The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post - OK, what's the deal with these shotgun news ads?

James K · May 10, 2006, 06:01 PM

Hi, UniversalFrost,

Yes, a carbine marked M2 is considered a machinegun even if it has no M2 parts and cannot fire full automatic. But either there was a misunderstanding or BATFE gave the wrong reason. It is not because it can be converted to a machinegun (any M1 carbine can be with the proper parts) but because it was "designed as" a machinegun. The proof that it was "designed as" a machinegun is the M2 marking, as all carbines marked "M2" were originally designed and made as machineguns.

If BATFE said in the charging documents or in an official statement that the carbine could be "readily converted" the owner might have a way of wriggling out of any charges, but the chances of getting the gun back are nil.

Prior to 1968, the law basically said that a machinegun was a gun that fired full auto. But Congress got upset about the DEWAT program (which ATTD instituted without a change in the law) and changed the definition of a machinegun to one "DESIGNED" to fire full auto, whether it could or not. This was the law that some folks express briefly as "once a machinegun always a machinegun."

So the M2 is a machinegun. Your friend can't argue with BATFE - his argument is with Congress.

Jim

May 10, 2006, 06:01 PM	#19
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	Hi, UniversalFrost, Yes, a carbine marked M2 is considered a machinegun even if it has no M2 parts and cannot fire full automatic. But either there was a misunderstanding or BATFE gave the wrong reason. It is not because it can be converted to a machinegun (any M1 carbine can be with the proper parts) but because it was "designed as" a machinegun. The proof that it was "designed as" a machinegun is the M2 marking, as all carbines marked "M2" were originally designed and made as machineguns. If BATFE said in the charging documents or in an official statement that the carbine could be "readily converted" the owner might have a way of wriggling out of any charges, but the chances of getting the gun back are nil. Prior to 1968, the law basically said that a machinegun was a gun that fired full auto. But Congress got upset about the DEWAT program (which ATTD instituted without a change in the law) and changed the definition of a machinegun to one "DESIGNED" to fire full auto, whether it could or not. This was the law that some folks express briefly as "once a machinegun always a machinegun." So the M2 is a machinegun. Your friend can't argue with BATFE - his argument is with Congress. Jim