The gun control lobby has expended a lot of time and effort over the past decade trying to rebrand itself as a "gun safety" movement. I've lost track of how many times I've heard someone, a gun control advocate or anti-gun politician proclaim that they "support the Second Amendment, but..." before laying out a laundry list of gun control laws they contend have no negative impact on our right to keep and bear arms.
Try to get a straight answer from one of these advocates about what guns they're actually okay with and you're likely going to find yourself frustrated. Semi-automatic handguns are too concealable, and the fact they can accept detachable magazines is a dealbreaker for most anti-gunners. Semi-automatic rifles, on the other hand, are "battlefield weapons of war" unsuitable for use by average Americans.
Some guns are too cheap. Some are too powerful. Some are designed for young shooters, which is deeply problematic for the gun control crowd. When it comes down to it, it really seems like no gun is truly acceptable, though maybe a single-shot bolt action rifle or single barrel shotgun might be okay so long as there are stringent requirements on possessing those arms.
One gun that definitely does not have the stamp of approval from groups like Everytown and Giffords is the M14, a select-fire rifle which really has seen service in battlefields across the globe. The Civilian Marksmanship Program recently announced that a yet-to-be-determined number of M14s that have been permanently modified to operate only as semi-automatics will be sold to those participating in the program, and the Everytown-funded website The Smoking Gun is melting down over the news.
Writer Rachel Fedeli says the CMP's recent announcement "raises several questions, including who authorized it and if it will lead to more U.S. military weapons, such as M16s and M4s, entering the civilian market in the future."
In an interview, CMP Chairman and CEO Jerry O’Keefe confirmed that the surplus M14 rifles “were originally serialized as fully automatic firearms.”1 This is important because, according to the ATF, the only way to remove a machine gun from the NFA’s requirements is to destroy its frame or receiver, the gun’s main building block.2 This is commonly known as the “once a machine gun, always a machine gun” rule.
Yet O’Keefe said the CMP “always felt that there was a legal pathway” to selling the M14s because of the organization’s unusual position under federal law.3 The CMP is not an ordinary gun dealer. According to O’Keefe, the organization’s federal charter provides it with “significant authorizations and exemptions that no other entity that sells firearms has.”4 O’Keefe added that the M14 sales were “all authorized under existing legislation and policy,” and “there was no law that needed to be changed.”5
O’Keefe said the CMP walked its federal partners through every step of the M14 conversion process, including the required machining, and plans to track each rifle by serial number to document the exact point when it becomes “permanently semi-automatic.”6 But if gun forums are any indication, some customers may attempt to convert the M14s back into machine guns.
I find it highly amusing that Fedeli links to almost every one of her sources except the unnamed gun forums where some commenters have supposedly said they might try to convert their CMP M14 back into a machine gun. I'm sure those comments exist, but I also suspect that they're few and far between. And frankly, anyone using a publicly accessible forum to express their intent to violate federal law is a moron.
Fedeli also seems highly concerned about whether the CMP really has the authority to permanently modify these M14s and make them available for sale, though she offers no evidence that the organization is skirting federal law. She's also taking her readers on a ride down a slippery slope by engaging in a little thought exercise about what the CMP might offer up for sale in the future.
That concern is especially relevant as the Army begins replacing M4A1 carbines within its Close Combat Force. The Army awarded Sig Sauer a 10-year contract in 2022 for what became the M7 rifle and M250 automatic rifle, and in 2025 formally classified both as standard weapons, saying the M7 would replace the M4A1 in the Close Combat Force. In 2026, the Army also accepted its first XM8 carbines, another select-fire 6.8mm weapon that it says is set to replace M4A1s for those soldiers. M4A1 rifles could of course remain in service elsewhere, enter storage, or be disposed of through other channels. But the M14 approval means there is now an established example of the government allowing the CMP to convert former military machine guns and sell them in the civilian market.
And? Those "former machine guns" would simply join the tens of millions of semi-automatic long guns that are already lawfully possessed by millions of American gun owners.
That seems to be the real issue for Fedeli and other gun control advocates. The fact that M14s are select-fire rifles is the hook they use to scare their audience, but when these guns are sold by the CMP they'll be functionally the same as every other gas-operated semi-automatic centerfire rifle on the market. The CMP plans on pricing the rifles "below $2,000", so there'll be plenty of cheaper options for gun owners out there. For those who want to own a piece of history, though, the CMP's new offering may be worth the extra cost.
Whether it's an M14, an AR-15, or even a Ruger 10/22, the gun control lobby can find something to complain about. Which again begs the question, if these folks aren't opposed to the Second Amendment, then what guns are they okay with?
