Debate Settled

Had a discussion going on what constitutes a machine gun over at my post about the guy who rigged cap guns to fire when rotated by a drill.

I was still unconvinced that this would have qualified, so I asked Len Savage.  Here's what he had to say:

In US v. Fleischli held that an electronic on-off switch to be a trigger if it is used to initiate a firing sequence....

Red Jacket Firearms registered their drill powered 12 ga version as a post dealer sample.

Under US v. Staples you have to "knowingly possess"....A clever US Attorney could overcome "Knowingly" since the author claims that real guns would work....

Technically speaking, in Akins the ATF claimed the "spring" because it stored energy to initiate a continuous firing sequence to be a "machinegun"....I don't see how a battery does not "store energy" to initiate a firing sequence....through the use of a switch...

By my calculations it fires 6 rounds per revolution, firing for the first 6 revolutions for a total of 36 rounds....

ATF would call it a machinegun if my company sent it in for evaluation...

Now if you rigged 36 revolvers to fire at once, that's NOT a machinegun (heavily regulated) but a volley gun....Which is regulated like any gun you buy from WalMart....(or regulated under the GCA or Gun Control Act)

Go figure???

Logic? You will not find that definition in the NFA meaning of terms. (where the commenter quoted from).

So having limited tools myself, if I used some guy's carpentry equipment to make what started this conversation off, would ATF's newest ruling apply?