+I also own an armscorp M1A, marked on the heel M14I agree: you will be okay.
Two reasons for my willingness to help:
* You are right and they are wrong.
* I am blessed with the ownership of an M1A. If this crap stands, it will be no time that they decide mine is a machine gun, since it could be modified. Scary!!!!
So, yes, my interest is selfish.
They will be getting an injunction within days to prevent that. Attorney has already spoken to them.I really hate to think this, but even if you do win, you may not win in the long run. What if from court proceedings you do by some stroke of luck win your case, and the ATF returns to you a pile of cut up metal that use to resemble the rifle you own?
Yeah you won the battle, but at what cost? You are out at least $20K according to you for legal fees, and that could very well just be the starting figure and not the final cost. You also end up with a worthless pile of scrap metal that now you can't sell to try and recoup some of your legal fees.
Might sound far-fetched, but it's happened before, and I wouldn't trust some federal agency bureaucrat to do just that out of spite for them losing in a court battle.
Totally agree.First attorney who told you to invite the man into your life is an idiot.
I hope you're not paying him $20k to try and fix the mess he got you into in the first place.
'Never write letters to the ATF' is a well known mantra for anyone who's seen the kind of shenanigans that result from that kind of correspondence.
Actually not.First attorney who told you to invite the man into your life is an idiot.
I hope you're not paying him $20k to try and fix the mess he got you into in the first place.
'Never write letters to the ATF' is a well known mantra for anyone who's seen the kind of shenanigans that result from that kind of correspondence.
Only problem is the rifle's first name "M14"Totally agree.
If the rifle was never capable of being a select-fire, or fully auto, I see no reason that informing the ATF ever served any purpose.
Yes, that lawyer is an idiot. Who would have ever known anything about the rifle if the ATF hadn't been written a letter? Probably not one person.
Only problem is the rifle's first name "M14"
You try to sell an M14 and everyone will tell you it is a "go to jail gun"
Have you been able to read the court case I attached?
The judge NEVER referred to the gun as an M14. He always referred to it as a NM
My case is based on the fact that it is NOT a M14 it is specifically a M14NM
I checked with the auction houses, they would not touch it.
The M1A is marked and referred to as an "m14" because we all know that no one can legally own a real M14, unless they owned it and registered it before 1986, and I do not dispute that at all.I think if you read this part of the article on M14 rifles, several civilian manufacturers of a M14 style semi-auto rifle use "M14" in their model numbers.
M14 rifle - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
So just because it uses "M14" in the model designation of the rifle, a person can't automatically assume it's a select-fire or full auto version.
The M1A was never referred to as an M14, because the M1A was always semi-auto only. The design, inspiration and even the appearance might suggest an M14, that doesn't make it so.The M1A is marked and referred to as an "m14" because we all know that no one can legally own a real M14, unless they owned it and registered it before 1986, and I do not dispute that at all.
This all comes down to semantics, a M14NM is not a M14. See the court case I just posted in 2 posts so everyone could read it.