Law Enforcement M14, Legal?

In 1963, the Army initiated a program to weld selected M14 rifles to a permanent semi-auto configuration and sell them through the DCM to civilian high power competitors. They even produced an Army Regulation* as to how this was to be done once the program was approved.

There was no problem with (then) ATTD. The United States was the legal manufacturer and owner of the rifle, and the manufacturer would simply have been issuing a new model, to be designated the M14M. The second "M" would be marked on the receiver once the conversion had been done. Some rifles were converted, but NONE were ever sold.

Well, on November 22, 1963, an event occurred that had many consequences. One was that the Secretary of the Army cancelled the M14M program, ordered that NO M14Ms were to be sold, and that while the sale of M1903A4 rifles could continue, the scopes were to be taken off and broken up with the lenses used for "educational purposes." The whole thing was CYA politics by the Army and the Johnson administration. (For those who aren't old enough to remember, there was legislation introduced to ban all hunting, ban all guns, ban all rifles, ban all scope sights, round up NRA members and hunters to be put in "re-education" camps, etc. It was sheer insanity and there was no way the Army was going to sell "machineguns" and scope sighted rifles in that political atmosphere.)

M14Ms and M14NMs were in fact later loaned to state associations for use by their teams, but none were ever sold; they remained the property of the U.S., the same as those M14s loaned to police departments.

Just as a tickler, there is NO legal reason the M14M program could not be revived today. It is not likely it will be. The 1986 ban on machinegun registration would not apply, as the M14M would not be a machinegun.

*That AR crops up every once in a while, and some folks say it requires the Army to release M14s for sale; it does no such thing and an AR does NOT over-ride Army policy or federal law.

Jim
 
The rifle was a US Rifle M14. Apparently a legal entity sold such an item to a private individual, and as one member wrote other's also have.
What can be done with such a rifle, with a bill of sale from a Police Dept.
stating it was a semi-auto not full auto weapon?

I think my next advice may be to get his chop saw out of the garage
and fired up.

LT.
 
Believe it that a bill of sale, even from a police department, does NOT trump federal law, no matter what it says.

Some time back, a fellow got himself appointed police chief in a small town and promptly ordered a couple of dozen MGs and SMGs which he sold to his friends. BATFE wondered exactly how much crime there was in a town of less than 1500 people and investigated. The ex-chief may still be in jail; the guns were seized and presumably are now in the hands of legitimate LEO's.

Just one more note on the subject of police M14s. A while back, someone advertised an ex-police M14 for sale, supposedly converted to semi-auto by the Army and legal to sell. Just for fun, I called him and he assured me that he was the owner of a gun store, that the gun was legal and could be shipped to any FFL dealer. But that was the second call. On the first call, I forgot about the time zone difference, and called an hour too early. The voice mail kicked in to tell me that "AGENT Smith is not at his desk." AGENT?

A sucker would have bought the gun, then a few weeks or months later, the feds would have shown up with "information received" that there was an illegal machinegun on the premises. BATFE gets credit for arresting a "potential terrorist", the local cops bask in the reflected glory, the press gets a story involving machineguns, and everyone is happy. Oh, except for the sucker, who if he is lucky may get probation and a big fine instead of jail time.

Jim
 
No one has contacted me yet

Plenty of opinions, most of them understand part but not all the advice/rumors they are putting forth, some suggest a chop saw, which might or might not be destroying a gun worth $15,000 because they are so afraid to find out the legal staus of the gun.
 
Is there the sight possibility that this is an Armscorp M14S (which would be semi-auto) I mean the Springfield's are M1A's, the Norinco's and Polytechs are stamped M14S along with the Armscorp versions. I wasn't sure if I caught any exact info on that? I know it said in the 70s', not sure when the others started making theirs to ship into the US? Everyone could be bantering over nothing if it turns out this is actual a civilian semi auto version to start with!
 
If it was gotten in the 70's, then No, there is no chance of that being the case. Those were all late '80 at the earliest.
 
