Well, it's nice that one more original FA Tommy will be preserved rather than torched.
It would be a lot nicer if we all could buy one, take it home, shoot it, as was done right through to just a few years ago. FREEDOM becomes measurably less in this fine country of ours almost daily.... if you aren't a criminal. I fail to see the street gangs lining up to register their FAs, their Prohibs, their Restricteds, but they seem never to be punished when they are apprehended. ONLY the non-violent are punished.
Think on it: owning, possessing, transporting, carrying a Prohib all are swept under the table at sentencing because the $200 taken from the gas bar is deemed more important by the Courts, THAT being ROBBERY. The dweeb gets 2-less-a-day for the robbery and all else is forgotten..... but WE get jumped all over for the very things which are forgiven, essentially, for the gangsters. It should be 6 offences, 6 sentences and all served consecutively because they were DONE consecutively; anything else is favourable treatment of the criminal element.
But also think outside the box. You gentlemen all are correct when it comes to SERIES-MANUFACTURED firearms, but those are not the ONLY ones ever made.
Alan Lever told me in 1966 that he was ordering a batch of SA Thompsons and that they would be legal SA guns. I know that an SA Tommy WAS built about that time because THAT is the gun to which the BATF objected: a gun which already had been built. It was SUBSEQUENT to that 'official rejection slip' that the 1927A1 closed-bolt gun was designed, a process which took several years, several different guns, one after the other, until the Glorious Commissars were satisfied.
It's the same thing as the original 1927: a purpose-built SA gun which used nearly all the parts from the FA gun. But it was a strict semi-auto and only became 'anti-social' AFTER the bureaucrats got hold of it. The GUN did not change, but it was perfectly okay one day and 'evil' the next... because of a bureaucracy which decided that it knew more than the people who MADE the thing. The '27 was eventually rejected because it used the same 'receiver' as the '28.... but the receivers were identical, anyway: all the changes were in the trigger mech! By THIS line of reasoning, a Charlton remains a Lee-Enfield and thus non-Restricted, a Huot remains a Ross. But the bureaucrats say 'no'.
Get a dictionary. The word 'bureaucrat' means 'rule by the office'
The biggest problem with Bureaucrats is that they CAN have it both ways and so you get:
1. the 1927 Thompson, a strict SA, becomes banned and
2. a new 1927 Thompson which looks a bit like the original is made
3. the Reising Model 60 is leaned on and then banned even though it always was a strict SA and very nearly impossible to convert (you needed a welder to start)
4. in California, the SMLE, for years, was a machine-gun because of the magazine
and so forth and so on. ad infinitam, ad nauseam.
We are ruled by people in offices who we do not elect and over whom we have no control, and who MAKE UP whatever Laws they might WANT to enforce. I have actually seen a bureaucrat look at a pile of permits issued by HIS office and announce that they were not permits at all, even though they had been issued as such for the preceding 26 years. THAT ONE cost me half a million bucks. And then there was the rifle range that had to be bulldozed flat so it could be built again (I have written about this one previously) exactly the same way.... because a bureaucrat decided to change a regulation in order to break a small club. And it goes on and on: people who are supposed to be ENFORCING the law deciding that they would rather MAKE the law.
And we, the subject masses, simply must do as we are ordered.
We are told that the Solar System will end when the Sun expands out to the orbit of Mars and scorches everything off the face of the Earth. I'll betcha 5 bucks that a bureaucrat makes a regulation against it... and 10 more says that another bureaucrat makes a regulation mandating it and another bureaucrat demands a 'fee' for the 'permit', without which God will be shut down!
It would be a lot nicer if we all could buy one, take it home, shoot it, as was done right through to just a few years ago. FREEDOM becomes measurably less in this fine country of ours almost daily.... if you aren't a criminal. I fail to see the street gangs lining up to register their FAs, their Prohibs, their Restricteds, but they seem never to be punished when they are apprehended. ONLY the non-violent are punished.
Think on it: owning, possessing, transporting, carrying a Prohib all are swept under the table at sentencing because the $200 taken from the gas bar is deemed more important by the Courts, THAT being ROBBERY. The dweeb gets 2-less-a-day for the robbery and all else is forgotten..... but WE get jumped all over for the very things which are forgiven, essentially, for the gangsters. It should be 6 offences, 6 sentences and all served consecutively because they were DONE consecutively; anything else is favourable treatment of the criminal element.
But also think outside the box. You gentlemen all are correct when it comes to SERIES-MANUFACTURED firearms, but those are not the ONLY ones ever made.
Alan Lever told me in 1966 that he was ordering a batch of SA Thompsons and that they would be legal SA guns. I know that an SA Tommy WAS built about that time because THAT is the gun to which the BATF objected: a gun which already had been built. It was SUBSEQUENT to that 'official rejection slip' that the 1927A1 closed-bolt gun was designed, a process which took several years, several different guns, one after the other, until the Glorious Commissars were satisfied.
It's the same thing as the original 1927: a purpose-built SA gun which used nearly all the parts from the FA gun. But it was a strict semi-auto and only became 'anti-social' AFTER the bureaucrats got hold of it. The GUN did not change, but it was perfectly okay one day and 'evil' the next... because of a bureaucracy which decided that it knew more than the people who MADE the thing. The '27 was eventually rejected because it used the same 'receiver' as the '28.... but the receivers were identical, anyway: all the changes were in the trigger mech! By THIS line of reasoning, a Charlton remains a Lee-Enfield and thus non-Restricted, a Huot remains a Ross. But the bureaucrats say 'no'.
Get a dictionary. The word 'bureaucrat' means 'rule by the office'
The biggest problem with Bureaucrats is that they CAN have it both ways and so you get:
1. the 1927 Thompson, a strict SA, becomes banned and
2. a new 1927 Thompson which looks a bit like the original is made
3. the Reising Model 60 is leaned on and then banned even though it always was a strict SA and very nearly impossible to convert (you needed a welder to start)
4. in California, the SMLE, for years, was a machine-gun because of the magazine
and so forth and so on. ad infinitam, ad nauseam.
We are ruled by people in offices who we do not elect and over whom we have no control, and who MAKE UP whatever Laws they might WANT to enforce. I have actually seen a bureaucrat look at a pile of permits issued by HIS office and announce that they were not permits at all, even though they had been issued as such for the preceding 26 years. THAT ONE cost me half a million bucks. And then there was the rifle range that had to be bulldozed flat so it could be built again (I have written about this one previously) exactly the same way.... because a bureaucrat decided to change a regulation in order to break a small club. And it goes on and on: people who are supposed to be ENFORCING the law deciding that they would rather MAKE the law.
And we, the subject masses, simply must do as we are ordered.
We are told that the Solar System will end when the Sun expands out to the orbit of Mars and scorches everything off the face of the Earth. I'll betcha 5 bucks that a bureaucrat makes a regulation against it... and 10 more says that another bureaucrat makes a regulation mandating it and another bureaucrat demands a 'fee' for the 'permit', without which God will be shut down!
Last edited:
