DSC_2119 by jamiehstanley, on Flickr
DSC_2117 by jamiehstanley, on Flickr
DSC_2120 by jamiehstanley, on Flickr
DSC_2122 by jamiehstanley, on Flickr

Is it really that simple with an 870 PGO? Just cut off the barrel at the end of the mag tube? What barrel length does that give you?

Yes very simple, this was a mossy 500 Just in Case, 5 shot tube, barrel is 14.5 ish came out to an overall length of 27.  Cut about 4 inches off.

870 mag tube is about 12", which is why I made a +1 extension.
I was under the false impression that the mossberg mag tube was longer then 14.5" . I went 870 because I didn't want to have to spend more on the short  conversion parts.

now that is purdy!

It is a lil more then 15 if you count the sling stud .. the barrel is actually shorter then mag tube.  I wanted to go the cheap route also, and was ok with 27 ish just to be safe.  




Thank you sir purdy is what I was going for I am calling it the Obomonatoin

Because
It is against some state laws
ie Ohio they are called sawed off firearms 18 bbl still required

Many states are the same

Many states? The only one I'm aware of so far that these are not legal is CA. They used to be legal in CA until CA actually changed their definition of a shotgun removing the requirement that it be designed to be fired from the shoulder.

OH does not have a definition for a shotgun and would then go off the federal definition.

They sell all they make with normal barrels why would they introduce something else.

It's a pretty small market me thinks.

Aren't these a DD at the whim of the government?



ETA: Look at the definition of a DD:



(4)
           The term "destructive device” means—

           

           

           

No.



By the same law that says a Short Barreled Shotgun is not a "shotgun"...............the National Firearms Act.
                       
You highlighted the wrong portion of the DD definition:

"ie Ohio they are called sawed off firearms "

Um, no. A 'shotgun' with a barrel shorter than 18" (in Ohio) is a sawed off firearm.

Ohio DOES NOT define 'shotgun' in the ORC.

Webster's definition = Full Definition of SHOTGUN

1
:  a smoothbore shoulder weapon for firing shot at short ranges

SHOULDER WEAPON.

The Federal definition of the weapon should apply to the hand held weapon that fires a shotgun cartridge that has an overall lenght of 26", regardless of barrel length.

Anything specifically legal under the Federal GCA is legal, under Ohio law.

Granted no one has gotten an opinion from the Ohio AG on this (that I know of), but none the less, it S-H-O-U-L-D be legal.

A shotgun shell is not a firearm, that precludes a shotgun shell from being a destructive device by itself.  Incidentally that clause is dependent upon the director recognizing it as particularly suitable for sporting purposes - which leaves the whole exemption at the leisure of the ATF.



 

Oh jeeze...............try reading the NFA and get back to us before you dig your hole deeper.

Please explain what I'm missing.  I re-read most of the text, and I seem to be missing something your seeing.



ETA: Link to definitions from 26 US Code 5845

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/5845



http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/subtitle-E/chapter-53/subchapter-B/part-I





 

Why were they able to classify the street sweepers/strikers as DD's?  They are shotguns too. I thought they nailed them with the whole non sporting designation and that was enough.

That is my understanding.  Destructive devices include firearms with a bore over .50.  Shotguns are carved out by the sporting exemption.  



I'm not a lawyer and the poster above says I'm wrong, so my opinion is probably worth about what you paid



 

We have an ongoing debate about them in Texas as well.  Some states have simpler law than the spaghetti NFA, and so the sub 18" birds heads may be banned in some states.  No one's managed to point to a prosecution yet, however.  There's no requirement for Ohio to use the Federal definition in their law.

Any opinion on why they would be carved out from the DD definition?



 

The shotguns that have been added to the DD list were added because liberals hate guns and they thought correctly they could get away w/ it b/c the Street Sweeper et al were scary looking & had scary names.  I believe there is a budget amendment currently in place that prevents BATFE from adding any other shotguns to the DD list.  Whether that would prevent BATFE from adding a non-shotgun shotty to the list I don't know.

I hope the restriction passes.



I'm just not seeing how the ATF can decide the 950 JDJ isn't a DD.  It's not a shotgun and the bore is greater than .50.



