Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Page / 7
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 8:04:07 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Smash47:
I think the NRA needs to release a statement on this matter and explain its stance real quick.


View Quote


rest assured.....numerous board members have been firing off inquiries all day.....
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 8:07:01 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By juan223:



I'm not exactly sure who, ATF or Citizen, is going to benefit from this 'broadening' of the SP clause.... that has yet to be made clear......so I'm uncertain who will be driving said bus, but it sure sounds like we're under it.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By juan223:
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:
I agree sporting purposes should go away. But making sporting purposes so broad we can drive a bus through it is nearly as good and much more achievable in the short term. ATF has put themselves in a whole and we don't need to give up anything to get it.



I'm not exactly sure who, ATF or Citizen, is going to benefit from this 'broadening' of the SP clause.... that has yet to be made clear......so I'm uncertain who will be driving said bus, but it sure sounds like we're under it.
Until we see text of an amendment it's hard to know who will be under the bus. If nothing changes ATF will probably be forced to declare an amnesty for all pistol grip shotguns with a bore over .5" and future sales will be regulated by the NFA. Unfortunately that's the law as currently written.
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 8:08:47 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:
Until we see text of an amendment it's hard to know who will be under the bus. If nothing changes ATF will probably be forced to declare an amnesty for all pistol grip shotguns with a bore over .5" and future sales will be regulated by the NFA. Unfortunately that's the law as currently written.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:
Originally Posted By juan223:
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:
I agree sporting purposes should go away. But making sporting purposes so broad we can drive a bus through it is nearly as good and much more achievable in the short term. ATF has put themselves in a whole and we don't need to give up anything to get it.



I'm not exactly sure who, ATF or Citizen, is going to benefit from this 'broadening' of the SP clause.... that has yet to be made clear......so I'm uncertain who will be driving said bus, but it sure sounds like we're under it.
Until we see text of an amendment it's hard to know who will be under the bus. If nothing changes ATF will probably be forced to declare an amnesty for all pistol grip shotguns with a bore over .5" and future sales will be regulated by the NFA. Unfortunately that's the law as currently written.


I would rather see that than possibly lose ammo imports of any type....


Link Posted: 4/12/2015 8:09:39 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By whiskerz:
They could stretch armor piercing to easily include almost all center fire rifle ammunition . .
View Quote


No, the law is based on the materials used for bullet construction, not performance.
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 8:14:11 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By juan223:


I would rather see that than possibly lose ammo imports of any type....


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By juan223:
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:
Originally Posted By juan223:
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:
I agree sporting purposes should go away. But making sporting purposes so broad we can drive a bus through it is nearly as good and much more achievable in the short term. ATF has put themselves in a whole and we don't need to give up anything to get it.



I'm not exactly sure who, ATF or Citizen, is going to benefit from this 'broadening' of the SP clause.... that has yet to be made clear......so I'm uncertain who will be driving said bus, but it sure sounds like we're under it.
Until we see text of an amendment it's hard to know who will be under the bus. If nothing changes ATF will probably be forced to declare an amnesty for all pistol grip shotguns with a bore over .5" and future sales will be regulated by the NFA. Unfortunately that's the law as currently written.


I would rather see that than possibly lose ammo imports of any type....


Agreed, this is ATFs screwup, we shouldn't give up anything.
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 8:17:28 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ShooterPatriot:


No, the law is based on the materials used for bullet construction, not performance.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ShooterPatriot:
Originally Posted By whiskerz:
They could stretch armor piercing to easily include almost all center fire rifle ammunition . .


No, the law is based on the materials used for bullet construction, not performance.
When the NRA was talking about widening the sporting purpose they were talking about widening in our favor. Probably to specifically prevent rifle ammunition being classified as armor piercing.
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 8:23:37 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:
When the NRA was talking about widening the sporting purpose they were talking about widening in our favor. Probably to specifically prevent rifle ammunition being classified as armor piercing.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:
Originally Posted By ShooterPatriot:
Originally Posted By whiskerz:
They could stretch armor piercing to easily include almost all center fire rifle ammunition . .


No, the law is based on the materials used for bullet construction, not performance.
When the NRA was talking about widening the sporting purpose they were talking about widening in our favor. Probably to specifically prevent rifle ammunition being classified as armor piercing.



If possible, could you please direct me to where the NRA has made such a statement?

Thanks!
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 8:26:45 PM EDT
I've been thinking about this, trying to get it to make sense.

I am not an NRA member. Because of all the weird crap they do in NC. Often at odds with GRNC and taking the compromise (some gun control route.) most of the time. I am not really a fan of them at times, Other times I am. I will say it appears that since the FUDDS are dying off and getting older and don't hunt as much, buy ammo, accessories etc... that the para-military types (for lack a better term) may be getting at least a little nod of acknowledgement.

Anyway. They have a place at times. Other times You wish they would go away.

So lets think of a plausible scenario.

It could be possible that the NRA may know things we don't, and it may be possible that the ATF could have agents that are are good guys that inform the NRA when stuff is going to come down.

So we know Blammo wants gun control and he has to do it illegally er... Through "executive action" Because he is not getting anything through Congress, has he tried at all since the elections? Nope.

Blammo tried an ammo ban via redefinition and got a ton of bad press of course they don't really care about that as they know nothing will ever happen to them they just don't like the exposure.

So maybe the NRA got wind of this funny thing that is ripe for a redefinition, (that thanks to the Supremes they no longer have to get comments on) As has been said the regs are a mess and a redefinition would make shotguns without a shoulder stock a DD which it appears they could easily be nade that way just to keep everything consistent. Perfect situation to screw millions of people he hates.

So Maybe it was going to occur, or maybe the NRA wants to cut it off before anything happens and to get leverage on the ATF they used the whole 885 ammo "ban" to get a foot in the door.

Sort of like this " Hey ATF You think you have egg on your face now, with Congress wanting to shut you down. Wait until they get a load of THIS."
we better fix this now.

Maybe like that.

Link Posted: 4/12/2015 8:31:53 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By juan223:



If possible, could you please direct me to where the NRA has made such a statement?

Thanks!
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By juan223:
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:
Originally Posted By ShooterPatriot:
Originally Posted By whiskerz:
They could stretch armor piercing to easily include almost all center fire rifle ammunition . .


No, the law is based on the materials used for bullet construction, not performance.
When the NRA was talking about widening the sporting purpose they were talking about widening in our favor. Probably to specifically prevent rifle ammunition being classified as armor piercing.



If possible, could you please direct me to where the NRA has made such a statement?

Thanks!
That is speculation on my part based upon recent M855 outrage and the ATF's current DD shotgun conundrum.
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 8:37:07 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:

That is speculation on my part based upon recent M855 outrage and the ATF's current DD shotgun conundrum.
View Quote



Gotcha, well I can tell you that the NRA ILA are almost all "Black gun" guys these days..... I'd be surprised if they don't want to see the SP Clause eliminated. IMO this move would only serve to legitimize and harden the SP clause against future action.
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 8:41:27 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By juan223:



Gotcha, well I can tell you that the NRA ILA are almost all "Black gun" guys these days..... I'd be surprised if they don't want to see the SP Clause eliminated. IMO this move would only serve to legitimize and harden the SP clause against future action.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By juan223:
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:

That is speculation on my part based upon recent M855 outrage and the ATF's current DD shotgun conundrum.



Gotcha, well I can tell you that the NRA ILA are almost all "Black gun" guys these days..... I'd be surprised if they don't want to see the SP Clause eliminated. IMO this move would only serve to legitimize and harden the SP clause against future action.

sporting purposes needs to go. It just makes a mess of things
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 8:44:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/12/2015 8:45:49 PM EDT by jaqufrost]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By juan223:



Gotcha, well I can tell you that the NRA ILA are almost all "Black gun" guys these days..... I'd be surprised if they don't want to see the SP Clause eliminated. IMO this move would only serve to legitimize and harden the SP clause against future action.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By juan223:
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:

That is speculation on my part based upon recent M855 outrage and the ATF's current DD shotgun conundrum.



Gotcha, well I can tell you that the NRA ILA are almost all "Black gun" guys these days..... I'd be surprised if they don't want to see the SP Clause eliminated. IMO this move would only serve to legitimize and harden the SP clause against future action.
Sporting purpose will never jive with the 2nd Amendment. I'm not sure we'll ever see it go away when it comes to imported arms. I have much higher hopes for domestic regulations.

In the meantime broadening sporting purposes could mean all shotgun based firearms are removed from the NFA and importable. If 3 gun is recognized as a sporting purpose we might see new USAS12s as non NFA items that can be imported.

Eta: It could also mean semi auto "assault rifles" are recognized as sporting and importable.
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 9:07:44 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:


In the meantime broadening sporting purposes could mean all shotgun based firearms are removed from the NFA and importable. If 3 gun is recognized as a sporting purpose we might see new USAS12s as non NFA items that can be imported.


Eta: It could also mean semi auto "assault rifles" are recognized as sporting and importable.
View Quote


Well, we are both just speculating on what, if any, plans they have.

But I don't see the ATF doing any of the above with regards to imports, and even if they do I don't want to give up anything to get it.

I see in the article that tracers are mentioned, well AFAIK tracers can only be imported for MIL/LEO use anyways, yes some imported stuff has made it's way onto the market but I don't think it came in on a Form 6 listed as tracers for civilian sale....

So if thats the case...what "specialty" ammo is the ATF after?
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 9:11:51 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By munsen:
I've stopped using smile.amazon.com that I have set to donate to NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund until this is resolved.
View Quote


Just switch your charity to the Second Amendment Foundation.
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 9:30:12 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By AllserviceBilliards:


What I want to know is WHY THE FUCK is mossberg not mass-marketing a 14" gun?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By AllserviceBilliards:
Originally Posted By HistoricArmsLLC:
Interesting article on it today:

http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2015/04/atf-classification-compromise-to.html

and Here:

http://www.examiner.com/article/atf-classification-compromise-to-redefine-sporting-use-ban-certain-ammo-imports

"The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ classification of pistol grip only firearms with 14” barrels that fire shotgun shells and are over 26” in overall length as neither “shotguns” nor National Firearms Act “Destructive Devices” or “Any Other Weapons” has created a situation wherein the agency must either quietly save face or have it exposed that untold numbers of good faith gun owners currently legally possess firearms problematic for the government to allow. In order to allow that status quo to continue, ATF, in conjunction with certain members of Congress and lobbying interests, is working at “tweaking” its definition of the arbitrary “sporting use” term, insider sources tell Gun Rights Examiner. And with that will come a push to expand definitions to allow for further importation bans on certain types or presently legal ammunition."

This would also effect ANY pistol gripped shotgun, which according to ATF is not a shotgun because it is not designed to be fired from the shoulder....Are we talking millions of firearms and owners or just hundreds of thousands of them?

Anybody have any solid information on who in congress is pushing this?


What I want to know is WHY THE FUCK is mossberg not mass-marketing a 14" gun?


I've been wondering that myself, I think this turn of events is the answer.
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 9:58:45 PM EDT
Before everyone jumps on the "evil NRA" bandwagon, I suggest looking at the article sources listed so far. Not the most reliable.

While I have no doubt the ATF is doing this, the bit about the NRA "colluding" with the ATF is hard to believe. More likely is that the NRA is involved and is fighting on our side, which is what I expect them to do. The newspaper is just making news and people are freaking out. I expect good news to come out of this if the NRA is truly involved. Maybe even the ATF having to admit to a rather colossal mistake, opening the door to congressional action against the ATF and NFA.
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 10:03:27 PM EDT
No quarter. None.
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 10:07:59 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Kikken:


Just switch your charity to the Second Amendment Foundation.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Kikken:
Originally Posted By munsen:
I've stopped using smile.amazon.com that I have set to donate to NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund until this is resolved.


Just switch your charity to the Second Amendment Foundation.

Off topic, but thanks to both of you. I order a ton off amazon, and didn't know about smile. I just set the SAF up for 0.5% of all my purchases.
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 10:22:04 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ShooterPatriot:

Off topic, but thanks to both of you. I order a ton off amazon, and didn't know about smile. I just set the SAF up for 0.5% of all my purchases.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ShooterPatriot:
Originally Posted By Kikken:
Originally Posted By munsen:
I've stopped using smile.amazon.com that I have set to donate to NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund until this is resolved.


Just switch your charity to the Second Amendment Foundation.

Off topic, but thanks to both of you. I order a ton off amazon, and didn't know about smile. I just set the SAF up for 0.5% of all my purchases.


Done, and no problem.
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 10:23:34 PM EDT
Wait, you mean the NRA is selling us out, AGAIN? Say it isn't so.
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 10:47:16 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Kikken:


Just switch your charity to the Second Amendment Foundation.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Kikken:
Originally Posted By munsen:
I've stopped using smile.amazon.com that I have set to donate to NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund until this is resolved.


Just switch your charity to the Second Amendment Foundation.



They might be worse as far as I can tell Gottlieb was recently willing to compromise on so called Universal Background Checks....and also be advised SAF runs the JPFO now...ugh...
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 10:48:35 PM EDT
I'd definitely be in for a something similar in a side by side 12g, because 'Road Warrior.'
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 11:09:39 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Kharn:
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll82/John_McFly/ARfcom/100_1501.jpg
Definitely the most giggle-inducing gun I own.

Kharn
View Quote

Seeing that makes me want to build one. What is the easiest route? Damn the ATF and possible reclassification.
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 11:15:15 PM EDT
tag for reading
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 11:19:27 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Andrapos:
I guess I need to start panic buying again...
View Quote
Never should have stopped (buying).
Link Posted: 4/12/2015 11:58:34 PM EDT
hunting is a sport


Link Posted: 4/13/2015 12:05:09 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By doc_Zox:
hunting is a sport

http://www.googlepixel.com/images/molotvepr2.jpg

View Quote

Central Flyway Conservation Order. That pretty much guts any sporting purpose shotgun test.
Link Posted: 4/13/2015 1:37:46 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Molotov357:
Too many in circulation. The outcry would be worse than the M855 fiasco.

View Quote


Out of the total population? that's a burp in the grand scheme of things. 99% of the population couldn't give a shit about some guys toy shotguns he has to keep the boogey man out of his house.
Link Posted: 4/13/2015 2:27:11 AM EDT
When France was liberated from the Nazis, Nazi collaborators were dragged into the street and publicly shamed, if they were lucky.
Link Posted: 4/13/2015 3:37:53 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Modly:
While unrelated, my 14" AOW is the only thing that cops seem to want to inspect when they see me shooting it at the public quarry. Something about a 30 year old cut up Mossberg really rustles their jimmies.

Almost half of the time, I get asked for papers while they waste my shooting daylight "calling it in".

I really think AOW's are the dirty step-child that the government wants to ban.
View Quote


BS. all teh cops right here tells me that cept for a "few bad apples" cops love the constitution and popular gun ownership and would refuse to obey orders to enforce (more) unconstitutional gun laws. You are telling me that cops routinely go out of hteir way to enforece unconstitutional gun laws even when NOT ordered by their superiors?!?!?
Link Posted: 4/13/2015 3:57:23 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By southerngunner:

this exactly
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By southerngunner:
Originally Posted By Smash47:
I think the NRA needs to release a statement on this matter and explain its stance real quick.

That and I want to know who the US ammo manufacturers are that are lobbying for ammo import restrictions so we can start boycotting the stores/vendors that stock their ammo brand.

So are these meetings a matter of public record?


this exactly

Link Posted: 4/13/2015 4:06:04 AM EDT
so per the article, there are a couple of guy's who are on trial in federal courts for NFA violations for possing like mossberg cruisers? And, the ATF realizes now that if these cases go forward that would either:
1. set a precedent of prosecution for non-stocked shotgun which would be problematic since there are millions of them.
2. force them to do something to the sporting purpose clause? What exactly?

The GCA is pretty clear that of guns w/ > .5" bore, only sporting shotguns are exempted, and a shotgun is elsewhere defines as either "w/ a shoulder stock" or "designed to be fired from the shoulder" So, yeah.

Link Posted: 4/13/2015 4:11:42 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By polymorpheous:


http://cdn.meme.am/images/300x/2745079.jpg
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By polymorpheous:
Originally Posted By carljung:
Originally Posted By Modly:
While unrelated, my 14" AOW is the only thing that cops seem to want to inspect when they see me shooting it at the public quarry. Something about a 30 year old cut up Mossberg really rustles their jimmies.

Almost half of the time, I get asked for papers while they waste my shooting daylight "calling it in".

I really think AOW's are the dirty step-child that the government wants to ban.

What papers?

You mean confidential tax documents that they have no right to? Ha, tell 'em to politely fuck off. I don't carry tax documents with me wherever I go...


http://cdn.meme.am/images/300x/2745079.jpg


unfortuantely, many or most states have laws that make possession of many NFA items illegal unless they are registerd w/ the NFA which means that per the local law they can arrest you. It is typically held that you have to make a "positive defense" (or was it affirmative defense), which means that you have prove you innocence rather than the state having to prove guilt, which is fucked up big time as it violates "innocent till proven guilty." Seems to be that if it is possibel for someone to own something legally in a partiuclar area, the presumption shoudl be that it is owned licitly w/o some other evidence.

Anyway polymorphous, what is your point? Why are you giving a fellow gun onwer a hard time for his lack of respect for law enforcers enforcing unconstitutinoal laws?
Link Posted: 4/13/2015 4:16:43 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By JSmithXYY:


unfortuantely, many or most states have laws that make possession of many NFA items illegal unless they are registerd w/ the NFA which means that per the local law they can arrest you. It is typically held that you have to make a "positive defense" (or was it affirmative defense), which means that you have prove you innocence rather than the state having to prove guilt, which is fucked up big time as it violates "innocent till proven guilty." Seems to be that if it is possibel for someone to own something legally in a partiuclar area, the presumption shoudl be that it is owned licitly w/o some other evidence.

Anyway polymorphous, what is your point? Why are you giving a fellow gun onwer a hard time for his lack of respect for law enforcers enforcing unconstitutinoal laws?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By JSmithXYY:
Originally Posted By polymorpheous:
Originally Posted By carljung:
Originally Posted By Modly:
While unrelated, my 14" AOW is the only thing that cops seem to want to inspect when they see me shooting it at the public quarry. Something about a 30 year old cut up Mossberg really rustles their jimmies.

Almost half of the time, I get asked for papers while they waste my shooting daylight "calling it in".

I really think AOW's are the dirty step-child that the government wants to ban.

What papers?

You mean confidential tax documents that they have no right to? Ha, tell 'em to politely fuck off. I don't carry tax documents with me wherever I go...


http://cdn.meme.am/images/300x/2745079.jpg


unfortuantely, many or most states have laws that make possession of many NFA items illegal unless they are registerd w/ the NFA which means that per the local law they can arrest you. It is typically held that you have to make a "positive defense" (or was it affirmative defense), which means that you have prove you innocence rather than the state having to prove guilt, which is fucked up big time as it violates "innocent till proven guilty." Seems to be that if it is possibel for someone to own something legally in a partiuclar area, the presumption shoudl be that it is owned licitly w/o some other evidence.

Anyway polymorphous, what is your point? Why are you giving a fellow gun onwer a hard time for his lack of respect for law enforcers enforcing unconstitutinoal laws?


He's just talking hard.
I doubt that hard talk would come out when dealing with LEO.
But this IS Arfcom.
So everyone is a badass.

BTW, IMO every gun law is unconstitutional.
Shall NOT be infringed.
Link Posted: 4/13/2015 5:41:18 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By packingXDs:

Seeing that makes me want to build one. What is the easiest route? Damn the ATF and possible reclassification.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By packingXDs:
Originally Posted By Kharn:
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll82/John_McFly/ARfcom/100_1501.jpg
Definitely the most giggle-inducing gun I own.

Kharn

Seeing that makes me want to build one. What is the easiest route? Damn the ATF and possible reclassification.

For mine, it was buy an 870 at Walmart, pay $200 for SBS tax, add $30 grip and $140 barrel. Pistol-grip-only 870s are incredibly hard to find. It's really dumb that it had to be taxed just because of the way it left the factory...

