hold of some cut up M-14 receivers (perfectly legal). They take that scrap metal (of a certain, politically incorrect history and shape), weld together functional receivers, add a few parts and produce a semiautomatic firearm.

The BATFE jumped in and said the MKS M-14 is an NFA weapon by virtue of how they interpret the law. Under civil asset forfeiture law, they grabbed an MKS M-14 owned by William K. Alverson.

The BATFE claimed that, because the M-14 was originally designed to shoot automatically, the MKS M-14 was an NFA weapon.

Alverson responded with an expert who testified that it would take six hours to convert the weapon to full-auto operation. Unfortunately, the Eighth Circuit had already held that if you could convert a semiautomatic rifle in 8 hours in a fully equiped machine shop, the gun would qualify as an NFA weapon.

Alverson also argued the concept of 'restoration'.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit sided with the BATFE.

This brings up a world of questions. Amongst them:

• Is the Glock 19 (semi-auto) a derivative work of the Glock 18 (full-auto) making it an NFA weapon?
• Would the Glock 19 be an NFA weapon if you could convert it to full-auto within 2 hours and no new parts (you can)?

We would like to add that the government looks completely moronic when they name an inanimate object as a defendant in a law suit. To normal citizens (not lawyers) this behavior does not pass any sort of smell test. If the government wants to go down that road, shouldn't the object be given legal council? And what about a compentency test to see if the object understands the charges against it?

Hat tip to How Appealing.

Let me simply add that:

• I don't know how to make a Glock 19 full-auto.
• I have never attempted it.
• I have never seen it done.
• I have never even researched it.
• My information comes from a conversion with an Army amormer who said he had done it many times to government owned Glocks.
• I would never recommend anyone go down such a course of action.

Update: New information has come forward that says that the M14 recievers used by MKS were not demilled to the BATFE's specifications. If that were true, then the pieces were still considered NFA weapons before they were even welded back together. Possession of those pieces by MKS would have been a violation of the NFA.

There is also some disgruntlement over the handling of the situation by MKS and their business ethics. We do not pretend to know the history or wish to go further down this line.