Today's paper had an AP story saying that the 9th ciruit court of appeals
overturned a conviction for possesion of machine guns on the basis that they
were homemade and had never been in the stream of commerce. Since there had
never been a transfer nor sale of the weapons or their parts, Congress didn't
have the power under the Commerce Clause to regulate homemade guns crafted from
scratch.
State laws still apply.
Wonder if this applies to artillery and barrel length, etc?

Wonder if this applies to artillery and barrel length, etc?

If it uses black powder and loads from the muzzle there are very few
restrictions. Anything over a .50 caliber in modern powders is under tighter
regulations. To sell a gun made in your own shop would require all kinds of
different permits from several agencies probably. The NRA/ILA website probably
has links to these laws and regulations.
Dennis

On 15 Nov 2003 04:07:49 GMT, (Toolie002) wrote:

Today's paper had an AP story saying that the 9th ciruit court of appeals
overturned a conviction for possesion of machine guns on the basis that they
were homemade and had never been in the stream of commerce. Since there had
never been a transfer nor sale of the weapons or their parts, Congress didn't
have the power under the Commerce Clause to regulate homemade guns crafted from
scratch.
State laws still apply.
Wonder if this applies to artillery and barrel length, etc?

Got a link?

Gunner



"By calling attention to 'a well regulated militia', the 'security' of the
nation, and the right of each citizen 'to keep and bear arms', our founding
fathers recognized the essentially civilian nature of our economy. Although
it is extremely unlikely that the fears of governmental tyranny which gave
rise to the Second Amendment will ever be a major danger to our nation, the
Amendment still remains an important declaration of our basic
civilian-military relationships, in which every citizen must be ready to
participate in the defense of his country. For that reason, I believe the
Second Amendment will always be important."
-- Senator John F. Kennedy, (D) 1960

On 15 Nov 2003 04:07:49 GMT, (Toolie002) wrote:

Today's paper had an AP story saying that the 9th ciruit court of appeals
overturned a conviction for possesion of machine guns on the basis that they
were homemade and had never been in the stream of commerce. Since there had
never been a transfer nor sale of the weapons or their parts, Congress didn't
have the power under the Commerce Clause to regulate homemade guns crafted from
scratch.
State laws still apply.
Wonder if this applies to artillery and barrel length, etc?

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/90B5FFB18A092A6F88256DDD000000FE/$file/0210318.pdf?openelement


"By calling attention to 'a well regulated militia', the 'security' of the
nation, and the right of each citizen 'to keep and bear arms', our founding
fathers recognized the essentially civilian nature of our economy. Although
it is extremely unlikely that the fears of governmental tyranny which gave
rise to the Second Amendment will ever be a major danger to our nation, the
Amendment still remains an important declaration of our basic
civilian-military relationships, in which every citizen must be ready to
participate in the defense of his country. For that reason, I believe the
Second Amendment will always be important."
-- Senator John F. Kennedy, (D) 1960

Once again it becomes extremely apparent that we are much more in need of a
well regulated ATF than we are of regulating firearms. Just think of all the
expenses involved with a case like this just due to some idiot ATF agent.

A buddy and I bought some of our machinery from a fellow (60 years of age)
that came into conflict with the ATF because he was rebuilding parts for the
mini-guns(these parts were only being sold to the US government). This man had
been convicted of a minor felony 40+ years before this. NOTHING this man was
in possesion(owner of) of or rebuilding involved any restricted parts due to
the fact he was a felon. None the less the ATF took notice of his business and
spent 2 years undercover to entice him under the guise of being purchasing
agents for the military to demonstrate his rebuilt parts on a functioning
mini-gun. This mans brother was and still is a registered machine gun owner
and he purchased the rest of a mini-gun offshore and had it (legally) brought
into the US. While at a government range testing the mini-gun with their
reconditioned parts installed one of the range personel kept urging this man to
"go ahead and give it a try". The instant he touched the gun he was arrested
by the ATF agents who were posing as the range personel. Two years and
millions of dollars in the making of a case that effected no one but this man
and our government to which they had already sold over 300,000.00 dollars in
parts to already. I don't know the entire outcome of the case other than he
was convicted on 6 counts of felony possesion of a firearm by a felon. Each
count is worth 10 years in prison.
It would sure look to me that with this case they have an excellent case for
appeal as due to only the US government being the only buyer of their parts
they were in no way affecting interstate commerce by increasing the demand for
a controlled item. ...

