Why are Machine Guns legal? What does anyone need with one?

Assault Rifles, and Machine Guns, are not one in the same. I would agree, no one really needs a belt feed fully automatic machine gun. But for self defense, home defense, my weapon of choice would always be a 12 gauge and an assault rife, with several pistols for back up. Firing an assault rifle on full auto or even burst is not really a good idea.

Sgt Kelli Mays, because they are about 16 kinds of fun to shoot. You have to be fairly well off to afford the hobby though - from 25¢/ round for bulk 5.56mm NATO to $3.00.round for linked .50 cal. BMG ammunition. Just listen to the cash going downrange.

Knob Creek Machine Gun Shoot
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2D4V4pSQbN8


Big Sandy Machine Gun Shoot
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIfrSmZLQX8

Who gets to decide what another citizen needs? What does 'need' have to do with freedom?

OK. There is a lot of misinformation from posters here. First, legally owned machine guns are rarely used in crimes. When the news reports that a AK-47 or AR was used, it is almost always the semi-automatic version. Second, civilians are only allowed to own machine guns manufactured prior to 1986; because of this, the supply of machine guns for sale to civilians is limited and you will pay in the tens of thousands of dollars to purchase a civilian legal machine gun. The actual part of the machine gun that is registered with BATFE is the receiver, so if you have a machine gun receiver, you are considered to be in possession of a machine gun. Because of this, a new machine gun can be manufactured by adding new parts to a old receiver registered with BATFE prior to 1986 and sold to civilians. Third, once you find a machine gun you want to purchase, you have to fill out a lot of BATFE paperwork --- Gun dealers usually charge upwards of $100 just to fill out the paperwork for you -- and send BATFE a check for $200 to cover the cost of the transfer tax stamp should they approve your purchase; there is no guarantee that they will approve. Then you wait a few weeks for BATFE to approve or reject your purchase and you are not allowed to possess the machine gun until approved. If you are approved, you are now the proud owner of a machine gun. Now you have to jump through more hoops regarding storage, transfer of the firearm from place to place if you ever move, etc., and God help you BATFE thinks you screwed any of that up. You do not need any special permit to own a machine gun; just the $200 one-time transfer tax stamp from BATFE.

I will start with, A machine gun is defined as an automatic gun that fires bullets in rapid succession for as long as the trigger is pressed. So if the news mentions a semi-automatic it is not a machine gun. it falls under the category of rifle. To have a machine gun (A class 3 weapon) legally you have to pay a tax/fine and register the weapon, cant take it across state lines without asking permission. There more rules then most people want to deal with. Personally I have only heard of one case where someone used an automatic weapon in a shootout. It was the 1997 north Hollywood shoot out and they illegally modified their weapons in to an automatic.

Now I know some ranchers on the border that use AR and AK style rifles (Semi automatic versions) to protect their land from drug traffickers. there have been cases where a trained group of drug traffickers either tries to scare a farmer or kill them. The farms are used to stop and get water ass they cross. They intimidate or kill so that they will not be reported to the border patrol. there are a few cases where they were driven off BECAUSE they ran in to a sufficient amount of firepower.

Machine guns are illegal to own unless you live in a state that allows to have one with a class 3 firearms license. The ATF just doesn't hand those out. They are mainly used for collectors. And you are confusing machine guns with semi-automatic rifles.

To properly answer your question, you need to ask yourself "what do I think is the definition of a machine gun?". I'll tell you mine: It's a fairly expensive, high capacity weapon capable of automatic or burst fire. Whether it be belt fed or fed by high capacity drum or magazine. There is a very strenuous process of investigation just to own one. The knee-jerk reaction of uninformed people is to assume that the average AR-15 is a machine gun. Wrong. I own two such AR-15s and neither of them are fully automatic. I use them for target practice to hone my marksmanship skills and for protection. Besides, anyone who has served a measurable amount of time in the military would probably have an affinity for such a weapon. Years of experience and muscle memory with the weapon. If we want to get "nit-noid", all my pistols, like my 2 ARs are semi-automatic as well. I think you need to ask yourself, if you still serve, is "do I want to let my own personal opinions interfere with a fellow American's rights in any way? Do I stand by the oath of enlistment I took?" If your question pertains to the ownership of semi-automatic weapons that look like "machine guns", you need to better educate yourself. Remember, guns don't kill people. People kill people.


Additional thought: if you've read that a lot of shootings are done with "machine guns" you need to remember the following:
1. Perpetrators of these crimes don't care about the laws. They either illegally purchase or modify the weapons in a way that allows them to go fully automatic.
2. The media will spin the truth. To the mainstream media, any weapon that "looks like a machine gun" is one.

The rest of us law-abiding gun owners will not give up our rights to appease the few.

If you say that you are "all for the second amendment" and still think that some guns shouldn't be owned, then you really aren't for the second amendment. Guns are not scary, they are just metal and plastic parts assembled together to form a tool. That tool can be a good tool or a bad tool depending who has it in their hands.
To answer you question about why someone should be able to own one...because they can. It really should be that simple. Why should we allow manufacturers to produce alcoholic beverages? Thousands and thousands die annually from drinking and driving. What about cell phones? Thousands die while playing with that and not paying attention to driving. You see, where would we stop?

The term 'machine gun' is a misnomer; all firearms are "machines"...however, I think you mean "fully automatic"; meaning that the weapon will continue to feed rounds into the breech, without interruption, so long as the trigger is depressed-this would apply to many weapons, from the MP-5 (SEF) to the M2.

To the best of my knowledge, sine 1986, owning a "fully automatic" weapon requires several things: First, paying upwards of $10,000-$20,000 per weapon (market value) for a "pre-ban", i.e. manufactured before 1986, weapon. Second, paying a $200 per weapon tax. Third, if manufacturing a "Post Ban" fully automatic weapon, one must possess a Class 3 dealer's license.

In short-very few Americans, and even fewer people with potentially dangerous metal illnesses or counter-culture ideologies are going to "legally" get their hands on a true "machine gun". Even the standard issue (at least in my time) M4 carbine had only "safe", "semi-automatic", and "three round burst". The M4A1 does have "fully automatic"...but again...to the best of my knowledge, this is not standard issue to all personnel (does anyone know if this has changed since 2009?). My understanding is that the military elected to limit the use of fully-automatic to specific designated personnel to improve rile marksmanship and round consumption.

I've always been told that the only true purpose for a fully automatic weapon is to suppress multiple contacts so as to allow for counter maneuver or to hold a position with as few personnel as possible (perhaps some of our more experienced RP folks can correct me if I'm wrong). Applied to a civilian owning such a weapon, it logically stands that the only reasons for owning one would be "sport", or possessing the ability to, as intended, hold a defensive position against multiple assailants.

Either way, the "hoops" one has to jump through to own one seems to preclude the likelihood someone with ill intent will get one...and at the end of the day, a weapon in the hands of an evil person is a weapon-regardless of rate of fire.

I'm going to be nice. For starters, there have been two murders with legally owned machine guns (full auto - the requirement for something to be a machine gun) since 1986 - both were by cops with department issued weapons. Since most of the responses here have covered this and the law, I'm going to leave that at that.

As for your question "why exactly is it legal to own a machine gun?" the answer is because this is America. We are a nation where the default is that things are legal. We are not a nation where everything is illegal unless and until we can show a need to be able to have it or do it. Even the really stupid laws like it being illegal to tie your giraff to a lamppost in Georgia starts from the opposite end of the spectrum - the requirement that the government show a compelling reason for that action to be illegal.