By NRA-ILA
Violence Policy Center (VPC) is a handgun prohibition organization. The group’s website still hosts a document declaring “Handguns should be banned from future sale except for military and law-enforcement personnel.” It should come as no surprise then that the group is advocating for executive action to ban some of America’s most common handguns.
In recent years, some criminals have illegally modified common semi-automatic Glock pistols into machineguns. Typically, this has been done using illegal parts (sometimes called Glock switches) acquired from unscrupulous overseas manufacturers or intensive personal manufacture.
It is not illegal to own a machinegun in the U.S. However, their transfer and possession are regulated under the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA).
The NFA requires certain firearms and firearm accessories to be registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record. Prospective machine gun buyers must apply to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives for permission to transfer the firearm and pay a $200 tax.
A last-minute amendment to the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986, dubbed the Hughes Amendment for sponsor Rep. William Hughes (D-N.J.), prohibits civilians from transferring or possessing machine guns not registered by May 19, 1986. The general public may still transfer and possess machine guns registered before that date, but the available supply of these items is frozen.
18 U.S.C. §924 provides that the transfer or possession of an unregistered machinegun is punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Further, the same code section makes clear that a person who uses a machinegun in a crime of violence or drug trafficking crime “shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not less than 30 years.”
Rather than focusing on the illegal machine gun parts or violent criminals who use them, according to VPC Government Affairs Director Kristen Rand, common semi-automatic Glock handguns should be regulated as machineguns.
An October 28 Chicago Sun-Times article reported,
Rand says ATF should consider using its authority to reclassify certain types of firearms that are easily converted into fully automatic weapons. Other firearms besides Glocks also are “readily convertible” into machine guns by machining or adding a few parts, she says.
“ATF should be looking at using their existing authority to classify some of these firearms as ‘machine guns’…
Recall that the general public may not transfer or possess machineguns not registered by May 19, 1986. Therefore, under such a proposal, semi-automatic Glock handguns owned by law-abiding gun owners would become contraband. In other words: gun confiscation.
Now, consider VPC’s reading of the law.
Rand claimed that Glocks and other unspecified firearms should be classified as machineguns because they are purportedly “readily convertible” to fire automatically. Rand’s use of the “readily convertible” language may stem from the definition of “firearm” in 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(3), which states in part,
The term “firearm” means (A) any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive;
However, this “readily convertible” or “readily be converted” language does not appear in the federal definition of a machinegun.
26 U.S.C. § 5845 defines a machinegun as follows,
The term “machinegun” means 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. The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.
The “machinegun” definition contemplates a weapon that can be “readily restored” to shoot automatically. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines “restore” to include, “to put or bring back into existence or use” and “to bring back to or put back into a former or original state.”
As a commercially available semi-automatic Glock pistol has never had the capability to fire automatically, it certainly cannot be “restored” to do so.
Note that the definition does include “any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun.” Therefore, anyone found in possession of a Glock switch or similar device, whether or not that item is equipped to a firearm or even whether or not the item is possessed at the same time as a firearm, can be charged with illegal possession of a machinegun.
SEE ALSO: The Full Hand Single Stack Glock 43X – My Central AC of Handguns
It is clear from a plain reading of federal law that the machinegun definition cannot be applied to commonly-owned semi-automatic pistols like the Glock. However, it is instructive to examine how extensive VPC’s proposed handgun ban would be.
According to ATF’s annual Firearm Commerce in the United States report, pistols (separate from revolvers) were the most popular type of firearm manufactured in the U.S. in 2019. ATF’s 2020 Firearms Manufacturing and Export Report noted that Glock manufactured 445,442 pistols in the U.S. that year. ATF data shows Glock’s home country of Austria accounted for 1,279,123 pistols imported into the U.S. in 2020. As The American Rifleman pointed out in early 2021, “In 2020 the Glock G19 was the top-selling semi-auto pistol sold by FFLs using the services of GunBroker.com.”
Glocks are ubiquitous and used by millions of Americans for lawful purposes like self-defense and target shooting. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) the U.S. Supreme Court made clear that the Second Amendment right extends to the possession and use of arms “in common use at the time” for lawful purposes like self-defense. Under any conceivable consideration, Glock pistols fall under this protection and the Second Amendment precludes any attempt to ban them.
As noted, semi-automatic Glock pistols cannot meet the federal machinegun definition. But consider if VPC’s twisted logic were combined with Supreme Court precedent.
As one of the most popular firearms, Glocks are certainly in common use for lawful purposes and thus protected under the Second Amendment and Heller. If VPC got its way and the federal government attempted to reclassify Glocks as machineguns, that could result in a so-called machinegun falling under the explicit protections of the Second Amendment. Making clear that the Second Amendment applies to machineguns doesn’t seem like something gun control advocates would support.