tim

And lo, it came about, that on 15 Nov 2003 05:15:03 GMT in
rec.crafts.metalworking , (Gunluvver2) was inspired to
utter:

Wonder if this applies to artillery and barrel length, etc?

If it uses black powder and loads from the muzzle there are very few
restrictions. Anything over a .50 caliber in modern powders is under tighter
regulations. To sell a gun made in your own shop would require all kinds of
different permits from several agencies probably. The NRA/ILA website probably
has links to these laws and regulations.

"Apparently" the Ninth ruled that if you make a machine-gun at home for
your _own_ use, _and_ you are not making a gun instead of purchasing one, then
you are not in violation of the interstate commerce catch-all clause excuse the
Feds use to regulate machin-gun manufacture.
Of course "Void where prohibited by law" still applies. Local (state and
city) laws may prohibit the manufacture of machine-guns, even if for personal
use on private property only.

Like the ruling that convicted felons are exempt from gun-registration
schemes (due to Constitutional protection against requiring self-incriminating
testimony), this does create "loopholes" and weird precedents. But it isn't
called the "Ninth Circus" for no reason.


tschus
pyotr

--
pyotr filipivich
The cliche is that history rarely repeats herself. Usually she just
lets fly with a frying pan and yells "Why weren't you listening
the first time!?"

--
"In any country there must be people who have to die. They are the
sacrifices any nation has to make to achieve law & order."

- Idi Dada Amin

"Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of
Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in
midstream. .and would have incurred incalculable human and political
costs. .We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect rule
Iraq. .There was no viable 'exit strategy' we could see. .Going in and
occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate,
would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression
that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United
States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile
land. It would have been a dramatically different -- and perhaps barren --
outcome."

- Elected President Bush


On 15 Nov 2003 04:07:49 GMT, (Toolie002) wrote:

Today's paper had an AP story saying that the 9th ciruit court of appeals
overturned a conviction for possesion of machine guns on the basis that
they
were homemade and had never been in the stream of commerce. Since there
had
never been a transfer nor sale of the weapons or their parts, Congress
didn't
have the power under the Commerce Clause to regulate homemade guns
crafted from
scratch.

Goddam Commie liberals!

Dan

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On 15 Nov 2003 04:07:49 GMT, (Toolie002) wrote:

Today's paper had an AP story saying that the 9th ciruit court of appeals
overturned a conviction for possesion of machine guns on the basis that
they
were homemade and had never been in the stream of commerce. Since there
had
never been a transfer nor sale of the weapons or their parts, Congress
didn't
have the power under the Commerce Clause to regulate homemade guns
crafted from
scratch.
State laws still apply.
Wonder if this applies to artillery and barrel length, etc?

Got a link?

Gunner

Careful, now. You might wind up saying the *second* good thing you've ever
said about the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, after once starting an entire
thread fuming over its decisions, which you titled "Gotta love you
liberals". g It may just turn out that the "liberal" courts are really
your best friends, when it comes to defending individual rights against the
feds.

Two brownie points if you remember the first...

Ed Huntress

(Gunluvver2) wrote in message ...
Wonder if this applies to artillery and barrel length, etc?

If it uses black powder and loads from the muzzle there are very few
restrictions. Anything over a .50 caliber in modern powders is under tighter
regulations. To sell a gun made in your own shop would require all kinds of
different permits from several agencies probably. The NRA/ILA website probably
has links to these laws and regulations.
Dennis

Oddly enough, so does the ATF website.

