Posted: 1/22/2017 7:02:13 PM EDT
|
I have an (admittedly absurd but) interesting hypothetical.
Imagine that I live in Alaska (I don't). For sake of argument, let's say I have a weekly poker game that I promote to some friends (I don't). Word gets out, and I get arrested and convicted of Promoting Gambling in the First Degree, a Class C felony (I didn't). I serve my sentence, and my parole and/or probation have expired. I am now a prohibited possessor of firearms in the United States (I'm not). As a prohibited person, according to Haynes v. US, I can't be prosecuted for failing to register a machine gun. So, I decide--in the privacy of my own home--to manufacture a machine gun from scratch in my home machine shop (I definitely did not). I cannot legally register it, and, in fact, I am exempt from the registration requirement. Nobody knows I have this machine gun. I go deep into the woods, and dig a hole, into which I place a safe. I put the machine gun into the safe, along with incontrovertible proof that I manufactured the machine gun at home, during such time that I was a prohibited possessor. Ten years passes from the discharge of my parole or probation. As a matter of law in Alaska, my firearms rights are restored. I then wait 5 years until the statute of limitations expires for illegally possessing a firearm as a felon. Then, I go out to my safe in the hole in the woods, and I get out my machine gun. What is the status of my machine gun? It was exempt from registration requirements at the time of manufacture. There is no ongoing registration requirement; registration is only done at the time of manufacture or transfer. I am now legally allowed to own firearms. I possessed a firearm illegally as a felon, but the statute of limitations has expired, so I can't be prosecuted for doing so. I have certainly committed crimes, but are any of them prosecutable? Is my machine gun now quasi-legal? I feel like I'm missing something that makes this obviously illegal, but I can't figure out what it is. (Of course, I'm sure that in reality I'd be arrested and my gun would be impounded, and even if I beat the charge, I'd never get the machine gun back.) |
|
Quoted:
Lube up for another felony. Yep, and add a bottle of Machine Gunners Lube for each round of ammunition you possess for said machine gun. If you look at NFA convictions, few people are charged with failure to register, it is much easier to prove unlawful possession. |
|
Quoted:
You are still in possession of an unregistered machine gun. 
OP: 18 USC 922(o) (o) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful for any person to transfer or possess a machinegun. (2) This subsection does not apply with respect to— (A) a transfer to or by, or possession by or under the authority of, the United States or any department or agency thereof or a State, or a department, agency, or political subdivision thereof; or (B) any lawful transfer or lawful possession of a machinegun that was lawfully possessed before the date this subsection takes effect. |
|
Quoted:
So is it just a 922(o) violation? What if it were a SBR or suppressor, instead of a machine gun? Quoted:
So is it just a 922(o) violation? What if it were a SBR or suppressor, instead of a machine gun? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haynes_v._United_States In a 7-1 decision, the Court ruled in 1968 in favor of Haynes. Earl Warren dissented in a one sentence opinion and Thurgood Marshall did not participate in the ruling. As with many other 5th amendment cases, felons and others prohibited from possessing firearms could not be compelled to incriminate themselves through registration.[1][2] The National Firearms Act was amended after Haynes to make it apply only to those who could lawfully possess a firearm. This eliminated prosecution of prohibited persons, such as criminals, and cured the self-incrimination problem. In this new form, the new registration provision was upheld. The court held: " To eliminate the defects revealed by Haynes, Congress amended the Act so that only a possessor who lawfully makes, manufactures, or imports firearms can and must register them", United States v. Freed, 401 U.S. 601 (1971).[3] The original Haynes decision continues to block state prosecutions of criminals who fail to register guns as required by various state law gun registration schemes. 18 USC 922(g) (g) It shall be unlawful for any person— (1) who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year; ... to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce. You still can't possess firearms. |
|
Even taking Federal law out of the picture you are still in violation of Alaska Statute 11.61.200 Misconduct Involving Weapons in the Third Degree.
..... (3) manufactures, possesses, transports, sells, or transfers a prohibited weapon; . . . (1) "prohibited weapon" means any . . . (C) firearm that is capable of shooting more than one shot automatically, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger; or |