this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2024
794 points (98.9% liked)

Political Memes

5422 readers
4196 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Podunk@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

The way the hughs ammendment works is, the only legally transferable machine guns were those that were on the registry in 1986. The total number of those registered machine guns was 175,977. There are no more. If your gun was not on that registry when the hughs ammendment passed, the answer is no.

But... god these rules are ridiculous.

For certain guns, if you have a legally registered full auto sear (the sear in this case is the firearm), you can put that in the appropriate nfa registered firearm (think sbr), anf then it would be legal.

This is normally how you see fully automatic hk95 and mp5s and registered colt recievers put into modern ar15 platforms.

It really is a shitshow when it comes to these laws. The real answer to all your question is money. If you have the cash equivalent to a brand new vehicle just sitting around, you can have a legal full auto gun. If you dont have those funds, dont bother. You wouldnt be able to afford the ammo for a fully automatic anyways.