An "Authorized Law Enforcement Officer" has been ordered by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division, to make an arrest in a machine gun case.
Guess who they're arresting?
Wrong. Not "who."
"What."
Seriously.
Here's how the warrant reads:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
VS .
ONE HISTORIC ARMS MODEL 54RCCS
"7 .62X54R CALIBER CONVERSION
SYSTEM" MACHINE GUN, SERIAL NO . V1, :
Defendant .
It's similar to a modern version of a deodand, although in this case, no one's ox cart has run over anyone. Still, a piece of property has offended our overlords, and for that, it must pay!
This despite the fact that the owner of said "machine gun," Historic Firearms, LLC President Len Savage, tried doing everything by the book in submitting a conversion part to ATF:
The dispute is over a part he submitted to the agency that he is proposing for an existing line of legal machine guns in the U.S. The part would convert the weapons to operate with ammunition that costs 1 or 2 cents per shell, instead of 25 cents or more...
Savage said he submitted the part to the BATFE, even though it technically was not a gun, and was stunned to get a response that not only was his repair part a gun, it was a machine gun, and he had only hours to "register" it properly.
How'd they come to that conclusion?
[A]ll it took was some metal, a length of chain, some duct tape and some plastic wire ties for the federal inspectors to make his gun part operate in that fashion, he said he was told.
Like this:
With that criteria, given enough added parts that are not part of the submitted design, I know a lot of people who could turn a banana into a machine gun.
Why are they doing this, especially since many other caliber conversion uppers exist that are not so classified? Will this area be revisited? Or is this payback for Savage testifying on behalf of David Olofson and in other cases?
Here's Savage's statement on this latest development:
I just got of the phone with Dahil Goss, Assistant United States Attorney from Northern District of Georgia. She has informed me that a complaint against the firearm I submitted to ATF's Firearms Technology Branch, who then then seized, has been filed.
I asked if a summons with attached complaint had been mailed or served upon me. She informed me that no in fact no attempt to serve me has been made. The arrest warrant has been issued for the firearm, she explained that it would take ATF 1-2 weeks to proceed with "legal fiction" [her term, not mine] and serve the arrest warrant on the firearm. She thought the arrest would occur in Martinsburg West Virginia at FTB, I was under the understanding that the firearm was in the ATF Atlanta office. I can only hope the firearm does not evade arrest if found in one place when going to arrest it in another?
I am told a copy of the complaint is available with the court clerk, Dahil Goss offered to send me a copy of the complaint, if I promised not to file anything on the case until I am served.
I will of course forward it when I receive it, your tax dollars at work...
Len has since sent both the complaint and the warrant to me, and I present download links to them below.
This is an unfolding issue (I've been reporting on it for six months), and I'll certainly return to it as things develop, as, I suspect, will a very few others who specialize in liberty-oriented journalism. It's a pity that you probably won't hear a word of this from most "mainstream" news organizations--you know, the "authorized journalist" government watchdogs we so rely on...
I'm sure they'll be right on top of ATF happenings under the hopeful changes of an Obama adminstration...
In the mean time, I'm going to give you some .pdf documents and some background information so you can more fully understand and better follow the issues at play here:
ATF correspondence (detailed): Download
The arrest warrant: Download
The complaint: Download
WorldNetDaily:"Gunmaker to feds: Make my day!"
WorldNetDaily: "Gunmaker to feds: Give me my firearm!"
Check out the latest from other Gun Rights Examiners:
Comments
Another example of government out of control. Taking an upper that has no receiver but just a part of a firearm. Then adding a bunch of stuff to it saying it has been converted into a full auto should be a crime. Is a warrant being issued for the BATFE employ/s who made a machine gun? My hunch is the government employ/s who made this machine gun and used a citizen's gun part as part of their machine gun are the only people in the country that know how to do such a thing. Clearly showing that they have used a skill of their own to make an unlawful machine gun. Clearly no one is above the law and these people need to be arrested for such an unlawful act once this machine gun of their making is arrested.