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 00:48:55 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Gunner

Careful, now. You might wind up saying the *second* good thing you've ever
said about the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, after once starting an entire
thread fuming over its decisions, which you titled "Gotta love you
liberals". g It may just turn out that the "liberal" courts are really
your best friends, when it comes to defending individual rights against the
feds.

Two brownie points if you remember the first...

Ed Huntress

Chuckle..Ed...given it is the most reversed court in the land..Id have
to say that this decision follows under the "even a blind robin gets a
worm now and again" category. And yes, I recall the thread. G

Gunner

"The Democratic Party is the party of this popular corruption.
The heart of the Democratic Party and its activist core is
made up of government unions, government dependent professions
(teachers, social workers, civil servants); special interest and
special benefits groups (abortion rights, is a good example) that
feed off the government trough; and ethnic constituencies, African Americans
being the most prominent, who are disproportionately invested in government jobs
and in programs that government provides.

" The Democratic Party credo is 'Take as much of the people's money as politically feasible,
and use that money to buy as many of the people's votes as possible'.
Tax cuts are a threat to this Democratic agenda.
Consequently, Democrats loathe and despise them." -Semi-reformed Leftist David Horowitz

It follows that if homebuilt machine guns are legal so are homebuilt
silencers.

--
free men own guns - slaves don't
www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/

"Nick Hull" wrote in message
...
It follows that if homebuilt machine guns are legal so are homebuilt
silencers.

--
free men own guns - slaves don't
www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/

Be careful. A close reading of the ruling shows why the man in question was
exempt from application of 922 (o) - oddly, that he was already a felon.
This meant that his home manufacture of machineguns did not reduce the
demand for machineguns, because "As a convicted felon, Stewart would have
been highly unlikely to obtain federal license authorizing him to purchase a
machinegun in the heavily regulated market for such commodities." (page 11)

Had he not been a felon already, his manufacture of machineguns would have
by the same reasoning *might* have "reduced the demand" for machineguns in
interstate commerce and thus fallen into the purview of 922(o). For an
example statute, see Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111. This conclusion is
not as clear cut as the one above.

As I am not an attorney this should be taken as only my best guess.

Also note that Stewart did *not* get off, as the court affirmed his
conviction for felony possession of a firearm.

StaticsJason

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 09:18:41 -0500, Nick Hull
wrote:

It follows that if homebuilt machine guns are legal so are homebuilt
silencers.


ooooooh!...I like the way you think!!

Gunner

"The Democratic Party is the party of this popular corruption.
The heart of the Democratic Party and its activist core is
made up of government unions, government dependent professions
(teachers, social workers, civil servants); special interest and
special benefits groups (abortion rights, is a good example) that
feed off the government trough; and ethnic constituencies, African Americans
being the most prominent, who are disproportionately invested in government jobs
and in programs that government provides.

" The Democratic Party credo is 'Take as much of the people's money as politically feasible,
and use that money to buy as many of the people's votes as possible'.
Tax cuts are a threat to this Democratic agenda.
Consequently, Democrats loathe and despise them." -Semi-reformed Leftist David Horowitz

It follows that if homebuilt machine guns are legal so are homebuilt
silencers.


ooooooh!...I like the way you think!!


Damn, and to think I was just going to scale up those plans for a .22 Gattling
gun to a .50 BMG with a silencer{s}. ****, I miss out on all the fun.....
Ron
Anyone have a mile tract to sight it in?

The gatling gun isn't a machinegun unless it's powered so I'd go for it.
Just make sure to hand crank it. Without the silencer of course.
Karl

"RKurtz" wrote in message
...
It follows that if homebuilt machine guns are legal so are homebuilt
silencers.


ooooooh!...I like the way you think!!


Damn, and to think I was just going to scale up those plans for a .22
Gattling
gun to a .50 BMG with a silencer{s}. ****, I miss out on all the
fun.....
Ron
Anyone have a mile tract to sight it in?


