Legal homemade machine guns?

[skippythwndrdog]

Aside from the fact that Stewart is a dirtbag for being a convicted felon possessing firearms, this case can have some widespread effects.

Evidently, if it takes more than just hammering parts together, you can assemble your own machine gun in the 9th district unless it's prohibited by the laws of the state in which you live. Evidently you can't transfer it to another or take it across state lines, but according to the ruling a homemade machine gun for personal use is fine with the 9th Circuit.

<snip>"We start by considering the first and fourth prongs of the Morrison test, as we have deemed them the most important. See McCoy, 323 F.3d at 1119. The first prong is not satisfied here. Possession of a machinegun is not, without more, economic in nature. Just like the statute struck down in Lopez, section 922(o) “is a criminal statute that by its terms has nothing to do with ‘commerce’ or any sort of economic enterprise, however broadly one might define those terms.” Lopez, 514 U.S at 561. Unlike in Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942), where growing wheat in one’s backyard could be seen as a means of saving money that would otherwise have been spent in the open market, a homemade machinegun may be part of a gun collection or may be crafted as a hobby. Or it may be used for illegal purposes. Whatever its intended use, without some evidence that it will be sold or transferred—and there is none here—its relationship to interstate commerce is highly attenuated.

"Moreover, the regulation itself does not have an economic purpose: whereas the statute in Wickard was enacted primarily to control the market price of wheat, id. at 115, there is no evidence that section 922(o) was enacted to regulate commercial aspects of the machinegun business. More likely, section 922(o) was intended to keep machineguns out of the hands of criminals—an admirable goal, but not a commercial one." . . .

"This case fails Morrison’s other requirements as well.

"As we stated earlier, section 922(o) contains no jurisdictional element anchoring the prohibited activity to interstate commerce. Congress also failed to make any legislative findings when it enacted the statute. While neither Lopez nor Morrison requires Congress to make findings every time it passes a law under its Commerce Clause power, the Supreme Court did note the importance of findings where—as here—such findings would “enable to evaluate the legislative judgment that the activity in question substantially affected interstate commerce, even though no such substantial effect was visible to the naked eye.” Lopez, 514 U.S. at 563."



http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/9th/0210318p.pdf

[MrBenchley]

1. So homemade machine guns are a possibility

but America doesn't have to worry that assault weapons can be converted to full auto....

Hokay.

[skippythwndrdog]

2. According to the ruling

It requires more than simply assembling parts. Skill in machining and modification must be used to assemble it legally under this ruling.

As the opinion reads, it will alomst take a gunsmith to do it.

[Romulus]

3. this was interesting:

from pg.16065
On some of the machineguns, the trigger
was “quite different” from “an ordinary Sten gun trigger.” Id.
at 561. The ATF chief testified that “(t)he only time (he’d)
ever seen . . . this (type of mechanism was) in conjunction
with (a) . . . . single-shot rifle.” Id. at 561-62.

So, obviously, the scope of the "assault weapons" definition needs to be broadened to single shot-rifles . . .

[slackmaster]

4. You'd have to start with raw stock for literally every part

It would definitely take a gunsmith or skilled machinist to do this. Even a screw or rivet or spring made in another state or country would put you in the realm of interstate commerce.

Most states have their own laws that would cover homebuilt machineguns. The ruling is irrelevant by itself, but it does show the degree to which the federal government's power to regulate interstate commerce has been stretched.

[skippythwndrdog]

6. I would even be wary of using parts

that were not designed for firearms if they were made in another state - if I had the skills to do it and were inclined to do so - and it was legal in my state within the 9th District.

[-..__...]

12. A lot would have to do with the complexity of the NFA item involved.

Rolling your own MP-5, FN P-90 or Thompson would require the talents of a highly skilled machinist and well equipped work shop. OTOH, manufacturing ones own fully functional Sten or full-auto MAC 10/11 could probably be built with minimal machine shop skills and equipment (hence the beauty of the simplicity of the designs).

Keeping in mind that the courts ruling requires that all parts be manufactured in the State of ownership...

Probably the most difficult undertaking of both approaches (complex or simple), would be manufacturing the magazines... gun can't shoot if you can't feed it.

[mosin]

15. I don't believe the ruling...

was that restrictive, that every individual tiny subpart had to be manufactured in the state. Those were not the facts as presented in the case.

Second, I'm not sure that "most" states have laws that would cover homebuilt machine guns. Ohio certainly does not.

Third, the ruling doesn't invalidate the NFA, so you'd still have to file the proper form (Form 1) and pay the tax to legally build a homemade machine gun. I heard that at least a few enterprising individuals did file Form 1, but I never heard the ATF's response.

Fourth, it was a non-representative 9th circuit panel, with two of the Second Amendment friendly justices. The guy lucked out. Whether other 9th circuit panels would respect the decision is highly doubtful.

[UNIXcock]

13. Dude WTF?

Not even a fair comparison. Back off. Just because you have a vagina doesn't make you a whore does it?

[snippy]

5. It is legal to own a machine gun if certain requirements are met.

From an online gun dealer:

It is a common misconception that machine guns cannot be owned by law-abiding citizens. This comes from the creation of a variety of confusing laws that have made purchasing a full-auto gun more difficult than purchasing a "normal" gun. But, you can comply with the law and own a machine gun.

. . .

To purchase a transferable machine gun, you must meet certain requirements (generally the same as when you purchase another gun), fill out special paperwork (called a 'form 4'), and pay a $200, one-time, transfer tax. Every time a machine gun is transferred, the $200 tax must be paid-- usually by the purchaser. The steps to take to purchase a transferable machine gun are:

Find a dealer locally who can assist you in all phases of the transfer. This should go beyond helping you fill out the paperwork: they should help you locate the gun if it isn't in stock and allow you to shoot the gun while your paperwork is being processed by the BATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms). It will usually take 4-6 weeks for the dealer to get the gun from another dealer if they don't already have it in stock (due to BATF paperwork delays).

Get your fingerprints (either by a police dept. or by a qualified fingerprinter, two imprints are needed) and two passport sized pictures taken. These will be used to perform a comprehensive criminal background check on you.

Have your local dealer help you fill out an "Application for Tax Paid Transfer And Registration Of Firearm" for, known as a "form 4".

You must have the signature of the Chief Law Enforcement (CLEO) officer that has jurisdiction over the municipality in which you live on the form 4. This could be the City Chief or the County Sheriff, for example. This is usually not a problem-- in machine gun friendly states.

The form 4, CLEO signature, 2 fingerprint cards, 2 pictures, and a $200 check (your one-time transfer tax) must all be mailed to the BATF and an approved tax stamp returned before you may take possession of the gun. This may take anywhere from 2 to 5 months.

Although it may seem complicated, we are happy to help you through every step in the process. We have transferable guns in stock, and if we don't have it, we can tap into a network of dealers in other states to find it for you. Let us help you get the full-auto gun that you've always wanted-- they are worth it!

How about Suppressors or Short-Barreled Shotguns? Yes you probably can! (Most of the same restrictions apply).

http://www.impactguns.com/library/legalities/caniown.htm

This site also features this statement in a drop down menu:

Destructive Devices-coming soon

[Romulus]

7. number one being "no felony convictions" (n/t)

[skippythwndrdog]

8. Thanks for the post

Those issues are well-known here in the Gungeon. The issue here is home made, read also as post-FOPA, full autos.

[FrontPorchPhilosophr]

9. There Was a Related Ruling In the 3rd District, I Believe....

Tthe individual accessed the ATF website and printed off the appropriate forms, completed them and sent them, with the appropariate fees to the ATF with notification of intent to manufacture for personal use.

The ruling stated that as "interstate commerce" was NOT involved, AND then individual had made a "good faith" attempt to comply with the necessary regulations, that he could NOT be convicted of the offense with which he was charged.

Essentially, in the 3rd Circuit (this was an Ohio case), you CAN manufacture a Class III weapon for personal use, providing you file the appropriate paperwork, pay the tax stamp, and so forth. You cannot transfer it in any way to any other individual and it's status as a "post 89 manufactured" item is questionable upon the death of the regristree, but....

This occurred during the "Clinton years" and the Janet Reno DoJ deliberately chose NOT to appeal to the Supremes and risk "Miller." so the decision stands, but ONLY in the 3rd Circuit.

:hippie:

[happyslug]

10. You may have your Circuits mixed up

Ohio is in the Fourth Circuit, Pennsylvania, New Jersey Delaware and the Virgin Islands are the only "States" in the Third Circuit.

[mosin]

14. Ohio is in the Sixth Circuit...

along with Kentucky, Michigan, and Tennessee. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals is in the federal courthouse in downtown Cincinnati.

I don't know the Third or Fourth Circuit states off the top of my head.

[-..__...]

11. Where there's a will, there's a way.

"You must have the signature of the Chief Law Enforcement (CLEO) officer that has jurisdiction over the municipality in which you live on the form 4. This could be the City Chief or the County Sheriff, for example. This is usually not a problem-- in machine gun friendly states".

If the CLEO is an asshat there are other options:

"A certificate of the local chief of police, sheriff of the county, head of the State police, State or local district attorney or prosecutor, or such other person whose certificate may in a particular case be acceptable to the Director, shall be completed on each copy of the Form 4 (Firearms). The certificate shall state that the certifying official is satisfied that the fingerprints and photograph accompanying the application are those of the applicant and that the certifying official has no information indicating that the receipt or possession of the firearm would place the transferee in violation of State or local law or that the transferee will use the firearm for other than lawful purposes.

As a general rule, the following can sign:

* Chief of Police for your town
* Sheriff for your county
* Chief of state police for your state
* District Attorney for your area
* Prosecutor for your area
* State Attorney General for your state
* Judges for your state, with some limitations
* Head of state Fish & Game Department as CLEO for wildlife issues
* Anyone who has been delegated the authority to sign for one of the above".

Source

And failing in getting any of those signatures; there's always the "incorporation" option... no fingerprints, mug shot or sign-off required. B-)

Down side... if the "corporation" is dissolved, you must relinquish ownership of the NFA items in question. :(