What next, someone gets their car impounded and some criminal cops take the car out of impoundment and rob a bank. Is the owner of the car going to get arrested for owning the get away car?
If this is an attempt to bankrupt Mr. Savage I have a hunch a lot of money will pour into his account for legal cost.
This is clearly bad business and serves no one.
The BATFE and Len Savage have been at war with each other for some time. Check the archives on the NFA Discussion Board at www.subguns.com. The BATFE is mad at him because he has testified against them in various federal gun cases, as others below have noted. Your tax dollars at work, indeed.
You would be correct Annony guy. Which means that by going after Mr. Savage to railroad him for having testified in a court of law, and lawfully at that. The government is trying to keep people from receiving a fair trial by making it so the defense has no experts to call.
For the government to engage in such conduct sends chills down my spine. If the American citizens lose the ability to have a fair court system, we have a very, very large problem. This is a case to keep a very close eye on and make sure everyone you know, knows about it.
I have always said the system is not perfect. Kowning sometimes an innocent gets convicted wrongly. But if the government is going to make it so people do get convicted wrongly. Thats a problem beyond anything government has pulled to date.
I bet the gun will be found not competent to stand trial. Or maybe it will get off with probabtion since it is underage.
I see no difference between what the BATF has done here and a street cop when he plants drugs on someone and arrests them. The only difference is one is an object while the other is a person.
And the ATF wants respect????????
David, my apologies for commandeering what I have heard you say oh so many times, but it somehow seems appropriate here:
Remember, they hate us because we're free.
The BATFE should now impound steel bar stock, lathes, drill presses, etc., because any competent machinist (or a determined individual with a file) could convert the bar stock into parts that could make a weapon automatic. In the case cited above, the list should also include duct tape and chain.
If I follow the ATF's logic, then any material that a person, using their imagination, is made to get any firearm to fire at least 2 shots per trigger pull. Now there are many rube-goldburg contraptions that can be invented to make even a single shot 'self load' and fire more than one round. I would think almost any material made by man, and nature!!, then could be used to make a 'machinegun'! Ah... so that's Obama's plan! The State owns everything!
ROTFL. No wonder I have so much trouble at the DMV, they are checking the arrest record of my vehicles. My motorcycle is wanted for being so darn fun. It's a fugitive and I'm harboring it in my garage. Don't tell anybody.
Another example of an agency gone astray . based on there example the FAA should be raiding houses and stomping cats for minor safety infractions. This type of action will continue in the foreseeable future. The best part is they approved a similar version of this and rescinded the approval 6 months later After a court case in which Len testified. They lost and got mad. This is the trampling of freedom in action. Tow the party line or face death by fire. The whole group should be shut down for being Nazi's
At its foundation, this is an assault upon the mind and creativity.
The BATF consists of uncultured, undisiplined, low-rent, perjuring, murdering, domestic terrorists. No more ; no less!
This is a clear case of the BATFE persecuting and exacting revenge against Len Savage for his expert witness testimony against them in other cases. Even the individual that BATFE has assigned to this case is the same individual BATFE agent Mr Savage testified as an expert witness against in a previous trial. The BATFE violates the law constantly and congress will not reel them in. I know, I invented the Akins accelerator rifle stock that allows a person to bumpfire their rifle within a stationary stock. The BATFE TWICE approved it for two years, then as soon as I started selling it (after thousands in start up costs), the BATFE changed their minds and declared it a machine gun even though it is not a firearm at all but just a stock and even though the original factory trigger functions once for each shot fired. My rifle stock case is under appeal in civil court. Congress has told BATFE to get a standardized, scientific, repeatable, written classification system in place to determine what is or is not a firearm and what is or is not a machine gun. But BATFE has not done so. The reason is because they want to be able to make up whatever ruling they want without any type of classification procedure other than the non scientific, arbitrary whims they currently use that creates situations where one manufacturer's item is approved by them, but another manufacturer's almost identical item is disallowed. The current classification system at BATFE's tech branch is not a system at all. It is political, arbitrary whim, and has no basis in repeatable, written, scientific standards.
