Wish I hadn't seen this...Now I want one!!

[Mags]

.
maybe grasping at a straw, but wouldn't the trigger on the drill fall into "...or a device that fires multiple shots with the pull and release of the trigger". once the drill is attached it's part of the firearm device.

Absolutely Magical! And Simply Irresistible.

Not for me - I guess I am a party pooper - I shot PLENTY of full auto while in the Military!

As did I and a few million others. The design of this gatling gun raises some interesting questions tho, relative to whether adding a mechanical device such as a drill would make it a machine gun. The defining characteristic of a gatling gun is that it does not have a trigger, thus the prohibition against "trigger cranks" does not apply. There is no mention of how the crank is to be turned. See below:

Quoted from ATF:

“Multiburst trigger activator” means: (1)A device that simulates automatic gunfire by allowing standard function of a semiautomatic firearm with a static positioned trigger finger or a device that fires multiple shots with the pull and release of the trigger; or(2)A manual or power-driven trigger activating device constructed and designed so that when attached to a semiautomatic firearm it simulates automatic gunfire.“Trigger crank” means any device to be attached to a semiautomatic firearm that repeatedly activates the trigger of the firearm through the use of a lever or other part that is turned in a circular motion, but does not include any firearm initially designed and manufactured to fire through the use of a crank or lever

That said, the argument to classify a powered gatling gun as a machine gun appears to rely on "rate of fire", rather than any mechanical attributes. Which begs the question of what is a acceptable rate of fire? So far no one, including the ATF, has come forth with any guidance on rate of fire as a distinguishing characteristic that would separate a non-full auto firearm from a full auto or select fire firearm.

[Mistered]

relative to whether adding a mechanical device such as a drill would make it a machine gun.

As with any inquiries such as this I suggest going to the source - and in this case it would be the manufacturer of this gun as they will no doubt have the correct answer. It would no doubt be in their best interest to know the answer as I suspect they get asked about this a lot.
An email to them is only keystrokes away!

[GunnyGene]

.
maybe grasping at a straw, but wouldn't the trigger on the drill fall into "...or a device that fires multiple shots with the pull and release of the trigger". once the drill is attached it's part of the firearm device.

Not according to the ATF. "but does not include any firearm initially designed and manufactured to fire through the use of a crank or lever".

Nor could the addition of a motor of some sort turn it into a "mini-gun", since rate of fire is controlled by the operator whether a "drill" is used or not.

It would be an interesting legal case if such were brought, since there is some tiny bit of "wiggle room" on both sides of the question, as noted below.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/rulin ... g/download

ATF and its predecessor agency, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), have historically held that the original, crank-operated Gatling Gun, and replicas thereof, are not automatic firearms or machineguns as defined. See Rev. Rul. 55-528, 1955-2 C.B. 482. The original Gatling Gun is a rapid-firing, hand-operated weapon. The rate of fire is regulated by the rapidity of the hand-cranking movement, manually controlled by the operator. It is not a "machinegun" as that term is defined in 26 U.S.C. 5845(b} because it is not a weapon that fires automatically. The Minigun is not a Gatling Gun. It was not produced under the 1862 -1893 patents of the original Gatling Gun. While using a basic design concept of the Gatling Gun, the Minigun does not incorporate any of Gatling's original components and its feed mechanisms are entirely different. Critically, the Minigun shoots more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger, as prescribed by 26 U.S.C. 5845(b}. See United States v. Fleischli, 305 F.3d 643, 655-656 (7th Cir. 2002). See also Staples v. United States, 511 U.S. 600,603 (1994) (automatic refers to a weapon that "once its trigger is depressed, the weapon will automatically continue to fire until its trigger is released or the ammunition is exhausted"); GEORGE C. NONTE, JR., FIREARMS ENCYCLOPEDIA 13 (Harper & Rowe 1973) (the term "automatic" is defined to include "any firearm in which a single pull and continuous pressure upon the trigger (or other firing device) will produce rapid discharge of successive shots so long as ammunition remains in the magazine or feed device -in other words, a machinegun"}: WEBSTER'S II NEW RIVERSIDE-UNIVERSITY DICTIONARY (1988) (defining automatically as "acting or operating in a manner essentially independent of external influence or control"}; JOHN QUICK, PH. D., DICTIONARY OF WEAPONS AND MILITARY TERMS 40 (McGraw-Hill 1973) (defining automatic fire as "continuous fire from an automatic gun, lasting until pressure on the trigger is released").

Here's the original patent the ATF references: https://patents.google.com/patent/US36836 . You can see that the subject "replica" gun is nearly identical in it's function and operation. It's also noteworthy that later improvements to the original Gatling include the use of a electric motor to rotate the cylinder which feeds the firing barrel.

[fortyshooter]

9mm gatling gun!
https://youtu.be/VYoPovsM-GM

[dddrees]

Absolutely Magical! And Simply Irresistible.

Not for me - I guess I am a party pooper - I shot PLENTY of full auto while in the Military!

Me too.

This thing would only ever be a man cave decoration at best for me. Even in 22LR just a big waste of money unless Federal was willing to sponsor me too. Frankly even then I wouldn't get that much joy out of it.

[dave77]

If it wasn't for the $5000 price tag one in .22 wouldn't be too bad. You wouldn't need match grade ammo so you could shoot it quite a bit for $20 - $30. Easy to spend that much or more when shooting much .357.

[fortyshooter]

I must have missed an earlier thread about it here some place.

[GunnyGene]

I must have missed an earlier thread about it here some place.

One of the mods combined the two threads. I'd originally posted about it in the Handgun forum. No biggie.

[Mags]

I wouldn't mind having one if not for the price. Even if most of the time it sat man-cave decoration. It makes a great conversation piece.

[fortyshooter]

Well I have a lathe and a couple of mills and plenty of time!

[Cowboy Gun Fan]

I always wanted a Gatlin Gun, but a real one, lol.

That little one is pretty cool though.

[If1Hitu]

Wow that absolutely awesome!

[clovishound]

I believe that addition of an electric motor would make it qualify as a machine gun. You would control the firing by use of a switch. This would make it fire multiple rounds with one pull of the "trigger". This is what made the bump stock legal. Technically, there would only be one bullet per trigger pull. The bump stock merely facilitates multiple trigger pulls.