Registered Lightning Link Installation-Legality

[Trader805]

I am trying to determine if it is legal to install the Link into a post ban weapon. Since the Link itself is considered the machine gun it seems like it would be ok, but not worth 10 years! Can someone with Class III knowledge help? Thanks!!!

OP- I do hope you get a firm answer. You can call the BATFE tomorrow and they can probably answer or will have a field agent call you back. All the ones I have talked to have been helpful- it just takes a ‘minute’ sometimes to get ahold of one.

 

[Hood886]

Ok let's break this down a bit. Your concerned about the legality of putting a registered LL "before may 1986" in a gun made after the AWB which started In 1994 and ended in 2004. I fail to see any connection between the two. Put your LL in whatever you want. No where in the GCA or Hughes amendment does it mention anything about a law that didn't exist nor should a law that is no longer on the books play any role on anything today.

Am I misunderstanding you're question?

 

[dannymcd]

To be really honest, slavery still exists. The 13th Amendment abolishes "Involuntary" slavery, meaning I cant be taken against my will to be someone's property without any fault of my own. Slavery now exists when one commits a crime and now has "Volunteered" to be a slave of the system. I love the fact that doing the right thing is not the law, because the law is different from justice. The law is, this person did this and deserves punishment, justice is when something happens and the system looks into the situation and does the right thing to prevent it from happening again. The Founder's are rebels and broke laws that the King put in place, but are regarded as hero's. Americans don't consider the Boston Tea Party a bad thing, even though they broke laws by looting and littering the water with tea. But America considered Dr. Martin Luther King Jr and other African Americans law breakers when they stood up for freedom and equality. Its the same game, just different players. Even though the fact is that slave owners "raped" innocent slave women/girls, but the law says that anyone with black skin/African descent is to be below the white man in every aspect and has no place/right/jurisdiction to challenge anything. So the fact that Dred Scott was born a male, and had a penis, he wasnt in the Constitution's (law eyes) definition as a man because of his skin color. My father used to tell me that he would walk on the bus, put his nickel in the machine to pay his fare, he would have to get off the bus even if it was pouring down raining. Had to walk through the back door to properly get on the bus. And if there was 20 empty seats in the white area, his skin color barred him from sitting there because of the law. Even though he never been to jail, was employed, and always paid his taxes as a citizen should, he didnt get to relish those "American liberties" as he should because of the law. Hell, after the Civil War, the enemies of the Union we're treated better than the slaves and received reparations for the land, slaves, and other loses they suffered from the war. Laws aren't created as just to keep order, but to keep certain groups of people in a certain place/class. Which ends this story as how the world has been operating since its inception. No matter who you are, how much taxes you pay, or who you know, the only price you can pay for freedom is putting your life on the line. Whatever your belief's are be prepared to defend them with your life as that is the only price that can be paid for freedom.

WTF???

 

[cjnowell72]

If its a registered transferable one you cant put it in whatever AR you want. The AWB is null and void any more. You could put it up your rear end and it would still be legal. Weird but legal

 

[dannymcd]

Ok let's break this down a bit. Your concerned about the legality of putting a registered LL "before may 1986" in a gun made after the AWB which started In 1994 and ended in 2004. I fail to see any connection between the two. Put your LL in whatever you want. No where in the GCA or Hughes amendment does it mention anything about a law that didn't exist not should a law that is no longer on the books play any role on anything today.

Am I misunderstanding you're question?

When you put it like that I guess that does answer my question. Thank you sir!