It is not uncommon for the ATF to file complaints against individual guns. In fact, one of the more famous cases, one which dispelled the "once a machine gun, always a machine gun" myth was US vs One FAL Rifle. In that case the ATF got their butts handed to themby the judge.
For those who may read this and NOT know.
ATF has declared shoestrings as machine guns.
bobernet.com/blog/assets_c/52.c1674e1c71ab33adbd8b1fc6bfac26a11a7ddc67.jpg
One simple object with NO creativity or skill required. In that case IIRC the person who asked wanted to see how stupid they were. The ATF played along.
In this case, and many many others the ATF, with no written guidelines or procedures, do whatever they have to in order to determine it's a machine gun.
Normal citizens would think that actions could only be filed against people and not against inanimate objects, although I do remember CA. arresting some guys Ford tractor after he plowed over some endangered species. The BATFU is clearly out of control and has been for years. This is all about making Len's life miserable and nothing else. We need to be mailing out the three teabags. I hope everyone is buckled in for the next 4yrs.
The inmates are running the asylum.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and firearms is running amok. Their actions demonstrate, consistently, time and time again, that they lack a basic understanding of our language, our Constitution, and believe they are above the law. Of course, the agency is unconstitutional, anyway, which makes all employees thereof criminals. But this one takes the cake: They’re arresting ( and one assumes, prosecuting a metal part ! One which did not, in fact, commit any crime, until they made extensive modifications. Hmmm, can the metal part claim “entrapment” and that its' "confession" was "tortured"" out of it, thus making the charge null and void. Does a metal part have rights, and how will it get a fair trial, by a jury of its’ peers, in accordance with our over-arching primary laws?
Some things to consider:
Len's upper was a virtually unaltered fullauto PK receiver, with the rear end removed and altered to fit the MAC lower and the gas piston and gas tube shortened. Otherwise it was a factory PK receiver, read MG, with intact feed, FA bolt and carrier, recoil spring and only missing the fire control group. A minor effort with some hand tools and a rear end cap could be fixed, and the receiver was functional by retracting the bolt and letting it go. Mount a 100 round belt box to the bottom of the receiver where it attaches and one has a mini belt gun in 7.62X54R capable of 750 rpm and concealable. IMO, ATF, now under the purview of DOJ would never allow something like this to be produced in any quantity that might make it to the street. From the perspective of the gun culture, any crime committed with this type of weapon would weigh very heavily against the NFa community and the gun culture at large.
With some tubing, some metal, some pins and some bars, I could make a lever action .30-30 into a "machine gun."
Per Len in response to "More to it":
"I also was taken by the context of the message. My thought's are that this is someone in the industry who works closely with ATF and is given information. The information is ATF spin. Patently false, but close to the truth. Makes sense if you don't look to close.
'Len's upper was a virtually unaltered fullauto PK receiver.'
'Otherwise it was a factory PK receiver, read MG.'
The receiver was built new using parts from MAC parts of course. The feed, bolt carrier, and a significant portion of the receiver are from an ATF approved semiautomatic PKM. The PK feed system was used. Only the top cover and feed tray are PKT [tanker version].
'Mount a 100 round belt box to the bottom of the receiver where it attaches and one has a mini belt gun in 7.62X54R capable of 750 rpm and concealable.'
Way wrong answer. The receiver of my firearm is vastly different from a PK. In fact the entirety of the bottom fifty percent is completely different. No attachment points for boxes or ammo. Look at the pictures supplied by ATF. Not to mention he forgets to tell everybody there would be no way to hold the darned thing! There would be no way to stop it from firing once you pulled back the cocking handle. More of a danger to the shooter. Big fireballs come out of that thing [it is on you tube firing].
He is also forgetting there are several other uppers for the MAC family that ATF does not consider to even be a firearm. One carries 100 rounds of 9mm and fires at over 1200 rounds a minute [if rigged like ATF's test]. It's far more concealable, it's only about 12" long, has been available for years, and still no crime committed with one!!! Doesn't hold water.
This guy goes on about his opinion, that DOJ will never let something like this one the streets....Now we get to some meat...They don't 'Like' it. Lawful doesn't even enter into the calculation."
OMFG ROTFLMFAO Now the anti gun crowd are arresting inanamant objects. Did ATFE read it it Maranda Rights and did the judge set bail for it? ATFe has finally gone off the deepend. Thanks for printing this article! I needed a good laught! :)
Oh boy, the worthless BATF is at it again wasting the taxpayers money on unimportant nonsense. The brand new Kremlin on the Potomac will probably start a big investigation over this also.
This video, The Gang (put out by JPFO.org) should be required viewing for all gunowners.
This video, The Gang (put out by JPFO.org) should be required viewing for all gunowners.
With all the knee jerk responses to ATF's evil, all from people who haven't the slightest idea of what is at issue, it is finally good to hear the maker describe how the upper was manufactured. So that the readers of this forum might understand some of the complexity of this issue, please answer these questions. One of the comments below by the
maker is that the upper was fitted with MAC parts. What parts in the upper are MAC aside from the mounting hardware for the FA MAC lower? PKs fire from an open bolt, by the tower on the carrier hitting the firing. Does your system function the same way? Since you mention that the receiver is a semi-auto design, how is the firing pin activated using the semi auto internals but for FA operation with the MAC lower? I would assume it is hammer fired if the internals are from the semi-auto PK design. I have seen a picture of the ATF setup with the rear end of the receiver captured. Did ATF also add a hammer to fire the gun? It is apparent that the recoil spring is part of the upper, too, so how did the gun finre in ATF's harness if it is not designed with an ignition system similar to the standard PK design?
I was interested in your response that just holding the upper without any other means of hand grip would be dangerous. Adding one is easy, with all due respect. Anyway, some of the devices I've seen guys playing with that are homemade are truly inspiring and often without much in the way of support. Also, the fact that there is no box attachment is also not relevant. Belts don't have to be contained.
I would like some answers to these questions so I and others can get a better idea of what the design entails for better understanding of ATF's response as well as your responses.
I have no affiliation with ATF and own post-sample examples of PKs and also own many other NFA weapons. There has been no way to understand what the design is like until this forum has provoked the maker into addressing the design rumors and questions, so please help make some
sense of it so more rational opinions can be
forged. You will have mnore support for your cause if more of us n the NFA world can understand exactly what you sent to ATF and what they did to make it function as an MG upper.As far as ATF making regulations based on political assessments or issues of public safety, unfortunately that is part of their mandate. NFA '34 was specifically based on public safety issues. FWIW
OK, I got a response from Len on this. Let me say this is the last time I'm going to address this--first off, I've moved on to other stories and there isn't enough of me to keep going back to old posts and jumping every time the chain is yanked, and secondly, because the audience here is general, not even necessarily "gun people," and the tech stuff you guys are discussing are too detailed for most visitors to this forum. Here's his response. If you want to take this further, do it on a gun board.
--------------
Good question!!! Several things here.
"NFA" has obviously some real experience and his questions are certainly worthy of response. If for no other reason than nearly every point he brings up has been asked by the government at some point during my journey with this product and it's situation.
"So that the readers of this forum might understand some of the complexity of this issue, please answer these questions."
Before I go into his questions, lets lay out some facts that are self evident for those of us who own machineguns, like NFA:
* All lawfully registered MAC type machineguns are "OPEN BOLT" in operation, that is the bolt locks back during the cocking process, and stays locked back until the trigger is activated.
* The ATF recognizes the lower portion of this machinegun to be "the receiver". ATF considers the upper portion that contains the bolt, recoil system, and barrel [in some units the ammo feed system] to be "a gun part", not even a firearm.
* ALL replacement and caliber conversion uppers for the MAC family of machineguns are "OPEN BOLT" in operation.
* All of these without exception would fail the ATF's contrived test. Even the plain jane stock O.E.M. would fail. If I took the tape and ziptie route that ATF demonstrated in detail and put that on the stock unit, I have a zip gun, just as illegal, same prison kind of crime. It converted the upper into a firearm. This "test" will turn any upper that has a feed device into not only a firearm, but a machinegun. ATF in it's own documents [shoestring letter] state VERY clearly that the use of ordinary items to convert a firearm into full auto is unlawful, and the items when attached, that convert the firearm into a machingun, the items are themselves the definition a machinegun {26 USC 5845(b)"a collection of parts that is solely and exclusively used to make a firearm into a machinegun}. Thus the items not being used in an unlawful manner are just items...
* The definition of a firearm frame or receiver is located in the Code of Federal Regulations, 27 part 478.11 "That part of the firearm which provides housing for the hammer, bolt or breechblock, and is usually threaded at its forward portion to receive the barrel". Applied to a MAC machinegun, there is no hammer, but it does contain a bolt, and barrel. Where are they located on a MAC? The upper. The unregulated, un-serial numbered, "not a firearm", upper.
* The seized firearm as any other upper, is not designed to fire at all unless it is assembled on a MAC machinegun or pre- June 21, 1982 legal open bolt MAC semi [and it would only fire as a semi]. The installation on a machinegun, the MAC registered lower acts as a conversion device, as it is solely intended to convert the upper [firearm or not] into a machinegun. [ref. 26 USC 5845(b)]. It is still a registered MG???
* I testified against ATF, Firearms enforcement Officer Max Kingery Jan 08 in US v. Olofson, by April 08 Max Kingery was assigned to evaluate the submitted product from my company. He is the one who contrived the test, and made the determination. I am a witness in a still pending case, and I am being "leaned on". This is not the first time ATF has taken out vengeance during a court case.
Now for some of his questions:
"I was interested in your response that just holding the upper without any other means of hand grip would be dangerous. Adding one is easy, with all due respect."
With all due respect NFA: putting a MAC machinegun bolt into a a semi is far easier that even adding a handle to something ad hoc with a welder, and it is reversible, and would require no tools or skills.
I would like to also point out as a machinegun shooter, you surely know about thrust and recoil. Unlike a semi that "kicks" if you will, a machinegun firing 7.62x54R is a continued thrust, not unlike a jet engine. The product produces 85 foot pounds of thrust. Even with a "handle" you only got one hand on it while you try and cock it with the other...then "zoom" 85 pound of pressure slam into the hand holding it......pressure you can not not stop until it runs dry.....and you shoot yourself if you drop it!
"As far as ATF making regulations based on political assessments or issues of public safety, unfortunately that is part of their mandate. NFA '34 was specifically based on public safety issues. FWIW "
NFA, what you did not know was that this process and submission started with many discussions with the Chief at Firearms Technology Branch prior to any submission to them. To address concerns that ATF had over public safety issues, the upper was registered as a Short Barreled Rifle, due to CFR 27, 478.11 public safety was served, as no prohibited person could ever possess one, ATF would control transfer to new owners, same restrictions and tax as a machinegun. Unless you are stating your lawfully possessed machineguns are a public safety issue???
I urge you to look at the facts, and the ATF's own documents and the law. You will then see through the ATF flim-flam.
Len
M1 Rifle An Automatic ?
I was in the USMC from 1958-1962 and was issued an MI rifle on sveral occastions at the rifle range I wittnessed an MI shooting automatic usally 2-4 rounds before jaming.This was caused by a broken sear located in the trigger housing.
The MI is used in competition shooting in many states, and has been offered to interested shooters by various organizations such as the NRA etc also the USArmy provided tens of thousands MI's to our allies during and after WWII and was sold back to us via the open gun surplus market,
So if an MI malfuctions and fires automatic 2-4 rounds does the BAFT go after the Feds,the NRA, or the many counties that sold the MI;s back to us/
Nex ut Tyrannus!
The hogs are hungry. Let's get to feedin'em folks!
Oink, Oink
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!