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.538 / Virus Database: 333 - Release Date: 11/10/03

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 11:49:49 GMT, "Karl Vorwerk"
wrote:

The gatling gun isn't a machinegun unless it's powered so I'd go for it.
Just make sure to hand crank it. Without the silencer of course.
Karl

Can you cite a reg or link? Your comment got me to thinking (no, it
didn't take a week. I've been on vacation).

This may have been hashed before. I'm just curious about the following
and how they relate.

Electric motor with lobe to strike trigger on semi-auto.

Mechanism to pull triggers on multiple semi-autos at one time.

Remote trigger via electric solenoid. Which is then the trigger; The
one your finger is on or the one the solenoid is pressing? If it is
via flex cable rather than electric? Radio controlled?

In article ,
says...
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 11:49:49 GMT, "Karl Vorwerk"
wrote:

The gatling gun isn't a machinegun unless it's powered so I'd go for it.
Just make sure to hand crank it. Without the silencer of course.
Karl

Can you cite a reg or link? Your comment got me to thinking (no, it
didn't take a week. I've been on vacation).

This may have been hashed before. I'm just curious about the following
and how they relate.

Electric motor with lobe to strike trigger on semi-auto.

Mechanism to pull triggers on multiple semi-autos at one time.

Remote trigger via electric solenoid. Which is then the trigger; The
one your finger is on or the one the solenoid is pressing? If it is
via flex cable rather than electric? Radio controlled?




insert usual disclaimer

The standard that used to be applied was no more than one shot without
additional user input.

Electric motor, (powered Gatling, chain gun, or trip cam for a semi), is
a machine gun.

Manual, (conventional Gatling, Calico or BMF activator), is not a machine
gun.

Remote trigger is OK as long as you still have to manually trip it for
each shot. (Set it up so the bolt handle of the semi hits the button
during the last of it's forward travel and you have a machine gun.)

Keep in mind that the BATF interprets the rules as they go along and that
they have NO obligation to decide grey areas in your favor. Best advice
I can give is to check with them in advance, and get their opinion in
writing. It won't keep them from reversing themselves a week later but
will show you made a good faith effort to stay legal.

Later,
Joe

(TSJABS) wrote in message ...

snippage
I don't know the entire outcome of the case other than he was convicted
on 6 counts of felony possesion of a firearm by a felon. Each count is
worth 10 years in prison.

It's interesting to see how they bring the interstate commerece thing
into the picture to make it a federal case. My wife was recently on
jury duty in federal court. The case was a small-time crook who was
charged with being a convicted felon in possision of a firearm. They
actually charged him with possessing the ammo - the gun was made in
the same state, but the ammo was made out of state, so they could call
it interstate commerce and charge him under the much stiffer fed laws.

I don't have any sympathy for the guy - he was a bad guy and a moron.
He got caught because he nearly hit a police car (he was drinking),
while driving on a suspended license, in a car with stolen plates,
with a bag of suspicious tools (crowbar, icepick, ski mask, etc) in
the back and a gun (and ammo) he isn't allowed to own (three prior
felonies) in the front.

John Kasunich

On 26 Nov 2003 10:16:06 -0800, (John Kasunich)
wrote something
.......and in reply I say!:

He was going bear hunting in the mountains?

I don't have any sympathy for the guy - he was a bad guy and a moron.
He got caught because he nearly hit a police car (he was drinking),
while driving on a suspended license, in a car with stolen plates,
with a bag of suspicious tools (crowbar, icepick, ski mask, etc) in
the back and a gun (and ammo) he isn't allowed to own (three prior
felonies) in the front.

John Kasunich

************************************************** ** sorry
remove ns from my header address to reply via email

Imagine a _world_ where Nature's lights are obscured
by man's. There would be nowhere to go.
Or wait a while. Then you won't have to imagine.