(B)
               any type of weapon (other than a
shotgun or a shotgun shell which the Attorney General finds is generally
recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes) by whatever
name known which will, or which may be readily converted to, expel a
projectile by the action of an explosive or other propellant, and which
has any barrel with a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter; and




 

The jdj was built specifically for sporting purposes and was granted a exemption. Gunsmith back home built a 70 cal the same way

I think I found it, I needed to look at 18 US Code, not 26 US code.  Title 18 includes a section:





The term "destructive device” shall not include any device which is
neither designed nor redesigned for use as a weapon; any device,
although originally designed for use as a weapon, which is redesigned
for use as a signaling, pyrotechnic, line throwing, safety, or similar
device; surplus ordnance sold, loaned, or given by the Secretary of the
Army pursuant to the provisions of section
4684
               (2),
4685, or
4686 of title
10;
or any other device which the Attorney General finds is not likely to
be used as a weapon, is an antique, or is a rifle which the owner
intends to use solely for sporting, recreational or cultural purposes.

So under title 18, ATF can determine whether the item is a destructive device, but under title 26 any firearm with a bore over .50 and not fitting the definition of a "shotgun" is a destructive device.



ETA: This begs the question - does Title 26 still apply even though it has been exempted under title 18?
 

Oh has a definition it is called sawed off firearm
This would fall into that classification

ORC 2923.11 Weapons control definitions.
(F) "Sawed-off firearm" means a shotgun with a barrel less than eighteen inches long, or a rifle with a barrel less than sixteen inches long, or a shotgun or rifle less than twenty-six inches long overall.


Now if you want to be a test case for an over zealous prosecutor be my guest

Yes says me. I can tell you are unaware but myself as well as others in this thread are FFLs and some of us are even manufacturers. So as such we are much more versed in the subject at hand than you are.

It looks like you need two things spoon fed to you.

First , look at your last quote. "SHOTGUN w/ a barrel.........". We are not talking about shotguns here. I don't understand how you don't get this. A Mossberg cruiser that ships with only a pistol grip is NOT a shotgun.

second ALL states follow ALL FEDERAL gun laws and regulations UNLESS a state chooses to have something stricter. CA is an example of this. CA decided to remove the requirement that a firearm needs to be shoulder fired to meet the definition of a shotgun, thus making CA's definition stricter. Now if OH would like to make these illegal just like CA then OH would have to give their definition of a shotgun and do it just like CA.

On a side note, an "over zealous" prosecutor can prosecute for anything they want (legal or not has no bearing). You could get a letter signed by the AG of your state verifying that it is legal and if they want to prosecute, they can.

You want to demonstrate that all 50 states adopted the shotgun language in their state statutes after the adoption of the NFA?

I understand where you are coming from. A lot of people want to see something in writing telling them that something is legal, but our legal system doesn't work that way. We have become so used to needing permission to do things we as a society have often lost sight of the fact that laws are written to tell us what we CAN'T do.

Showing you what you're asking would be like showing a law that says it is legal to open carry here in PA, there isn't one. It's the lack of a law saying you can't that allows us to. In just the same way, the lack of some states having their own definition of something is then defaulted to the federal laws and definitions. Since in OH there is no state definition of this type of firearm then it automatically defaults to federal definition and you are left with nothing saying you can't do it.

Sorry, you've invoked "automatically" in a legal argument that concerns the powers of the Federal government and the states.  I'm not a resident of Ohio, nor are you, but I'll take your word for it on Ohio.  That leaves 49 other states for you to demonstrate that when the state does not define something, the Federal definition is "automatically" adopted.  There is no requirement in the Constitution for states to do so - are you able to demonstrate a legal precedent?

You know I believe you are right on this

(Edit : could have done without the "spoon fed bs though)



I looked up state statues and it would seem that you are correct in Ohio (at least ) this firearm would be 100 percent legal

thanks for the info
Edit ll
It is also legal in Florida, S. Carolina, and Virgina

Now that we hashed that out...

Are there any dealers in Ohio that sell these non-shotgun pistol grip only 'other' firearms that have a less than 18" barell??

I am a long time lurker of AR15.com, and generally find most discussions rather humorous. Most posts I have seen on most websites prove that there are more "Forum Warriors" than not at times. That said a customer of mine reached out to me, and asked for me to comment on this page. I really like the direction this conversation has been heading and with help from shockwave technologies and guys like Mr. Savage this debate will live on for a long time. The manufacture of these scatterguns is a unique process and most of that has been elaborated upon such as stating that "These were never shotguns" is very important verbiage. Remington 870 scatterguns can be made like this (even though no PGO versions have been made in years) and mossbergs are obviously many times easier and cheaper to do. I saw a very lengthy debate regarding this to be a DD in some peoples opinion. With that in mind at any give moment regulation can be made at almost any level to make anything classified in almost any category of our very vague (for a reason) laws. IMO neither of these configurations could be considered a DD due to the fact that Mossberg 500s and Remington 870s (no matter their configuration) as long as they do not fall under the purview of the NFA are defined as having sporting purpose. Before this erupts a debate think of this, basic model such as 870 or 500 is all that is approved when these considerations are made, so it would be extremely difficult to say just because it ships as an other it no longer has a sporting purpose, after all I can slap a stock on an 18" or longer barrel version and it becomes a shotgun (but it cant go the other way), or 18" and shorter with a stock becomes an item under NFA laws.  

With those points out of the way a "sawed off" must've started life as a firearm intended to be fired from the shoulder as discussed previously and this is a debate that we are going to have Texas case law on soon (since the first 2 appeals were by the state since they lost in County and district courts here).  Lastly, there has been question about the sig braces on these, when I make these I use the shockwave grips because Marty and I are like minded. There are only a handful of FFL's making these and almost all at special request, and it is always up to the end customer to make their own judgment on final legality. There has been a tech letter approved for use of the sig brace on others, I will not share my copy for the fact I got a little specific in my questions and the response contains too much company specific info for me to share it, and with redactions it is virtually pointless. I can say I have made this configuration and I can say since it is a brace and only a brace it does not change classification, and there are many true AOWs that use them as well. The best way to look at a firearm that's an other it falls between Pistol / Handgun, and Any Other Weapon. It is on the border line of the NFA it is a Pistol grip only but it isn't designed to be shot by a single hand and now can have a vertical grip on the pump. It can do everything an AOW like a Serbu super shorty can do but It must be measurably over 26" and I think .5" minimum to safely put you there.  

Hopefully this all makes sense and hopefully this doesn't spark a debate, and Yes some manufacturers will make them and ship them to Ohio.

Welcome to the site.  I like your username.  Thanks for the comments.  When discussing the DD side I think ATF currently holds your viewpoint.  I don't know if they will always hold that view point though.  Precedent from the USAS-12 would indicate that if they did change their mind they would probably have an amnesty period.



 

The USAS12 is a really good example and one I have been more than surprised that the Siaga12 hasn't been brought up in.  This is a really good example though of not having any "ture" sporting variant and the reason why it was so easily change in their eyes. The one I'm curious to see is the SMR line of semi auto revolving mag fed shotguns. All this talk of shotguns though makes me really want a CRYE Precision revolving master key but shhh those are super secret squirrel.

I want one of each, I just can't afford them



 

Sorry the spoon fed sounded harsh, it was meant with a friendly smirk (which is hard to convey in print).

I don't have any dealers in OH that I build them for yet, I have built them for people in OH

Currently I don't know of any other manufacturers that are building them either.

There are a few of us that like to challenge things but we are few and far far far between.

Can you point us to the cases in Texas?  Saigas, etc, have not been added to the DD list b/c the budget rider prohibits them from spending Federal funds on adding shotguns to the DD list, I believe.

Does it prevent other firearms besides shotguns from being added?  The problem that may arise is that they're not shotguns.



 

You'll have to look up the language in the budget law.  I'm quoting a summary that is only referenced in my skull.  I don't even remember which year the rider passed, but I believe in the last 5.

As stated in my text the case is still on going therefore I cannot "point" you to the case and the question is relatively mute given that it shows the ignorance on LEO interpretation of law. I also cannot comment more than I have give the fact I'm not only the manufacture of the item in question but also a witness. As far as the budget rider goes your assumption is incorrect. How they determine an item being a DD goes to the point of it have a variant with a sporting purpose. Saigas are imported as sporting shotguns the usas12 was not determined to be a sport shotgun because of its configuration so it was redefined. Saigas have been approved and defined as sporting shotguns much like their tube fed counter parts. These do not follow under this purview because their counter part is, has, and will be a sporting shotgun and those cannot be defined as DD.

Yes the heat shield will work.

I have to disagree with this last part.  Reading section B of the DD definition it implies that shotguns are not DD's at the discretion of the Attorney General.



(B)
               any type of weapon (other than a
shotgun or a shotgun shell which the Attorney General finds is generally
recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes) by whatever
name known which will, or which may be readily converted to, expel a
projectile by the action of an explosive or other propellant, and which
has any barrel with a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter; and




So if the Attorney General finds it no longer to be generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes it then becomes a DD.



 

But they would have to redefine all 870s or all 500s bc that's how they classify DDs so the fact that one variant is sporting makes that highly unlikely.

My point was simply that the way the law is written even 870's and 500's are a stroke of a pen away from being classified as DD's.  Hopefully that would get overturned in court, but swing two supreme court justices from the conservative to the liberal side and they can do whatever they want.



 

Oh no I understand. Roger that bud.

Midway and Brownells both have them in stock.

They work with a 14.5" on a 590. I'd have to play with it. As far as I know it's the only heat shield offered.