I do have a "Devine, TX" M1A from circa 1972, but those are clearly marked, "M1A." Maunz produced rifles sometime in the late '70's, but I don't recall how they were marked.

However, if a PD, it's 99 44/100% certain to be a live USGI M14.

Regards,

Walt
 
Put your old cop buddy in contact with David. He's been in the NFA game for a while now, and I'm confident he'll figure out teh deal with the M14.
 
You could also try if your buddy buddy with the sheriff to deputize you and allow you to purchase the weapon. Out here that isn't that far fetched and still is considered legal unless you lose the "badge". I found this out from a guy who didn't want to pay like 15K plus for an MP5 and found out if he did it that way it would have been just something like 2K. Can't verify, but just like certain body armor, if you can get an leo or mil to sign off on it, you can buy it.
 
You could also try if your buddy buddy with the sheriff to deputize you and allow you to purchase the weapon. Out here that isn't that far fetched and still is considered legal unless you lose the "badge". I found this out from a guy who didn't want to pay like 15K plus for an MP5 and found out if he did it that way it would have been just something like 2K. Can't verify, but just like certain body armor, if you can get an leo or mil to sign off on it, you can buy it.

That is a very dangerous, and wrong, statement...
 
One it's not dangerous. Two it's not wrong prove it. The sheriff here has the option of doing that and if you know him and he knows you (especially with class IIIs and all) he can legally do that. I stand corrected when you show me how that is wrong or dangerous. This guy would not do anybody but a select few and it never hurts to ask worst he says is no. Just like having him sign off to order body armor. How is that wrong and dangerous? This is super rural VA though. At least stay chill and explain why instead of VERY DANGEROUS VERY WRONG....(but won't say why). Why respond then?
 
One it's not dangerous.

The dangerous I believe he's referring to is legally dangerous. It wouldn't take much for the ATF to see through that type of scam.

Two it's not wrong prove it.

Post 86 samples can be owned by an agency or SOT for demo purposes, not an individual.
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/faq2.htm
(M2) How can an individual legally acquire NFA firearms? [Back]

Basically, there are 2 ways that an individual (who is not prohibited by Federal, State, or local law from receiving or possessing firearms) may legally acquire NFA firearms:

1.

By transfer after approval by ATF of a registered weapon from its lawful owner residing in the same State as the transferee.
2.

By obtaining prior approval from ATF to make NFA firearms.



The sheriff here has the option of doing that and if you know him and he knows you (especially with class IIIs and all) he can legally do that.

No he doesn't. If he is deputizing people for the sole purpose of bypassing NFA tax laws he is conspiring to commit tax fraud.

Just like having him sign off to order body armor. How is that wrong and dangerous? This is super rural VA though.

Unless there is a state law against owning body armor, the leo/mil sales are company policy not law.
 
OK, you asked for it....

Dangerous- a person can and will be prosecuted for tax evasion, and illegal posession of a machinegun if the scenario you posted turned out to be true. The sheriff or cheif or whomever would also be charged with conspiracy to commit tax evason and illegal transfer of a title II firearm. There is more than one 'loophole' way to own title II firearms, but a wise person wouldn't do any of it.

A Sheriff cannot simply say 'presto' you're my deputy, and here's an MP5! What would you tell an ATF agent if you happened to encounter one and they asked to see your paperwork. It would be something like '.....uh, I'm Sheriff Buford's special deputy and this is my duty weapon...' And then you would be in for a trip to the pen.


AND... I can reference a similar case RIGHT HERE IN INDIANA! The sheriff of Grant County (I belive it was Grant) was just indicted and prosecuted for a very similar type of scandal. He was buying back department weapons from the local .gov for very minimal $$ and then selling them for personal profit. It all appeared legit on the surface, but now a once respectable man is an inmate in a system that he once ran....


