Is this true about NFA firearms?

[Armybrat]

It is my understanding that since the NFA Act of 1934 there have been approximately 240,000 privately owned fully automatic functioning firearms legally registered with the federal government, and in the 79 years since then only three (3) have been used to commit crimes. Further research showed that two of those crimes were committed by police officers.

[csmsss]

I have heard the same thing, but do not have a cite.

[JimDandy]

Since 1934, there appear to have been at least two homicides committed with legally owned automatic weapons. One was a murder committed by a law enforcement officer (as opposed to a civilian). On September 15th, 1988, a 13-year veteran of the Dayton, Ohio police department, Patrolman Roger Waller, then 32, used his fully automatic MAC-11 .380 caliber submachine gun to kill a police informant, 52-year-old Lawrence Hileman. Patrolman Waller pleaded guilty in 1990, and he and an accomplice were sentenced to 18 years in prison. The 1986 'ban' on sales of new machine guns does not apply to purchases by law enforcement or government agencies. That's the best I can find. I just find various amounts of the quote above around the internet. Roger Waller appears to be the only named defendant/perpetrator listed anywhere.

ETA Here is a story both detailing the crime, and reporting his parole hearing is/was due.

[Massan]

Well I guess this might need to be updated a bit. Last I heard Dorner used NFA items during his shootout.

[csmsss]

Well I guess this might need to be updated a bit. Last I heard Dorner used NFA items during his shootout.

Perhaps, perhaps not. Remember that among the first of his victims was a police officer. It's quite possible that Dorner took possession of her automatic rifle after he killed her. It's also possible that he took/stole an automatic rifle from LAPD while he was still a police officer.

[JimDandy]

I doubt the exemption for new purchases applies to private purchases of law enforcement officers, nor would they get to keep them after retirement, let alone being fired for cause.

According to this: commercial website California state NFA laws allow SBR's and SBS's. but it makes no mention of fully automatic firearms.

According to Wikipedia, again with a grain of salt, as the search isn't bringing up California law with enough ease to get there for me, Califonia appears to ban Title II weaponry.

[johnwilliamson062]

Those sources vary drastically on the Waller case.
I think the claim is Dorner used an SBR and suppressor, not a machinegun.
With all the inexplicable oddities of the Dorner case and blatant aggressiveness used in his pursuit, combined with LAPDs reputation, I doubt any rational person will ever be confident in any of the claims or evidence.

[carguychris]

Originally Posted by csmsss

It's quite possible that Dorner took possession of her automatic rifle after he killed her. It's also possible that he took/stole an automatic rifle from LAPD while he was still a police officer.

+1. Dorner claimed in his manifesto to own Class III weapons purchased through an out-of-state trust, and AFAIK he was found to be in possession of suppressors that were presumably legally purchased, but I have yet to see any definitive source (i.e. not a blog post or Wiki edit!) state that he ever possessed a properly registered and transferable NFA machine gun.

Given the press silence on this particular detail, I feel it's safe to presume, as csmsss stated, that his FA firearms were non-transferable and misappropriated.

Feel free to correct me, really, I'm curious.

Originally Posted by JimDandy

I doubt the exemption for new purchases applies to private purchases of law enforcement officers...

What exemption? There's no exemption for LEO's from the federal NFA. I believe there's a State of CA LEO exemption for suppressors specifically, but I could be wrong about this; I haven't researched it in depth.

[Librarian]

If one can get a 'machinegun permit', California does allow fully automatic weapons to non-LEO.

Practically, one needs to be a prop-supplier to the movie industry or otherwise 'connected' to get such a permit.

[JimDandy]

What exemption?

The exemption for "new purchases" from the factory so to speak. As I understand it, the registry is not closed to government law enforcement.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

The NV shop that sold Dorner the SBR and suppressor verified that he did purchase those through them in a thread on Lightfighter. However, while those are NFA items, they are not machineguns, which is what I believe the OP was asking about.

[csmsss]

The exemption for "new purchases" from the factory so to speak. As I understand it, the registry is not closed to government law enforcement.

True, but that is only to law enforcement agencies, not to individual officers. LEO's by law are required to turn in their agency-issued NFA firearms upon termination of employment; however, how carefully this is monitored and enforced is unknown to me. I have a sneaking suspicion that there are any number of these automatic weapons circulating outside of the agencies which first acquired them.

[JimDandy]

Right. That's the point I was making.