Blackwater and Firearms Laws
Via several sources, it seems that Blackwater has questionably purchased NFA firearms. Seems that the local sheriff was listed as the buyer, Blackwater paid for them, and Blackwater keeps them at their facility. The weapons consist of 17 AKs and 17A ARs.
Ry notes that this transaction is likely illegal. Joe likens it to a straw purchase of title ii firearms.
I wonder why Blackwater would go through the trouble. I seem to recall recently a bill passed that exempted federal contractors from the NFA ban. Nope. Never mind. The bill is part of the ATF Reform act, which has not passed yet.
Next, assuming it is illegal, this is another negative from the NFA ban. After all, we can’t equip our contractors with appropriate weaponry until they’re out of country. They’d have to train with them first and could not, in country, under the NFA. So, most of their weapons stuff is OK out of country.
This in addition to the fact manufacturers won’t develop military rifles in country because there’s no market.
This is not the first time there have been issues with Blackwater and NFA laws. A while back, there was some press because they exported suppressors without dotting i’s and crossing t’s.
Update: BTW, why wouldn’t Blackwater just get an FFL and an SOT?
June 25th, 2008 at 9:58 am
I suspect the BATFE as it’s currently operating wouldn’t approve of a SOT buying MGs for it’s own use. I know it happens, but the point of a SOT is to acquire the weapons for sale to another party. The only exception being dealer samples, but I’m pretty sure it’s also illegal to become a SOT just so you can own post 86 dealer samples.
I’m not a SOT or a dealer, but I do have a (legal) SMG which, of course, means I have no clue about any of this. 🙂
June 25th, 2008 at 10:53 am
There is a gun range in Georgia that rents out SMGs to fire at their range and are not for sale. Why couldn’t blackwater do the same thing?
June 25th, 2008 at 10:54 am
i’m sure at some point, that range either got those guns as samples or built them as samples.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:10 am
An easy solution would also be to become a Type 7 FFL and get a Class II SOT. At that point, they could just manufacture their own M16s and M4s. Possibly ATF won’t issue you a license for manufacturing unless you’re selling them, but there is a market for M4s and M16s in law enforcement.
June 25th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
there are several ranges that rent out NFA items so why wouldnt blackwater have the same kind of license?
this one is not making much sense, i cant imagine a facility and company as well funded as their that would do something like this…
this story doesnt smell right
June 25th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
What’s even worse is they chose Bushmaster over Colt! 😉
June 25th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Couldn’t the sheriff just dodge the problem by making some Blackwater guys an “auxiliary SWAT team”?
June 25th, 2008 at 9:18 pm
I could be mistaken but I was under the impression that those organizations that rent out full auto items only do so for pre ’86 machine guns. This sounds like post ’86 items.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:44 pm
isn’t the sheriff involved in illegal “transferring” unless there is one member there with the guns at all times? I know that they COULD store them at blackwater if the only people with access were the county folks, but if blackwater is using them without appropriate county representation (say, they have the key to where they’re locked up) aren’t they breaking the law? If not a whole list of laws.
Aren’t we REALLY just talking about conspiracy to violate federal gun laws here? Where’s the ATFU?