A machine gun possession charge was dismissed by a district court in Kansas yesterday on 2A grounds. The court found that machine guns are clearly bearable arms, and in this case at least, the govt failed to show a historical tradition to justify their ban. - The Great Awakening

A machine gun possession charge was dismissed by a district court in Kansas yesterday on 2A grounds. The court found that machine guns are clearly bearable arms, and in this case at least, the govt failed to show a historical tradition to justify their ban. (twitter.com)

posted 92 days ago by winn 92 days ago by winn +171 / -0

51 comments

51 comments share save hide report block hide replies

You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.

Comments (51)

sorted by:

▲ 1 ▼

– SvixGale 1 point 91 days ago +1 / -0

Great catch! I'm pretty sure the NFA has "constructive possession"allowances, which means if you even own a PART of a "machine gun" - such as a Glock switch, auto-sear, or heaven forbid, an actual full-auto receiver (say an M16 receiver, even if it was stripped to just bare metal); merely possessing that item is an NFA violation.

Same as if you possessed a tube & washers; in the eyes of the ATF, you CLEARLY are trying to construct a suppressor. 🙄

Again; that's just my understanding & I could be mistaken..... but it would explain the case; maybe he had the glock switch in the same bag as his .300?

However, it is a totally egregious & inexcusable error for the court to call the Andersen a "machine gun" if it wasn't actually, and if the case is more about the glock switch.

Oh, BTW: can anyone remind me how many gang members have faced life in prison because of these switches?