Renz Posted September 6, 2019 Report Share Posted September 6, 2019 (edited) Thought this would be interesting to share. The Captain Miller Thompson from Steven Spielbergs Saving Private Ryan film will be up for grabs at UKs PropStore auction at the price of what a full auto Tommy will run you. It appears to have been converted from a real Thompson to fire blanks. Lots of photos available on their website. https://bit.ly/2kw8uTK Edited September 6, 2019 by Renz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaryKeim Posted September 6, 2019 Report Share Posted September 6, 2019 When work began on "Band of Brothers", the Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg-produced war series, Colin Hanks chose the exact same weapon as his father for his role as Lieutenant Henry Jones. That is interesting! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anticus Posted September 7, 2019 Report Share Posted September 7, 2019 No one in the States could buy this if it’s live and overseas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim c 351 Posted September 7, 2019 Report Share Posted September 7, 2019 I wonder what countries would permit the successful bidder to import the gun.??? That should keep the bids lower.Jim C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD. Posted September 7, 2019 Report Share Posted September 7, 2019 I think this would be an excellent question to submit to BATF for an official ruling. I feel certain they would want to inspect the Thompson before making a determination. If the conversion is such that this Thompson cannot be readily converted to fire live ammunition, then a strong case could be made to allow registration as something other than a machine gun, i.e., Short Barrel Rifle (SBR), Any Other Weapon (AOW), Destructive Device, etc. Before posting, I understand there will be plenty of Class 3 experts that can provide many reasons why a favorable ruling from ATF would not occur. I am not one to make their job easier. I try to be optimistic on hypothetical questions like this. Properly presented, especially with a long game of possibly taking the issue to Federal District Court, may produce unexpected results. And it costs nothing to be optimistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim c 351 Posted September 7, 2019 Report Share Posted September 7, 2019 It might cost nothing to be optimistic , but it would cost a pretty penny to be high bidder and then spend years fighting in our court system.Unless a lawyer would volunteer to do it for free. Any takers???Jim C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villafuego Posted September 8, 2019 Report Share Posted September 8, 2019 I can see a place like Battlefield Las Vegas importing it as a post-sample, and charging a premium to rent/shoot it on their range..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1921A Posted September 9, 2019 Report Share Posted September 9, 2019 And the correct answer is......Once a machine gun, always a machine gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adg105200 Posted September 9, 2019 Report Share Posted September 9, 2019 Thought this would be interesting to share. The Captain Miller Thompson from Steven Spielbergs Saving Private Ryan film will be up for grabs at UKs PropStore auction at the price of what a full auto Tommy will run you. It appears to have been converted from a real Thompson to fire blanks. Lots of photos available on their website. https://bit.ly/2kw8uTKGreat looking M1A1 with a unique history! Thanks for sharing! Andrew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSMGguy Posted September 9, 2019 Report Share Posted September 9, 2019 Looks like it's a live M1A1 with a barrel restriction installed for firing blanks. It'll be informative to watch the bidding on this one. There are just a few places to where it can be imported and owned in its current configuration. That'll cut down on the number or bidders, unless someone buys it with every intention of destroying its functionality to comply with local requirements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chopper28 Posted September 10, 2019 Report Share Posted September 10, 2019 It wont be back in the USA for sure. Put a new barrel on it and it would be ready to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1gewehr Posted September 11, 2019 Report Share Posted September 11, 2019 And the correct answer is......Once a machine gun, always a machine gun. No such regulation. But folks keep saying it as much as TV shows keep telling folks that all legal guns are 'registered'. Still not true.There have been several court cases where ATF tried to make that stick. They have been shot down every time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bt3_guns Posted September 11, 2019 Report Share Posted September 11, 2019 Can you list the caes where BATFE has failed? I'm no expert but sure would like to read up on them. Thanks. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim c 351 Posted September 11, 2019 Report Share Posted September 11, 2019 Bill,I can't sight any cases. I have only my failing memory to fall back on .But I do remember a case involving a military M14 with a selector lock.As I recall the judge told the ATF to either demonstrate the gun could be fired, as it sits, FA or return it to the accused.Of course a different judge could rule another way.Jim C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSMGguy Posted September 11, 2019 Report Share Posted September 11, 2019 Bill,I can't sight any cases. I have only my failing memory to fall back on .But I do remember a case involving a military M14 with a selector lock.As I recall the judge told the ATF to either demonstrate the gun could be fired, as it sits, FA or return it to the accused.Of course a different judge could rule another way.Jim C A number of owners lost "reweld" MK Specialties semi-automatic M14s when the ATF demonstrated in court that the guns were "readily restorable" to full auto fire. Never mind that it took a skilled expert to do the restoration, and that the receivers used had been considered scrap by the ATF. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp2/294/896/2569999/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelkih Posted September 12, 2019 Report Share Posted September 12, 2019 NFA items can not be imported and owned by non dealers. Also, it still a machine gun receiver. There is no case to be made. The dumb rules are the rules. I think this would be an excellent question to submit to BATF for an official ruling. I feel certain they would want to inspect the Thompson before making a determination. If the conversion is such that this Thompson cannot be readily converted to fire live ammunition, then a strong case could be made to allow registration as something other than a machine gun, i.e., Short Barrel Rifle (SBR), Any Other Weapon (AOW), Destructive Device, etc. Before posting, I understand there will be plenty of Class 3 experts that can provide many reasons why a favorable ruling from ATF would not occur. I am not one to make their job easier. I try to be optimistic on hypothetical questions like this. Properly presented, especially with a long game of possibly taking the issue to Federal District Court, may produce unexpected results. And it costs nothing to be optimistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1921A Posted September 14, 2019 Report Share Posted September 14, 2019 (edited) And the correct answer is......Once a machine gun, always a machine gun. No such regulation. But folks keep saying it as much as TV shows keep telling folks that all legal guns are 'registered'. Still not true.There have been several court cases where ATF tried to make that stick. They have been shot down every time. Once a machine gun, always a machine gun has been ATFs position as long as I can remember. Perhaps you could share the specific ATF court cases youre referring to?Thanks1921A Edited September 14, 2019 by 1921A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpw43 Posted September 16, 2019 Report Share Posted September 16, 2019 (edited) I thought it odd that the captain carried the Thompson and the Sergeant carried an M1 carbine.I thought it should be the other way around. Edited September 17, 2019 by jpw43 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim c 351 Posted September 16, 2019 Report Share Posted September 16, 2019 Question for lawyers,Is the "once a machine gun-always a machinegun" the law as passed by congress.??Or is it the ATF interpretation of the law as passed by congress??Does it make any difference ??Jim C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim c 351 Posted September 16, 2019 Report Share Posted September 16, 2019 jpw43,Sizemore and Hanks could have carried any firearm they wanted.Jim C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mnshooter Posted September 16, 2019 Report Share Posted September 16, 2019 I thought it odd that the captain carried the Thompson and he Sergeant carried an M1 carbine.I thought it should be the other way around.You're right, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firearm Posted September 16, 2019 Report Share Posted September 16, 2019 (edited) And the correct answer is......Once a machine gun, always a machine gun. No such regulation. But folks keep saying it as much as TV shows keep telling folks that all legal guns are 'registered'. Still not true.There have been several court cases where ATF tried to make that stick. They have been shot down every time. Once a machine gun, always a machine gun has been ATFs position as long as I can remember. Perhaps you could share the specific ATF court cases youre referring to?Thanks1921AI am going to roll with you on this one. I can't remember where I read it in the regs (way back whenever) but that is what I always remember. "Once a machine gun, always a machine gun". Unless someone can cite a court case proving otherwise, that's what I would stick to. Not to mention, the State Department would probably consider it a "non-sporting" firearm. Edited September 16, 2019 by firearm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bridgeport28A1 Posted September 16, 2019 Report Share Posted September 16, 2019 (edited) A one off case...I am not a lawyer and I did not read the whole file. A welded full auto shaft of a NM USGI M14. Disclaimer: I read it on the internet. https://www.constitution.org/2ll/bardwell/us_v_m_14.txt Edited September 16, 2019 by Bridgeport28A1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now