With the Supreme Court striking down D.C. and Chicago’s handgun bans, the Right-to-Carry recognized throughout the country, and Constitutional Carry in half the states, VPC is further from its goal of banning handguns than when the group started more than three decades ago. However, with the radical nature of the Biden administration, gun owners must keep an eye on attempts to enact illegitimate executive gun controls. After all, President Biden has made clear he wants to ban 9mm handguns.
An alternative approach to this matter would be to seek 30-year prison sentences for those who use illegal machine gun parts to commit violent crime, as provided under current federal law. Given the prevailing soft-on-violent crime sentiment of many policymakers and a Department of Justice that seems more concerned with wrongthink than criminal wrongdoing, law-abiding gun owners shouldn’t expect such a sensible outcome.
Right is right, left is wrong. A green light will let you go straight, right or left, but going left requires much more caution.
Perhaps this is why they always spew false information about things they don’t understand. To make a real machine gun you need a lot more ammunition storage also. The criminals have real fully automatic machine guns and don’t care about laws anyway.
A hammer has an unlimited amount of ammunition, just ask Pelosi. I wonder if Newsom will let that guy out?
I guess I am not paying attention, are places like Chicago and NYC full of criminals with converted Glocks, spraying the town with automatic fire, or are these VPC people watching too many movies and TV shows? It is a fact that the Gun Control Act of 1934, was created out of an emotional response to what the Congressman of that era saw on Movietone Newsreels and not on the facts of actual events. Just like today, back then sensationalism in the media blew up what ever the issue was into an end of the world scenario.
First we take a Thompson machine gun and shove it up their @$$, then do the same with a Glock. We then ask them is they can feel the difference. If they say yes – we win the argument. If they say no we do the same test but replace the Thompson with a Ma Deuce .50 cal.
First we should take a Thompson machine gun and shove it up their @ss, then we should do the same with a Glock. We then ask them if they can feel the difference.
DemoSocialists know that they can’t destroy the Second Amendment and disarm American citizens all at once. Instead, they’re working to do it piecemeal, one gun or one gun category at a time.
Wow…lots ‘o comments to consider. Be nice to read on topic instead of taking sharp turn to other stuff but that’s free speach! Anywho all said why “just say no” individually to Uncle Sugar? Talk is cheap…stand the wall with Patriots. Remember the tree of Liberty & hold true its meaming. All comments are insightful be maybe not turn on our comrades.
So, PVC wants to reclassify any semi that “might be modified” to fire full-auto to machinegun status?
That’s as HUTA stupid as saying we should reclassify every automobile & p.u. truck out there as not street legal because they MIGHT be modified to remove pollution controls to get more power. Senseless, but then you have to understand that you’re dealing with Progressive-Socialists with an agenda, and that agenda is Not public safety!
This proposal is flat-out absurd! First, it’s already illegal to convert a semi-auto to full-auto. Auto sears are already regulated under the law. Second, a full-auto handgun would technically be a Sub-machinegun; just a technical point, but akin to calling a magazine a clip.
It’s just part of the ceaseless attempt by the Progressive-Socialists to rid America of ALL firearms in civilian hands. Period.
Violence Policy Center was founded by Josh Sugarmann, former head of the National Center to Ban Handguns. It receives the bulk of its funding from the Joyce Foundation, a left-wing organization with over a $1billion(!) war chest. George Soros is also a major funder through his Open Societies Foundations.
What’s that tell you? I know what it tells me.
I hate to say it, but with the Left’s constant efforts to seize power at all levels, and the weak, ineffective leadership on the Right, eventually the Progressive-Socialists will win and get their way. The recent midterm election stacked on top of the other ones for the last 14 years shows that about half the country is lost to the black hole of Marxism. We are moving inexorably towards civil war, unfortunately.
So the we’re just pointing at things and calling them machine guns? Lol that means I can point at a select fire kriss vector and call it a revolver…
Note The Three Most Important Words In The Declaration of Independence: “…that among these…”
The U.S. Constitution – including The Bill of Rights – does not convey, give, grant, nor transfer any of our Natural Rights. As expressed in The Declaration of Independence – a template for the future U.S. Constitution – “…We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, THAT AMONG THESE are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness…” (Note: Not all of our Rights are expressed, only the paramount ones upon which others are based.) Our Natural Rights existed throughout Man’s history, before there was any form of government. The Right to own firearms is based upon all three of the basic of Life, Liberty, Happiness. If you have a Right to Life, you have a Right to protect it. If you have a Right to Liberty, you have a Right to protect it. If you have a Right to Happiness, you have a Right to ensure it. Our Founders did not declare our Rights in the Bill of Rights; rather, they PROTECTED our Rights.
There was contentious arguments as to whether or not The Constitution acknowledged and protected our Rights. In order to get some of the hold-out Colonies to Ratify The Constitution, The Bill of Rights was added. It did not convey, give, grant, nor transfer any Right. It was written in plain-and-simple language to ensure that there could be no misunderstanding nor misinterpretation.
Simply, the Second Amendment is MOOT. Take away the Second Amendment and the Right STILL EXISTS!
Never say, “Constitution Right” or “Second Amendment Right”. Always state “Constitution Protected Right” or “Second Amendment Protected Right”.
Maybe Hamilton was correct when he wrote: “I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers not granted; and, on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted. For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do? Why, for instance, should it be said that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained, when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed? I will not contend that such a provision would confer a regulating power; but it is evident that it would furnish, to men disposed to usurp, a plausible pretense for claiming that power. They might urge with a semblance of reason, that the Constitution ought not to be charged with the absurdity of providing against the abuse of an authority which was not given”
LoneStarHog
Great dissertation! I copied so I could refer to it in the future.
Logic doesn’t work on gun controllers. Neither does dialectic.
They won’t stop until they achieve complete confiscation. Throughout history, this has been the case. Only we can stop them.
And just How do you propose stopping them? I know what’s necessary, at this point, but that won’t happen.
It’s obvious that most do not understand what kind of law is being used and how it works. All statutory law, whether federal or state, applies only to “persons.” A person in statutory law is defined as a legal or commercial entity. Are you a legal entity? Here’s a hint: you are not a legal entity, but, your legal name is. Are you a name or do you HAVE a name you use?
Executive orders apply only to the executive branch. They are policy for government workers in the executive branch. They do not apply anywhere else and they are NOT law.
Now, put two and two together. Government has no authority over flesh and blood men and women. We are the creators of government and the created cannot be superior to its creator. The only reason people get into trouble is because the first thing they do in court is to admit to being a legal name. How could you possibly BE a name? You can call this crazy legal theory or whatever you want. This IS how it works. It is only your ignorance that convicts you.
My late father always said, “Why buy a Glock when you can afford an HK?”
He was right!
GLOCKS? LOLOLOL!
I know some of you just love those things – and I offer no insults here, myself, never much cared for them! I have a hard time counting GLOCKS as FIREARMS! Let-Alone Machine-guns!
Funny, I bet you’ve never even held a GLOCK, let alone shot one, so your point is moot in all readers of this post! I take it by your lack of education that you have in your locked safe(good place to put your self defense gun!)an over hundred year old technology that has the stupid single stack super slow .45 ACP gold dots in your lame 1911… how good am I?! You think your hundred year old technology is really better than guns made this century, you truly are ignorant! Try putting your junk over weight 1911 under your in sure hybrid and drive over it and get out and checkout your new crushed mag well! Try it with a GLOCK or even an 80% lower and get out and see that the gun not only isn’t crushed, but is still fully functional and doesn’t even have a scratch on it! Also there’s not a million parts to create a working pistol! Meaning less parts less parts to break… but I know logic isn’t a strong aspect of your mind set clearly. You say your not going to knock GLOCKS and then cowardly do exactly that, don’t be a coward man! Stand up for what you believe even if it’s totally wrong;)
Shooters in this great Nation have an absolute right
to choose a weapon that suits them the best . Not all
firearms work universally for all shooters . I have nothing
against another’s choice .
This is not a debate over football or basketball teams .
A 85 lb. lady may have a hard time with a “ Smith mod. 29 “ ,
yet drive tacks with a “ mod. 36 “ .
Save your debates for Sunday afternoon at the Sports Bar .
So if newer is always better, do you support smart gun technology? 😛
A Glock is 20th century technology. Check out a 21st century weapon, like an FN 5.7.
I’ve had Glocks. No wonder you’d give up the .45 ACP, that grip is like a coke bottle. Even those 9s and .40s (teehee) are artless and blocky, even for combat tupperware.
Look, whatever works for you doesn’t have to work for all of us. Maybe you like metrics and soccer but that doesn’t mean I should.
p.s. – run thatGlock frame through a deep fat fryer and check the mag well then. 😉
How about you deep fat fry yourself you british tart!
I would try to drive over my Glock to test your theory, but it melted when I left it too close to the wood burning stove.
