I've been thinking:
Since a semiautomatic rifle is defined as: "any repeating rifle which utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing cartridge to extract the fired cartridge case and chamber the next round, and which requires a separate pull of the trigger to fire each cartridge."
There is a workaround. Eliminate the recoil springs and most of the firing mechanism. Replace them with a small servo set that cycles the bolt and then re-locks it after each shot. The weapon would not be a semi-automatic at that point, since the energy to extract and chamber would not come from the energy of the fired cartridge.
The magazine of such a weapon could contain the battery and be recharged between firings, the battery could be in the weapon, or both.
6 comments:
ATF has stated that electrical cycling is readily convertible; thus a machinegun.
Even if automatic was locked out in the hardware? Say burned into the chip that controls the action?
Use solar power too.
It's an opinion issued about putting an electric drive on a Gatling gun.
It was very concise. Using an electric motor to work the action is, in their paisley colored sky world, a machinegun.
Someone posted a copy of the letter once, but I can't find it now.
I found it. Here it is. I think that the gun I described would be OK, as long as the chip controlling the action is hardwired to ensure that only one shot is fired per pull of the trigger, and the circuit was designed in such a way as to make it time consuming to modify. OF course, I am not a lawyer...
https://www.atf.gov/file/83561/download
That's a different letter, but about the same language.
I think your experiment would hinge on how simple it is to bypass your controller with wires that connect the trigger switch to the motor; or to add a switch which bypasses the controller.
I am CERTAIN I don't want to be the first person to try and come under the ATF's mercurial gaze.
Post a Comment