ETA: I am 100% sick of these scenarios dealing with 'free' or 'loophole' ways to own NFA items. It is this kind of stupid selfish immature behavior that may get it ruined for the rest of us law-abiding NFA owners. That may be harsh, but, damn, pay your $200 tax and GET OVER IT. If you don't like that $800 M16's are selling for $20k, then WRITE YOUR CONGRESSMAN!
 
Last edited:
Here's one from this year, just for giggles...

Gun offenses send three law enforcers to prison

Thursday, April 10, 2008
THE SAGINAW NEWS

MIDLAND -- A man who helped send people to prison is headed to prison himself. Former Midland County Assistant Prosecutor Frederick A. MacKinnon will spend five years in a federal lockup for abusing the authority of his office to obtain seven machine guns and nine silencers for personal use. MacKinnon was Ogemaw County prosecutor when the offenses occurred.

A jury in August convicted MacKinnon and Maxwell L. Garnett, 56, former Rose City police chief, of 51 charges. The jury found a third defendant, Gary J. Theunick, 59, a former Ogemaw County chief assistant prosecutor and Saginaw police officer, guilty of 26 charges. Theunick and Garnett are both of Rose City.

All of the counts involve unlawful possession of machine guns and silencers, including four .22-caliber silencers, a .223-caliber machine gun, a .45-caliber submachine gun and a 9 mm submachine gun.

U.S. District Judge Robert H. Cleland sentenced Mac-Kinnon, 54, of Hale on Tuesday. Cleland earlier sentenced Garnett to 71 months in prison and Theunick to 63 months.

The men started buying the guns in 1999. Federal law restricts the possession of machine guns. Authorities indicted them in 2005.

Former Midland Prosecutor Norman Donker hired MacKinnon in April 2001. Current Prosecutor Michael Carpenter took office on Jan. 1, 2005, and fired Mac-Kinnon on Jan. 19, 2005, immediately after reviewing the criminal allegations against MacKinnon. Theunick retired from the Saginaw Police Department in 1994 after 20 years as a patrol officer.

Bottom line: Don't be an idiot!
 
WOW. This started as a basic question. Apparently it is NOT legal to own a M14 with a selector lock even if it was bought from a dept. and and then sold as a semi-auto by an officer to a civi.
But what it also tells me, is the DOD is not keeping track of it's property.
The police can and do dispose of DOD property as they see fit.
If the DOD started inventory in 2002.. how long does it take to find out they
are missing a few?
It seems the only one's playing by the rules are the civilians.
As for myself I was'nt interested in the piece, I collect knives not guns.


LT
 
It doesn't matter if DoD did or did not "lose track" of a gun, some gun, or all of them. If an individual is found with an M14, he will be arrested, indicted and possibly imprisoned. In one case I know of, a three star general testified that the Army had NEVER released ANY M14 rifles for civilian sale, period. And that, therefore, ANY GI M14 in civilian hands was not only illegal, but stolen property, period.

So who will a judge or jury believe? An Army general, or Joe Slob, who says he bought the M14 from his cop cousin, and that the guys on some web site said it is OK? If he is lucky, he gets probation, but no matter what, he is a felon who can never again own any kind of gun except an antique.

Jim
 
machine gun

for it to be a machine gun, it must fire automatic. if it's semi-auto only.... it's semi-auto only, and there aren't issues.... you said this was a semi auto m14. so it's just a cool gun, not a class 3 weapon, unless the barrel is chopped.
 
No, most M14s were locked to shoot semi only, but are still machine guns. The ATF, backed up by case law, considers any gun that was ever a machinegun to be a machinegun and subject to the registry, or contraband.
 
No, most M14s were locked to shoot semi only, but are still machine guns. The ATF, backed up by case law, considers any gun that was ever a machinegun to be a machinegun and subject to the registry, or contraband.

This is entirely correct. There are about 50 M14s on the registry, legal to own. Some came out of H&R when it closed, some from TRW, etc. There is one TRW M14NM that was adjudicated to be semauto, but that's it. All the others are on the registry—or contraband.


Regards,

Walt
 
Back
Top