Is this what “Assault Weapon” bans do to transferable MACs?

[cjsoccer3]

“Connecticut Legal”

https://www.machineguncentral.com/ViewDetails.aspx?p=2196--1ea50ea4-4b96-4044-a8b0-f47f6f63ae2f

 

[Vegas SMG]

Nope, that’s just gross stupidly.
Remove the trip and replace the selector with a PS selector delete. You could even grind the selector lever off and tack weld the pin to the inside of the receiver to prevent easily installing the select fire components.

 

[Eric]

Yeah, it would seem there would be a better way to comply with Connecticut's state law that allows "machine guns" but since 1993 has generally banned "assault weapons" which "select fire" falls into that latter category.

https://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/rpt/2013-R-0050.htm

ASSAULT WEAPONS (copied from https://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/rpt/2013-R-0001.htm )

The law defines an “assault weapon” as (1) any selective-fire firearm capable of fully automatic, semiautomatic, or burst fire at the user's option; (2) any of a list of named firearms; or (3) any unlisted semi-automatic rifle or pistol that can accept a detachable magazine and has at least two of specified features; or (4) a part or combination of parts designed or intended to convert a firearm into an assault weapon (CGS § 53-202a).

By law, with limited exceptions, it is illegal for anyone to (1) possess assault weapons, unless he or she possessed the weapon before October 1, 1993, registered it with DESPP before October 1, 1994, and received a DESPP certificate of possession for it, or (2) sell, give, transfer, distribute, or transport assault weapons (CGS § 53-202b and 53-202d). Illegal possession of an assault weapon is a class D felony, with a mandatory minimum one-year prison term. A first-time violation is a class A misdemeanor (see Table 2) if the violator can prove that he or she possessed the weapon before October 1, 1993 and otherwise complies with the law (CGS § 53-202c). Illegally transferring or carrying an assault weapon is a class C felony (see Table on Penalties), with a two-year mandatory minimum prison term or, in the case of transfers to people under age 18, an additional six-year mandatory minimum (CGS § 53-202b).

 

[A&S Conversions]

During the National Assault Weapons Ban (September '94 - September 2004) effected magazines of a capacity greater than 10 rounds. So only Law Enforcement/Government Agencies or FFL holders could purchase or possess magazines of high capacity. New high capacity magazines were marked as such. I remember Colt 9mm subgun 32 rd mags had a market value of around $120 each. As I recall Uzi 32 rd mags were around $35 each.

Machineguns themselves were not effected by the NAWB. But a machinegun would not be so much fun without high capacity magazines. That is why some M11/NINE guns were converted to use Sten mags, as those were easier to find and relatively cheap.

Scott

 

[boomer535]

There are grandfathered machineguns in Canada, but they are limited to 10 round magazines.

 

[root]

There are grandfathered machineguns in Canada, but they are limited to 10 round magazines.

Ya grandfathered.
Since 1976 no transfers and destroyed upon owners death.

There is a really good article on how they are treated up north in "KOKALIS ON MACHINE GUNS" printed by SHOT GUN NEWS.

A&S I remember how much mags were then.
Ya the 94 omnibus crime bill is what made me a magaholic. Some mags back then were more cash then the guns.
And a Company called USA MAGAZINES seemed to have a warehouse endless supply full of NOS, of all types of mags that magically went away when the ban ended.

But ya Connecticut needs to be FA only. I think there is one other state like that also not sure though.

Rich

 

[Gaujo]

It doesn't matter anyway because were you to be in CT and legally acquire this gun, you as a new owner would not be able to acquire or register any new magazines beyond 10rds. They've effectively killed mg ownership in CT.

I know this because when I was in the region I wanted to go shoot a mg shoot they hold, but couldn't because I couldn't bring in magazines

 

[Pipelinen]

Nope, that’s just gross stupidly.
Remove the trip and replace the selector with a PS selector delete. You could even grind the selector lever off and tack weld the pin to the inside of the receiver to prevent easily installing the select fire components.

That was definitely a “Hold my beer and watch your eyes” moment. Nothing like learning to tig weld on a transferable machine gun.

 

[Mackjack]

Could be that some local yokel law enforcement made someone do it... You just never know. So many circumstances are possible. I kinda doubt it was done for no reason.

 

[strobro32]

 

[woodenword]

One of these days it will be worth what they are asking...

 

[Fishman]

At least they welded the selector on 'full' instead of 'semi'

 

[Villafuego]

Wow....that's hideous....

What sort of nimrod would have thought that was the best way to accomplish that.....bonus points for vaporizing the front selector stop nub.....

Unless you are the kinda person that would "fix" that with a dremel and some Duracoat, I'd say that's a 5K gun......and I wouldn't even buy it for that....

 

[cjsoccer3]

Can anyone familiar with that area say if the weld was because it was purchased after the ban? Or you had to weld just to keep it?

 

[boomer535]

Hopefully when Ginsberg gets replaced there will be enough for the Supreme Court to overturn the stupid assault weapon and magazine bans that are in the more liberal States.

 

[Mackjack]

How about overturn all 2nd amendment violations....

 

[john-g]

How about overturn all 2nd amendment violations....

I’ll 2nd that
Pun intended ��

 

[Andrapos]

Can anyone familiar with that area say if the weld was because it was purchased after the ban? Or you had to weld just to keep it?

It was probably welded due to a lack of understanding how to comply with CT law. Remove the trip & throw it away. Put the gun back together and it is full-auto only. Compliant.