Shoestring Machine Gun

In September 2004 the ATF decided that a 14 inch long shoestring was considered a machine gun:

Here is an official letter stating the facts:

In 2007 the ATF decided the shoestring alone was not a machine gun.  It was only considered one when added to a semi automatic rifle in order to increase its rate of fire:

Thank god they reversed their 2004 ruling.  It would have been pretty difficult to prosecute the entire shoe wearing population of the United States for constructive possession of a machine gun. :lol:

The first picture in this post is allegedly a “registered” shoe string, that the owner paid to be able to use legally.  That metallic tag apparently has a serial # on it.

This raises a couple of questions in my mind…

  1. Why is the ATF so specific of the type of string used?
  2. Why is the ATF so specific with the length of the shoestring?

I wonder what would happen if someone was caught using a 13 inch piece of fishing line?  I suppose since it still would increase the rate of fire, it would be deemed a machine gun no matter what type of string or length.

35 COMMENTS - JUMP DOWN ↓ TO ADD ANOTHER

NiCK January 25, 2010 at 09:47 am

Now remember Shotgun barrel 18″, Rifle Barrel 16″, your shoe laces not 14″.

I am the only person in this room qualified to handle this weapon. POP

Reply

bill February 6, 2011 at 11:48 am

I am the only one is this room professional enough to handle a glock 40. BOOM! is everyone alright?

*call an ambulance*

Reply

Josh January 25, 2010 at 10:19 am

The ATF is being specific as to the type and length of string because it seems that they examined, at Mr. Blakely’s request, a 14 inch piece of shoestring to determine legality. Clearly, anything that modifies a weapon to cause it to fire automatically causes the classification of the weapon to be changed to a “machine gun.”

The type and dimensions of the string used as reference in the letters appears to be to address the specific string Mr. Blakely was inquiring about.

Reply

Mike W January 25, 2010 at 02:55 pm

to me that looks no different than the “bump fire” devices- which, as I understand it, are all considered legal.

Reply

Walker May 9, 2013 at 09:12 am

This is different than “bump firing” because you are not physically pulling the trigger each time while when bump firing your finger presses the trigger for each shot fired.

Reply

Josh January 25, 2010 at 04:26 pm

I’m not familiar with all the “bump fire” devices, but from what I’ve seen, don’t they operate on the principle that the shooter’s finger still actuates the trigger for each shot? Recoil causes the weapon to move backward slightly to allow the trigger to reset, and the device pulls the weapon forward again to make the shooter’s stationary finger actuate the trigger again.

This device doesn’t operate on that same principle. In this configuration, the key ring essentially becomes the trigger. Once the key ring is pulled, the weapon continues to fire until it is released. The weapon physically moving backward with recoil doesn’t cause the trigger to reset either, the slack on the string from the bolt blowing back causes the reset.

As I said, I’m no expert on bump fire devices, but I recall reading about an “Akins Accelerator” (I think that was the name) that caused a 10/22 to essentially fire fully automatic. I’m pretty sure that was ruled illegal by the ATF as well. Someone might be able to correct me or add more information.

Reply

Robert February 22, 2013 at 03:25 pm

Your theory is flawed. Both devices require pressure on the trigger to maintain an automatic firing system.

Reply

Bryan Spiegel January 26, 2010 at 07:17 am

The atkins accelerator was a stock that had the receiver free float on a spring mount in the stock. The stock stayed still, and the receiver 9and by effect, the trigger) would move slightly back and forth, allowing controlled bursts of bumpfire.

The ATF said it was acceptable… and then changed their mind, and required confiscation of the spring in the stock or face the time and fine for making a machinegun.

(I thought once you were found not guilty of a crime you could not be tried again. isnt that changing of their mind doing just that? Oh wait.. they arent law enforcement, they are tax collectors with guns.)

Reply

Josh January 26, 2010 at 09:19 am

The fifth amendment prevents double jeopardy. It means, in essence, that a person cannot be tried twice for the same crime after acquittal, retried after a conviction unless that conviction is first vacated, or punished multiple times for the same crime.

You’re likening that to a change in a rule or law that previous held that something was legal. This happens all the time. By your logic, cocaine, and nearly all other illegal drugs, would have to still be legal since they were, at one time, not illegal to possess or use.

Reply

Bryan Spiegel January 26, 2010 at 09:33 am

Good point :)

You would think that since they had said that these were legal, then existing sold stock would be accepted as legal, and future sales would be restricted.

Reply

Admin (Mike) January 26, 2010 at 03:58 pm

I agree, it would have been nice to see the people that already owned the atkins accelerator, grandfathered into the NFA system for free, and with all the paper work done for them. I suppose that’s asking too much…

Reply

Robert February 22, 2013 at 03:29 pm

Double jeopardy isn’t what you are looking for. Article 1, Section 9 of the US Constitution clearly states “Ex Post Facto laws will not be passed” which simply means if you owned a bump fire system before it was illegal to buy one, it is unconstitutional to confiscate it. On the other hand, legislators have been wiping their ass with the constitution for decades.

Reply

Dedicated_Dad April 1, 2011 at 10:56 pm

I know this is old, but I can’t resist a comment…

You said “…The first picture in this post is allegedly a “registered” shoe string, that the owner paid to be able to use legally. That metallic tag apparently has a serial # on it…”

For this to be true, one of two things must ALSO be true:
(1) He registered it prior to 1986 – an impossibility since the first ATF “Ruling Letter” came in 1996.
(2) He’s a “SOT” – in which case he could only use it as a “dealer sample” to LE Agencies or the .Mil.

I really can’t believe we’re having a serious conversation about ending up in prison for a gorram SHOESTRING!! WHAT F***ING COUNTRY IS THIS AGAIN??!!

Gah!!

Reply

Noway May 24, 2012 at 11:04 pm

That’s not correct.

There are FFL Manufacturers licenses that combined with a Demo Letter allows those manufacturers to make ‘Post Samples’ or machineguns to this day.

Reply

Hammerhead November 27, 2011 at 11:47 pm

Even with the shoe string the trigger is being operated each time which is legal. two words for the atf Fuck YoU!

Reply

Nick December 8, 2011 at 07:10 pm

Were free and the government should let the public do what they want

Reply

Cooolll September 4, 2012 at 12:09 pm

I think according to the ATF letter where it says manual reloading and single function of the trigger would not allow them to stop us from using bump devices.
The law is the law and this is very clear bump devices pull the trigger each time to reload and its not a single function.

Reply

bakeca livorno May 16, 2013 at 12:40 am

wtf?….

Reply

just blume September 10, 2013 at 06:54 pm

If anyone has fired and tried to hit anything with a full auto weapon they would realize how silly the whole thing is… a whole lot of wasted ammo and you usually only hit the target with the first two or three rounds…

Reply

chris March 19, 2014 at 01:23 pm

Just blume: “If anyone has fired and tried to hit anything with a full auto weapon they would realize how silly the whole thing is… a whole lot of wasted ammo and you usually only hit the target with the first two or three rounds…”
might I add shoulder fired ” full auto weapon” My UGWS shoots 50cal and MK19 fully auto just fine!!! :)

Reply

LEAVE A COMMENT:

Previous post:

Next post: