Is atf coming after shockwave firearms?

[12Bravo20]

They're literally saying the same exact thing calling pistols rifles now because of the brace.

Logically and technically, it's the same exact thing as reclassifying firearms as short barrel shotguns if they had a brace, yet they are not treating them the equally under color of the law.

First let me state that I do NOT agree with the new brace rule one bit.

The ATF is using the legal definitions of a pistol, rifle, shotgun, and "firearm"

The Legal definition of a pistols is any gun designed to be shot one hand. Yes we all normally use two hands but the legal definition is one handed.

The legal definition of a rifle is a gun that has a rifled barrel at least 16" long and overall length of at least 26" and is designed to be fired using two hands with a shoulder stock.

The legal definition of a shotgun is a gun that has a smoothbore barrel at least 18" long and overall length of at least 26" and is designed to be fired using two hands with a shoulder stock.

The legal definition of a "firearm" is anything that does not meet the above definitions yet has an overall length of at least 26", designed to be fired using two hands and is designed to be used without a shouldering the gun nor ever has had a shoulder stock installed.

If a "firearm" is less than 26" in overall length then it is a NFA regulated AOW - Any Other Weapon. HINT leave the beards head grip on with the 14" barrel to stay legal without having to file a Form 1 as a SBS or NFA AOW.

So any smoothbore firearm such as the Shockwave, Tac 13/14, and similar were never designed to be shot one handed nor have a stock then they are NOT eligible for the pistol brace rule to register them as a SBR on a Tax Free Form 1.

You can still register a smoothbore firearm as a SBS but you will have to pay the $200 tax that is required by the 1934 NFA.

Whether any of us agree with the new rule or not, it is what it is. We will have to wait until either the courts rule the brace rule unconstitutional or Congress passes laws to stop the brace rule. But none of that changes the legal definitions of a pistol, rifle, shotgun, or firearm. And the Shockwave IS a firearm that does not meet the legal definitions of a pistol, rifle or shotgun.

You can do what you want with the information I posted, you can choose to comply or not comply, that is YOUR choice that only YOU can make.


PS: If you don't like what the brace rule is, don't attack me for it, I had nothing to do with it at all. I am only passing the information along so each and every person can make an informed decision for themselves.

 

[Racer88]

First let me state that I do NOT agree with the new brace rule one bit.

The ATF is using the legal definitions of a pistol, rifle, shotgun, and "firearm"

The Legal definition of a pistols is any gun designed to be shot one hand. Yes we all normally use two hands but the legal definition is one handed.

The legal definition of a rifle is a gun that has a rifled barrel at least 16" long and overall length of at least 26" and is designed to be fired using two hands with a shoulder stock.

The legal definition of a shotgun is a gun that has a smoothbore barrel at least 18" long and overall length of at least 26" and is designed to be fired using two hands with a shoulder stock.

The legal definition of a "firearm" is anything that does not meet the above definitions yet has an overall length of at least 26", designed to be fired using two hands and is designed to be used without a shouldering the gun nor ever has had a shoulder stock installed.

If a "firearm" is less than 26" in overall length then it is a NFA regulated AOW - Any Other Weapon. HINT leave the beards head grip on with the 14" barrel to stay legal without having to file a Form 1 as a SBS or NFA AOW.

So any smoothbore firearm such as the Shockwave, Tac 13/14, and similar were never designed to be shot one handed nor have a stock then they are NOT eligible for the pistol brace rule to register them as a SBR on a Tax Free Form 1.

You can still register a smoothbore firearm as a SBS but you will have to pay the $200 tax that is required by the 1934 NFA.

Whether any of us agree with the new rule or not, it is what it is. We will have to wait until either the courts rule the brace rule unconstitutional or Congress passes laws to stop the brace rule. But none of that changes the legal definitions of a pistol, rifle, shotgun, or firearm. And the Shockwave IS a firearm that does not meet the legal definitions of a pistol, rifle or shotgun.

You can do what you want with the information I posted, you can choose to comply or not comply, that is YOUR choice that only YOU can make.


PS: If you don't like what the brace rule is, don't attack me for it, I had nothing to do with it at all. I am only passing the information along so each and every person can make an informed decision for themselves.

In other words... the Shockwave, in stock factory form (original grip) is unaffected by this new "rule." But if you put a "brace" or other type of stock that can be shouldered... different story.

 

[John A.]

12bravo20, I'm not attacking what you wrote, however, there are some blatant errors in it that deserve correcting.

You're adding words to the legal definitions that do not exist in either aspect.

The ATF is using the legal definitions of a pistol, rifle, shotgun, and "firearm"

The Legal definition of a pistols is any gun designed to be shot one hand. Yes we all normally use two hands but the legal definition is one handed.

The legal definition of a rifle is a gun that has a rifled barrel at least 16" long and overall length of at least 26" and is designed to be fired using two hands with a shoulder stock.

26 U.S. Code § 5845 defines rifle and shotgun as:

(c)Rifle
The term “rifle” means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed cartridge to fire only a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of the trigger, and shall include any such weapon which may be readily restored to fire a fixed cartridge.

(d)Shotgun
The term “shotgun” means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed shotgun shell to fire through a smooth bore either a number of projectiles (ball shot) or a single projectile for each pull of the trigger, and shall include any such weapon which may be readily restored to fire a fixed shotgun shell.

There is no mention of how many hands that you must use or can use while firing either long gun type. For that matter, the definition of pistol does not require you to only use one hand either. Only that you can. There's plenty of people that fire shotguns and rifles of all types with a single hand if they want.

I blame the NRA for the whole single hand and sporting bullshit added into law over the last ~100 years. 2A isn't about deer hunting either where "sporting" is concerned.

But if you're gonna quote law, at least quote it correctly.

Neither rifle or shotgun definition has words in it that indicate how many hands are necessary or required to fire.

You're adding words to the legal definitions that do not exist in either aspect.

 

[12Bravo20]

12bravo20, I'm not attacking what you wrote, however, there are some blatant errors in it that deserve correcting.

You're adding words to the legal definitions that do not exist in either aspect.


26 U.S. Code § 5845 defines rifle and shotgun as:

(c)Rifle
The term “rifle” means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed cartridge to fire only a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of the trigger, and shall include any such weapon which may be readily restored to fire a fixed cartridge.

(d)Shotgun
The term “shotgun” means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed shotgun shell to fire through a smooth bore either a number of projectiles (ball shot) or a single projectile for each pull of the trigger, and shall include any such weapon which may be readily restored to fire a fixed shotgun shell.

There is no mention of how many hands that you must use or can use while firing either long gun type. For that matter, the definition of pistol does not require you to only use one hand either. Only that you can. There's plenty of people that fire shotguns and rifles of all types with a single hand if they want.

I blame the NRA for the whole single hand and sporting bullshit added into law over the last ~100 years. 2A isn't about deer hunting either where "sporting" is concerned.

But if you're gonna quote law, at least quote it correctly.

Neither rifle or shotgun definition has words in it that indicate how many hands are necessary or required to fire.

You're adding words to the legal definitions that do not exist in either aspect.

The ATF has stated that firearms are designed to be shot using two hands and it is clearly written in the Brace Rule. I'll post a screen shot of what the ATF said again for all to read.

 

[12Bravo20]

In other words... the Shockwave, in stock factory form (original grip) is unaffected by this new "rule." But if you put a "brace" or other type of stock that can be shouldered... different story.

That is correct, in the stock configuration with the birds head grip, they are 100% legal. With a brace installed they are now a NFA regulated SBS

 

[John A.]

The ATF has stated that firearms are designed to be shot using two hands and it is clearly written in the Brace Rule. I'll post a screen shot of what the ATF said again for all to read.

In fairness, atf says a lot of stupid things. Regardless, that still doesn't change what the actual law says.

 

[12Bravo20]

A lot of the 34 NFA and 68 GCA do not make sense but they are still law.

I am only presenting what the ATF has said themselves and that is posted to the federal register. What you do with the information is up to you.

Here is the official Brace rule as posted to the federal register on 31 Jan 2023 and is effective on that date.

https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...firearms-with-attached-stabilizing-braces#h-1

It would be beneficial for all concerned to read the entire brace rule.

 

[John A.]

A lot of the 34 NFA and 68 GCA do not make sense but they are still law.

Yes you are correct.

I am only presenting what the ATF has said themselves and that is posted to the federal register. What you do with the information is up to you.

Here is the official Brace rule as posted to the federal register on 31 Jan 2023 and is effective on that date.

https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...firearms-with-attached-stabilizing-braces#h-1

It would be beneficial for all concerned to read the entire brace rule.

I have read the brace rules, and even all the supporting documents. Over 500 -pages worth.

I was very upset when I read why the agency does not feel that it violates the post de facto laws on the books about the government taking property and even more upset when I read that the atf doesn't recognize that the nfa items were not protected under the 2A and even provided case numbers where they informed juries of such prior to the start of trials.

As I mentioned, atf says a lot of things.

 

[CaddmannQ]

First let me state that I do NOT agree with the new brace rule one bit.

. . . don't attack me for it, I had nothing to do with it at all. I am only passing the information along so each and every person can make an informed decision for themselves.

Bravo, you must be thinking you’re on some other forum, that should never happen here.

So what I’m gathering is that if I take the stock pistol grip off of my std length 500 cruiser and put a shoulder stock on it, I’ve legally converted it from a firearm to a shotgun, and if I put the 500 pistol grip back on it, I’ve feloniosly converted it to an illegal firearm. (AOW? . . . Unspecified???)

Even though that was the original configuration. You can’t go back . . .

 

[CaddmannQ]

. . . when I read why the agency does not feel that it violates the post de facto laws on the books about the government taking property and even more upset when I read that the atf doesn't recognize that the nfa items were not protected…

They’re just as off the hook as every other agency. EPA BLM BIA . . . anything with 3 letters is running amok, because after witnessing what our two parties have allowed to go on, they know they don’t have to care.

The worst thing they’ll suffer is temporary public embarrassment, which will be quickly scrubbed from the news.

There’s a corollary to Abrahams Lincoln’s famous words about fooling people.

Sometimes you can fool enough people, for just long enough, to perpetrate any crime.

 

[DefenderTacticalTX]

Bravo, you must be thinking you’re on some other forum, that should never happen here.

So what I’m gathering is that if I take the stock pistol grip off of my std length 500 cruiser and put a shoulder stock on it, I’ve legally converted it from a firearm to a shotgun, and if I put the 500 pistol grip back on it, I’ve feloniosly converted it to an illegal firearm. (AOW? . . . Unspecified???)

Even though that was the original configuration. You can’t go back . . .

If your barrel length is 18" or greater, then you are not impacted. If you have a full length barrel, you should be free to put whatever brace/stock or pistol grip you'd like. The recent ruling did not have anything to do with shotguns that I am aware of, it only clarified that the ORIGINAL brace ruling never applied to "firearms" like the Shockwave (barrel < 18", no stock) therefore pistol braces on these firearms have technically never been allowed.

Again, to our knowledge with the 18" "standard length" barrel, you should be good to go. If anyone can confirm/correct me here, please do.

 

[John A.]

If your barrel length is 18" or greater, then you are not impacted. If you have a full length barrel, you should be free to put whatever brace/stock or pistol grip you'd like. The recent ruling did not have anything to do with shotguns that I am aware of, it only clarified that the ORIGINAL brace ruling never applied to "firearms" like the Shockwave (barrel < 18", no stock) therefore pistol braces on these firearms have technically never been allowed.

