Ammo For Sale

« « Cali gun suit | Home | Man of steel » »

Olofson update

Sebastian has an analysis of the Olofson case.

One Response to “Olofson update”

  1. Sebastian Says:

    What’s really interesting about the definition proffered by Olofson’s attorneys in this appeal, namely the definition of “automatically,” is if the court had accepted it, it would have made three round burst legal, and not subject to NFA regulations. The argument essentially was that automatically meant that it had to fire until the trigger was released or the ammunition was exhausted. If it stopped firing as a result of something other than those two things, then it wasn’t a machine gun, since it did not fire automatically. This was the language the Supreme Court used in Staples, but it was dicta.

    It seems that argument was a hell of a hail mary, legally, but if there’s any chance the court might bite, you give it a try. Would have been interested had the court bitten.