MNGunTalk.com

mrp wrote:Update:

http://www.southernminn.com/northfield_ ... 3e7ab.html

The federal machine gun charge a Northfield man is facing came after he sold a fully-automatic Uzi to a confidential informant, according to a search warrant filed in Rice County.

Through the investigation, the agent was also able to determine Lasley’s history of drug use, including marijuana, methamphetamine, heroin and possibly cocaine.

usnret wrote:The bigger question is where did this looser get a full auto UZI from.

Deputyhiro wrote:My guess is he has a few friends that are frantically exercising their chop saws.

Ironbear wrote:

Deputyhiro wrote:My guess is he has a few friends that are frantically exercising their chop saws.

Or one of those boating accidents...

A slide-fire stock is a legal gray area in MN. It's not beyond reason that a person could be arrested and charged with unlawful possession of a trigger activator. It's also not beyond reason that a person could be found guilty as well, depending on how the case plays out. The question is, does a slide-fire stock fall within the definition of a Trigger Activator:

MN 609.67 Subd. 1(d) wrote:
"Trigger activator" means a removable manual or power driven trigger activating device constructed and designed so that, when attached to a firearm, the rate at which the trigger may be pulled increases and the rate of fire of the firearm increases to that of a machine gun.

jshuberg wrote:I'm not saying that this is necessarily the case, just that it's a possibility. There have been people who have been convicted of possession of an unregistered machine gun for simply having a rifle that experienced a hammer-follow malfunction which resulted in more than one round being fired per trigger press.

MJY65 wrote:

jshuberg wrote:I'm not saying that this is necessarily the case, just that it's a possibility. There have been people who have been convicted of possession of an unregistered machine gun for simply having a rifle that experienced a hammer-follow malfunction which resulted in more than one round being fired per trigger press.

Has that actually occurred in a case where the shooter hadn't deliberately altered the fire control mechanism?

yukonjasper wrote:

MJY65 wrote:

jshuberg wrote:I'm not saying that this is necessarily the case, just that it's a possibility. There have been people who have been convicted of possession of an unregistered machine gun for simply having a rifle that experienced a hammer-follow malfunction which resulted in more than one round being fired per trigger press.

Has that actually occurred in a case where the shooter hadn't deliberately altered the fire control mechanism?

I'd like to see some evidence of that myself.

george wrote:There was a man in Milwaukee who was prosecuted for a machine gun when his AR fired more than one round then jammed. The firearm was even under a recall and he was prosecuted anyway. It wasn't that many years ago as I recall.