Question, and perhaps I'm just stupid, but I really don't know what the atf means by " without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger"
I just find that rather confusing in the context of a machine gun.
Can someone explain this to this simpleton?

They want everyone Confused so that they can twist it anyway they want to make you feel like you did something wrong and give up your Constitutional Rights

A single pull of the trigger cause a cartridge to fire resulting in the machine reloading without any other action by the shooter.

Doesn't that go without saying, why add the " Manual reloading" ? I don't even believe that possible in something shooting full auto.

Think "jury instructions."

Still can't make sense of it, I'll have to agree with funshooter, it appears to just be a waste of text in order to confuse, it doesn't take that much to confuse the jury pool.

Have had a 1911 machine gun on me more than once.

Aren't there triggers designed to fire when you pull the trigger it fires like a normal trigger but when you release it the gun fires again. With such a trigger might come closer to full auto than the rectal orifices at the BATFE. I sen more that one ads for what appear to be that type of trigger while cruise various hunter/shooter forums.
PJ

A semi-automatic firearm shall only be allowed to fire one round per trigger activation. No binary trigger that fires round number two on the release. This, I think is their focus.

I believe, you can have a firearm that, for example, fires a round, the bolt holds open, you load another round, then release the bolt (no trigger activation) that fires round two upon the bolt closing... (I visualize something like an AR action without a magazine). . A bolt action could be made to do this type of operation also. (Think Remington 700 slam fire, lol). A WAG as examples that can fire two rounds with one trigger pull that wouldn't be prohibited.

Is manual reloading referring to reloading the firearm or reloading the chamber? I'd think chamber.

Full auto, or burst of fire, would obviously be prohibited. .

Obviously?
Why should it be obviously prohibited ?
Kenneth

Nope. The Ithaca 37 shotguns had mo disconnecter. Meaning, if you kept the trigger squeezed, it would fire as fast as you worked the pump.

I'm thinking legal definitions written by lawyers who've never fired a gun

Perhaps Alec Baldwin can answer this.

It's bogus insanity. Simi Auto rifles like the AR and AK can be made to fire full auto with a nothing more than a rubber band and a stick and still be within the definition of a simi auto. They're trying to make a case for outlawing all simi auto firearms. We need to be rid of that bunch of misfits. It's apparent they are out of control again.

High price of ammo

By this definition the forced reset trigger could not be defined as a machine gun, the trigger must be manually activated for each round fired.
It does manually (or mechanically) force the trigger back into your finger so that holding a few pounds of pressure will fire the gun repeatedly, but that doesn't change the fact that it's a single function of the trigger.

Still a bit confused about "without manually reloading"
Meaning automatically reload, as in the bolt picking up a round and rechambering without outside influences?
I know I'm making to much of this, but if it changes the definition above.

Can't argue with any of that!

I don't think that's mentioned in the constitution.

Definitely NOT! I have a copy of it hanging on my wall and we all know what it says and doesn't say.

Good one

I read it to mean that firearms that can be "slam" fired like the Ithaca Plumbim mentioned or a Winchester 1897 won't be banned , but anything that puts another round in the chamber automatically IE gas operated or blowback and fires more than one round is verboten.

The early ones did work as you say bit they were changed to have a disconnector maybe soon after the passage of the 1968 gun control law. You left out he 1897 Winchester, my favorite alley cleaner, the Winchester M12 and I have a hardware store 12 ga. that looks like it was made by high Standard that can be slam fired. At least it did when I took it to the range to test fire it. Dunno if there were any others as those are the ones I recall.
PJ

The more they desperately infringe the 2nd, the more it comes into play.

Yes, it IS that simple...

As a kid I remember a using a pump action 22 rifle that you could slam fire. I remember it was a takedown model and I'm thinking Winchester Model 62 maybe, but I'm not positive on that.

They keep things vague on purpose so they can interpret it any way they want.

Because of the the text we're discussing, nothing more.

I think there's a reason these are on sale, and it isn't a good reason.

https://www.grafs.com/franklin-armo...90122&cmp=1&utm_medium=HTMLEmail

Besides the spilling maybe.