Obviously the forced-reset trigger has pretty much the same effect as a machine gun and common sense suggests that the two should have the same legal status. They don’t though because 26 U.S.C. § 5845(b) defines a machine gun as:
Any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger
and a firearm with a forced reset trigger does require a separate actuation of the trigger for each shot. It is the place of the congress, not the ATF to update the law.
This is why in the realm of drug law there is the concept of analogue illegality. As in one cant just take crack or whatever, modify it by one molecule, and then sell it legally just because it isnt crack anymore on a technical basis. Its overall similarity to crack, molecularly and in terms of functionality, makes it as illegal as crack
The law operates on precise definitions.
Obviously the forced-reset trigger has pretty much the same effect as a machine gun and common sense suggests that the two should have the same legal status. They don’t though because 26 U.S.C. § 5845(b) defines a machine gun as:
and a firearm with a forced reset trigger does require a separate actuation of the trigger for each shot. It is the place of the congress, not the ATF to update the law.
This is why in the realm of drug law there is the concept of analogue illegality. As in one cant just take crack or whatever, modify it by one molecule, and then sell it legally just because it isnt crack anymore on a technical basis. Its overall similarity to crack, molecularly and in terms of functionality, makes it as illegal as crack