Kharn
Link Posted: 4/13/2015 5:51:56 AM EDT
What's to stop these sons of bitches from declaring "a shotgun with a pistol grip is not a shotgun, it's a spaceship"


That's exactly what they're doing, just arbitrarily making shit up out of thin air.



Link Posted: 4/13/2015 6:17:31 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Kharn:

For mine, it was buy an 870 at Walmart, pay $200 for SBS tax, add $30 grip and $140 barrel. Pistol-grip-only 870s are incredibly hard to find. It's really dumb that it had to be taxed just because of the way it left the factory...

Kharn
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Kharn:
Originally Posted By packingXDs:
Originally Posted By Kharn:
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll82/John_McFly/ARfcom/100_1501.jpg
Definitely the most giggle-inducing gun I own.

Kharn

Seeing that makes me want to build one. What is the easiest route? Damn the ATF and possible reclassification.

For mine, it was buy an 870 at Walmart, pay $200 for SBS tax, add $30 grip and $140 barrel. Pistol-grip-only 870s are incredibly hard to find. It's really dumb that it had to be taxed just because of the way it left the factory...

Kharn

If that is the case I guess a 590A1 SBS might just have to do.
Link Posted: 4/13/2015 6:26:07 AM EDT
Should I start neck-bearding shotgun P-Grips now?
Link Posted: 4/13/2015 6:30:00 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BlueLogo:
Wait, you mean the NRA is selling us out, AGAIN? Say it isn't so.
View Quote


It wouldn't surprise me. Feels like the 90's again.
Link Posted: 4/13/2015 6:34:12 AM EDT
Originally Posted By HistoricArmsLLC:
Interesting article on it today:

This would also effect ANY pistol gripped shotgun, which according to ATF is not a shotgun because it is not designed to be fired from the shoulder....
View Quote


Wait! If I put it to my shoulder then it's still a shotgun right? Intent and all, can't have it both ways. Isn't this the same lunacy on the Sig Brace.

I swear we are swirling faster then all hell to ruin our country.
Link Posted: 4/13/2015 6:40:39 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By juan223:



They might be worse as far as I can tell Gottlieb was recently willing to compromise on so called Universal Background Checks....and also be advised SAF runs the JPFO now...ugh...
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By juan223:
Originally Posted By Kikken:
Originally Posted By munsen:
I've stopped using smile.amazon.com that I have set to donate to NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund until this is resolved.


Just switch your charity to the Second Amendment Foundation.



They might be worse as far as I can tell Gottlieb was recently willing to compromise on so called Universal Background Checks....and also be advised SAF runs the JPFO now...ugh...


Then switch to the NRA CRDF. But seriously, you should have them donate to one or the other. Doesn't cost anything and it's better than letting Amazon keep it.
Link Posted: 4/13/2015 8:27:17 AM EDT
http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2015/04/chris-cox-i-categorically-deny.html

Chris Cox goes on the record categorically denying everything....
Link Posted: 4/13/2015 8:51:10 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ShooterPatriot:


No, the law is based on the materials used for bullet construction, not performance.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ShooterPatriot:
Originally Posted By whiskerz:
They could stretch armor piercing to easily include almost all center fire rifle ammunition . .


No, the law is based on the materials used for bullet construction, not performance.

And yet, a month ago....
Link Posted: 4/13/2015 8:54:43 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By chupacabras:

But they have sources in the NRA. Secret sources.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By chupacabras:
Originally Posted By Mossberg:
The Examiner article seems intentionally as vague as possible, in order to fuel as much wild speculation as possible.

But they have sources in the NRA. Secret sources.

Something tells me that everytime the NRA board sees this "reporter" that the only thing they say is "security".
The "press release" doesn't say anything, it implies a vast conspiracy with the political parties and the NRA.
I'll bet the author has so ideas about the grassy knoll and Russian mobsters buried in the back of his mind that he'll gladly share if given a chance.
Link Posted: 4/13/2015 9:01:55 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By HistoricArmsLLC:
http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2015/04/chris-cox-i-categorically-deny.html

Chris Cox goes on the record categorically denying everything....
View Quote



Someone is full of shit. Thats a pretty black and white statement by Cox that I don't think he would make if he were partaking in some shenanigans.

Even Bill's "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" statement left him some wiggle room.
Link Posted: 4/13/2015 9:11:23 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By quick2k3:



Someone is full of shit. Thats a pretty black and white statement by Cox that I don't think he would make if he were partaking in some shenanigans.

Even Bill's "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" statement left him some wiggle room.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By quick2k3:
Originally Posted By HistoricArmsLLC:
http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2015/04/chris-cox-i-categorically-deny.html

Chris Cox goes on the record categorically denying everything....



Someone is full of shit. Thats a pretty black and white statement by Cox that I don't think he would make if he were partaking in some shenanigans.

Even Bill's "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" statement left him some wiggle room.


Yeah, it will be interesting to see where this goes. I'm guessing that any 'confirmation' at this stage will likely be hearsay, as uncovering this at all would have made a deal pretty much untenable for the NRA leadership.
Link Posted: 4/13/2015 9:17:24 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By HistoricArmsLLC:
Following the logic;

ATF in the FFL Newsletter states:

https://www.scribd.com/doc/261463668/Atf-Newsletter-2009

If a pistol gripped shotgun is "NOT" a shotgun, under the NFA it is a Destructive Device if the bore is greater than 1/2".

Given the numbers currently in private hands either made that way factory (or by the owners) since 1968, enforcement at this point is no longer an option....

So since 1968 untold numbers of NFA firearms (Destructive Devices) have been in citizen hands and public safety was not impacted....Hmmm If there ever was proof that some NFA firearms need not be regulated under the NFA, there it is.

View Quote
for it to be a DD it would have to have a rifled bore...
Link Posted: 4/13/2015 9:17:55 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RocketmanOU:


Yeah, it will be interesting to see where this goes. I'm guessing that any 'confirmation' at this stage will likely be hearsay, as uncovering this at all would have made a deal pretty much untenable for the NRA leadership.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RocketmanOU:
Originally Posted By quick2k3:
Originally Posted By HistoricArmsLLC:
http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2015/04/chris-cox-i-categorically-deny.html

Chris Cox goes on the record categorically denying everything....



Someone is full of shit. Thats a pretty black and white statement by Cox that I don't think he would make if he were partaking in some shenanigans.

Even Bill's "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" statement left him some wiggle room.


Yeah, it will be interesting to see where this goes. I'm guessing that any 'confirmation' at this stage will likely be hearsay, as uncovering this at all would have made a deal pretty much untenable for the NRA leadership.

Yup, we will never find out whats going on here
Unless someone can get some very solid sources

But at least the deal is sabotaged, that is all that matters to me
Link Posted: 4/13/2015 9:31:23 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By OhioLongRange:
for it to be a DD it would have to have a rifled bore...
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By OhioLongRange:
Originally Posted By HistoricArmsLLC:
Following the logic;

ATF in the FFL Newsletter states:

https://www.scribd.com/doc/261463668/Atf-Newsletter-2009

If a pistol gripped shotgun is "NOT" a shotgun, under the NFA it is a Destructive Device if the bore is greater than 1/2".

Given the numbers currently in private hands either made that way factory (or by the owners) since 1968, enforcement at this point is no longer an option....

So since 1968 untold numbers of NFA firearms (Destructive Devices) have been in citizen hands and public safety was not impacted....Hmmm If there ever was proof that some NFA firearms need not be regulated under the NFA, there it is.

for it to be a DD it would have to have a rifled bore...

I'm pretty sure that mortars (a DD) aren't rifled.
Link Posted: 4/13/2015 9:47:04 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By HistoricArmsLLC:


If (according to ATF) merely shouldering a wrist brace "re-designs" a pistol into a Short Barreled Rifle and requires registration, then attaching a pistol grip to a shotgun will be considered not "re-designing"?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By HistoricArmsLLC:
Originally Posted By polymorpheous:
This is all because of AR-15 pistols and Sig braces right?


If (according to ATF) merely shouldering a wrist brace "re-designs" a pistol into a Short Barreled Rifle and requires registration, then attaching a pistol grip to a shotgun will be considered not "re-designing"?
Shooting a shotgun with a stock from the hip will be considered re-designing it into a DD.
Page / 7
Top Top