Again, to our knowledge with the 18" "standard length" barrel, you should be good to go. If anyone can confirm/correct me here, please do.

Yeah, title 1 firearms are regulated different. No problems with the 18" or longer barrels/26" OAL.

 

[ricky_bobby]

A lot of the 34 NFA and 68 GCA do not make sense but they are still law.

Correct - which is the problem many of us have, and the court process will find - there is no 'new law' classifying braces as they have been legal with millions in common use

34NFA and 68GCA were actual laws passed. If they want to make braced pistols SBR's, pass a LAW through Congress like those prior, not a rule in the federal register

 

[12Bravo20]

Bravo, you must be thinking you’re on some other forum, that should never happen here.

So what I’m gathering is that if I take the stock pistol grip off of my std length 500 cruiser and put a shoulder stock on it, I’ve legally converted it from a firearm to a shotgun, and if I put the 500 pistol grip back on it, I’ve feloniosly converted it to an illegal firearm. (AOW? . . . Unspecified???)

Even though that was the original configuration. You can’t go back . . .

A Mossberg Cruiser comes from the factory with a 18.5" barrel so one can go from the pistol grip to a shoulder stock and back to the pistol grip without any legal issues as long as you keep the 18.5" or longer barrel installed. The reason is that the Cruiser is still a shotgun by federal definition. Mossberg has sold Home Security Combos that come with a pistol grip AND a shoulder stock in the same box. Again, they are legally shotguns so you can switch between the pistol grip and stock all you want as long as you maintain a barrel at least 18" in overall length and the shotgun's total length remains over 26".

The Shockwave is in a different class all together since it does not meet the legal definition of a shotgun. The Shockwave, Tac 13/14, etc are smoothbore firearms. Basically any gun that does not meet the legal definitions of a pistol, rifle or shotgun and are not regulated by the NFA are classified as a "firearm" by the ATF.

 

[John A.]

Basically any gun that does not meet the legal definitions of a pistol, rifle or shotgun and are not regulated by the NFA are classified as a "firearm" by the ATF.

Until they're suddenly reclassified.

Reference: Franklin Armory. It was designed to be fired with two hands, and was classified as a FIREARM (not a pistol, not a rifle, not a shotgun) until the atf later changed its' mind and said it was an nfa gun.

And that was against prior fatd/tech branch determinations and letters.

Wanna know even more what doesn't make sense?

Not an sbr below either.

 

[12Bravo20]

Until they're suddenly reclassified.

Reference: Franklin Armory XO-26. It was classified as a FIREARM (not a pistol, not a rifle, not a shotgun) until the atf later changed its' mind and said it was an SBR.

And that was against prior fatd/tech branch determinations.

Wanna know even more what doesn't make sense?

Not an sbr below either.

The reclassification of the Franklin Armory XO-26 does not make sense. And IIRC the only reason for the reclassification was due to Connecticut laws on AR pistols and AR rifles. People were buying the Franklin Armory XO-26 to skirt state laws.

And as far as the Mauser Broom Handle with stock holster along with others such as some Hi Power pistols not being an NFA item is due only to their collectors value and a Curio and Relic. It wasn't all that long ago when these were NFA regulated SBR's. And this also goes for certain highly collectable lever action rifles with barrels shorter than 16", they too were removed from the NFA due to collectors value.

 

[John A.]

Correct again.

Anyone know who removed them from the nfa and under whose authority?

That's a question that I have never seen answered.

Another, not an SBR/NFA.

 

[12Bravo20]

According to the ATF Curio and Relics handbook, it was the ATF that removed certain Curios from the NFA do to their collectors value.

Here is the Curios and Relics Handbook https://www.atf.gov/file/128116/download

 

[Bobster]

Wasn't the Franklin Armory an unrifled (smoothbore) firearm to skirt the NFA?

 

[John A.]

No, it had a groove down the bore, but wasn't rifled. That way it wasn't a smooth bore and wasn't a rifled bore.