At the risk of offering an outlandish suggestion, regarding the above described problem, how about actually enforcing Existing Law. The above is directed to the BATFE, and the U.S. Department of Justice, where BATFE currently hangs it’s hat.
gun probition” cults, “gun control” and “gun safety” groups are gun banning groups run and controlled by Michael Bloomberg, George Soros, the Chinese government, Russia, North Korea, Iran and Mexico.
These communist groups could care less about crime and want all law abiding citizens disarmed.
Remember back during WW2 Germany and Japan had plans to invade the east coast and west coast of America and have Mexico invade the southern states promising Mexico to give them Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas, but they were afraid of all the Americans who owned firearms and would fight them off. Now they are joining up to ban all firearms in America!
I don’t think they are communists as much as people who continuously live in fear. Guns are most likely not they only thing they are afraid of. They are probably very short on the mental ability to process information logically. That is a sad combination. I would hate to be one of those people. It has to be a miserable life.
Okay, devil’s advocate here, but how similar are the receivers between Glock 17 and 18? Would an 18 slide work on a 17 frame? Would the resulting firearm be capable of full auto fire without further modification?
The definition of a machine gun icludes the frame or receiver of any firearm that can easily be readily restored to fully automatic fire. Glock 18 is a lot like a 17 but full auto – is it close enough to fit that definition?
I recall hearing that many of the Glock switches recovered in the last few years have been 3D printed.
Category error. The error is in your logic.
Here is the answer. Any repeater can be “readily convertible into machine guns by machining or adding a few parts”, even bolt actions (Pederson device). John Browning once turned a cowboy lever action into a machine gun with a couple of levers and pivots and a diaphragm to capture the muzzle blast. It is well known that certain gas operated autoloaders can be turned into machine guns with a shoe lace and a key ring. There used to be a youtube video where an SOT turned an autoloader into a machine gun with a rather short piece of coat hanger wire.
Repeating firearms are relatively simple machines. Not only that, they are tech that is over a century old.
You really need to quit frequenting this site. You are clearly not tall enough for this ride. OTOH, you do make a lot of us laugh from time to time.
Thanks, Phil, you just gave PVC & Everytown ammunition to ban ALL semi-autos.
And how many of those full-auto mods you mentioned resulted in uncontrolled chain fire, not to mention reliability issues?
BTW, the Blue Dog(he/him/she/they/it) troll gets tons of replies to his stupid postings. We’re feeding the beast, as well as his ego. I’m guilty myself.
Stan, he already wants to ban all semiautos as does VPC & Everytown. I didn’t give them ammunition. They already know this and Glocks are the camel’s nose.
So what?
Okay, Angels advocate here, Blue Him Dog is the absolute definition of an unthinking gun-grabbing ideologue. Perhaps your anti 2A nonsense would play better on the various gun confiscation organizations’ websites. Creating criminals out of Americans that support the American Constitution, confiscating legally owned weapons, and NOT enforcing existing law is the leftists( and apparently, BlueHimDog’s), wet dream.
Yes, but if (he/it/they) commented on those sites, (he/it/they) wouldn’t get all the attention (he/it/they) craves that our people give in their replies.
Possession(without required federally issued stamp) of a Glock 18 is already against the law. Your dreaming of an 18 slide on a 17 frame is absolutely mindless drivel. Basic logic seems to be missing from your anti 2A comment. Just a normal day in the gun-grabbers daydreams………
It’s more akin to dropping a registered sear in a host AR. A “Glock switch” is a sear trip. So any Glock could function with this unregistered add-on. Going after Glocks as a “potential host” for select-fire would substantially be the prelude going after ARs for the same reason…
The answer is NO, a slide from the Glock 18 WILL NOT fit on a Glock 17 ! It was intentionally designed to not fit for that reason. The frame rails and trigger pack are different. You can look it up on u-tube .
Thanks, Ted. I was wondering about that, whether they had designed the 18 slide not to fit the 17.
If a G17 were never a G18, then a G17 could never be RESTORED to being a G18. The similarity of the receivers is irrelevant, and so is the logic your employers are paying you to post in this thread.
A Glock 18 slide will not fit on an unmodified Glock 17 frame. If you modified the Glock 17 frame to accept a Glock 18 slide it would only fire semi-auto. Glock switches have nothing in common with a Glock 18 slide.
“It is better to be quiet and thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.”
Thanks, fred. Although, I don’t know that admitting ignorance about full auto parts interchngeability would make me a fool. 😉
You are a fool, bluequeer.
As usual, you don’t know what the F–k you’re talking about! Begone, stupid Lefty troll!
Mr glocky mcglockface is not happy today! I notice they say handguns more like they are using glocks as an example for the whole……
So I guess my 44 mag will be less lethal than my glock and I should carry that instead heh-heh!