Welcome to Northwest Firearms
Join our community, sign up for free today!
Sign Up

Reading cpl pamphlet, got a question

Messages
3,359
Reactions
2,236
Applied for my cpl the other day, and was given this pamphlet "Firearms Safety, Suicide Awareness, The Law And You". On page ten something caught my eye, ".....and fired therefrom at the rate of five or more shots per second. " this was the final line in the machine gun description. Huh? What? Wait! Hold da phone, if i have a design that shoots fewer than five shots per second, that's not a machine gun? Pretty sure when I call they will weasel out in their best bureaucratic fashion, but it will be entertainment.
Going to be sure they tell me where I can submit my design for state approval.

Don't seriously expect any intelligible answers, but what the heck.

now that I think about it, a slow fire machine gun would be much more controllable, consume ammunition at a slower rate, wear and break less often.
 

KKG

Messages
4,113
Reactions
6,126
If you look at the definition of a Machine Gun you will see that any number of shots that are fired MUST be fired with a SINGLE pull of the Trigger. And I believe that the number is TWO(2).:)
 
Messages
1,781
Reactions
3,826
It's from WA's definition of a machine gun: RCW 9.41.010: Terms defined.

(18) "Machine gun" means any firearm known as a machine gun, mechanical rifle, submachine gun, or any other mechanism or instrument not requiring that the trigger be pressed for each shot and having a reservoir clip, disc, drum, belt, or other separable mechanical device for storing, carrying, or supplying ammunition which can be loaded into the firearm, mechanism, or instrument, and fired therefrom at the rate of five or more shots per second.
It is an interesting question though and it appears that if you can reliably limit the rate of fire to less than 5 rounds per second, then yeah, the firearm would not be a machine gun for WA law purposes.

The Federal definition may be different so don't go doing anything rash based only on that one RCW. ;-)

EDIT: Achieving the limited firing rate would be interesting -- I'm thinking either a sort of spring wound clockwork mechanism or a circuit controlled mechanism would be required to get it to work. Another interesting definition question: let's say you have a mechanism the fires 1 shot every 100 milliseconds, but after firing four shots, pauses for 600 ms. That's still less than 5 shots per second.
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,781
Reactions
3,826
Damned feds.

as just an academic exercise, i was thinking more like a three shot burst mechanism.
A) 3 shots in one second, B) continuous 3 shot fast bursts/second, or C) three shot burst and then stop?

I would think that C would get into trouble with regulators because they would do the math on the splits and extrapolate the rate. It is also probably true that a person could pull the trigger twice in less than a second and manage at least 6 rounds/sec. I think traditional burst would be a problem.

B is the most interesting to me -- hold the trigger down and a 3 shot burst per second would happen as long as the trigger was depressed. It would be harder to extrapolate a violative firing rate because no matter what, it will only put out 180/minute, or 3/sec.

A is the least interesting to me -- I would think it might be harder to use than simply using a semi-auto.
 

Red98422

Messages
96
Reactions
131
Think about this then, since WA law doesn’t allow for machine guns to be owned via the states definition, but you have a machine gun (with proper paperwork) that you then modify to fire no more than the required amount before coming here. In the most technical aspect you could own and use it in WA as according to the RCW it’s not a machine gun...unless I bungled that up somewhere. :D
 

User 1234

Messages
1,872
Reactions
4,964
Here is the practical problem. You file a form 1 or form 4 with the federal government, because even firing 4 shots per second with one trigger pull it meets the federal definition of machine gun. The feds deny your stamp because they believe it violates Washington law. You then pursue administrative appeals with the federal ATF because they are incorrect, and you meet all of the legal criteria to get the stamp. That takes time, and meanwhile the state very likely amends the law to eliminate the 5 RPS threshold. I personally don’t have time for that exercise.
 

Red98422

Messages
96
Reactions
131
Here is the practical problem. You file a form 1 or form 4 with the federal government, because even firing 4 shots per second with one trigger pull it meets the federal definition of machine gun. The feds deny your stamp because they believe it violates Washington law. You then pursue administrative appeals with the federal ATF because they are incorrect, and you meet all of the legal criteria to get the stamp. That takes time, and meanwhile the state very likely amends the law to eliminate the 5 RPS threshold. I personally don’t have time for that exercise.

I absolutely agree with you on all accounts, I guess this completely theoretical avenue would only make sense to an already approved owner of a machine gun who is going to move here, otherwise as you have said it’s basically a novelty at best....I find it fun to think about however
 

User 1234

Messages
1,872
Reactions
4,964
Even an Arizona resident with a legal machine gun on a Form 4 who asks the ATF for permission to move the federal MG here would encounter this administrative/legal problem. Some companies, like Franklin Armory, might have the time for this kind of venture, but I doubt any individuals do.
 

User 1234

Messages
1,872
Reactions
4,964
I can also see in the state definition an argument (which the state would make after throwing someone in jail) that the four round per second limit must be achieved by slowing down the ammunition feeding device, not the firing mechanism.
 
Messages
30
Reactions
31
I thought that here in WA possession of any part of a machine gun was considered possession of a machine gun, ie: M16 bolt used in a AR15...
 

User 1234

Messages
1,872
Reactions
4,964
”..., any part designed and intended solely and exclusively for use in a machine gun, bump-fire stock, undetectable firearm, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, or in converting a weapon into a machine gun, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle;“ 9.41.190.

The question regarding any particular part is whether it was designed and intended solely and exclusively for use in those particular types of weapons.
 

NEW CLASSIFIED ADS

LATEST REVIEWS

  • Mary's Pistols
    5.00 star(s)
    Fantastic small business with equally excellent folks running the place. I was given fair value for a trade in and was able to order something I...
    • Red98422
  • Gooseneck Road
    4.00 star(s)
    Very popular service road with some unmarked logging roads that branch off of the main. Relatively cleaned up from what we saw. I just wish that...
    • Benzdriver81
  • Liberty Safes of Oregon
    5.00 star(s)
    I have now purchased 2 Safe’s and constantly recommend people go here. You get better quality than the other liberty safes made for places like...
    • Motojohonda
  • Supporting Vendor Lucky Sporting Goods
    5.00 star(s)
    Just dropped by today to pick up a rifle … this is what a gun store should be! None of the crotchety bluster and BS that so many other gun stores...
    • DLS
  • Supporting Vendor J&B Firearm Sales
    5.00 star(s)
    I'll put in a good word for J&B Firearms Sales in Beaverton, on Beaverton-Hillsdale Hwy (across the street from KFC and BiMart). I've always had...
    • RVNvet

Staff online