Akins Accelerator Decision v 2.0

They are on the radar screen big time. You think ATF didn't get a list of purchasers from Atkins? Not sending that form in is a good way to get a nocturnal visit from ATF.
Click to expand...
'
Unless of course you where lucky enough to buy one at a gun show and paid CASH. The letter that went with EVERY one sold from the ATF saying this item was NOT a machine gun and was legal to own. I am guessing that the first person to be brought before a judge will all of them that where sold a grandfather clause.
 
I am guessing that the first person to be brought before a judge will all of them that where sold a grandfather clause.
Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean here Travis, but if you think a judge can grandfather those units and thus remove them from the purview of the NFA once the Tech Branch issued that ruling, you are sorely mistaken.

FWIW, Newerguy is correct here. BATFE can, does, and has in the past tracked down parts kits and other contraband items from importers/manufacturers/dealers right to the individual buyer's home address. Witness the improperly demilled Uzi kits imported by Cole, Chinese PPsh41 kits rerouted through other countries, the ill-fated SOCOM M249 and RPD uppers, etc. When BATFE wants customer lists and that sort of info from a dealer, manufacturer or importer to track down what they have determined to be a contraband item, most are cooperative. Not because they necessarily want to, but they know BATFE can make their lives (and their business) very difficult if they don't help. They are, afterall, in the unenviable position of having been caught putting contraband items into the stream of commerce. Don't believe me? Just ask Ernie Wrenn re the SOCOM uppers. Wrenn didn't do himself or his customers any favors by not seeking an advisory opinion on the uppers, and he helped to try and get some of the sold units back, but if you think BATFE can't, or won't, play rough and bend the rules when it fits their need, especially when it relates to NFA weapons, you are mistaken.

Once they have something like a customer list from the dealer/manufacturer/importer, it would be a relatively easy matter to start an investigation and get a search warrant for an individual customer.

As regards the substance of the ruling itself, I hate to say it but I agree with VUPDBlue that the ruling is correct in light of the existing law. That said, I think it could be an easy matter to get around this ruling with a similar device. The trigger on the akins recoils rearward (with the action) backwards into the stock, and is thus temporarily shielded from the users finger until the trigger resets and begins moving forward again. If the shooter pulls the trigger and holds it there without moving their trigger finger, the gun does in fact continue to shoot until empty. I think this may be able to be overcome by simply cutting the stock around the trigger back a bit, so the trigger is never completely shielded from the user's trigger finger. If the trigger was then pulled all the way to the rear, the gun would then fire one round and then the shooter would have to release the trigger to allow it to reset before firing again. If the shooter found the "sweet spot" in the trigger pull - not pulling all the way back, but just enough to fire the gun - and held their trigger finger in exactly the same place, the gun would still work exactly as the unmodified Akins does.
 
1st of all. The AFT could not obtain a customer list from Atkins without a federal investigation. The ATF cannot and will not just show up at your house demanding to see your firearms unless you are under investigation. You can be under investigation unless charges have been filed.
Click to expand...

Actually, The Akins Group, who manufactured this item, is a FFL holder, which gives the ATF the power to come look at their books at any time for any reason they want. I would imagine that TAG surrendered the buyer list at the ATF's request since they also manufacture suppressors and other NFA items. It wouldn't be worth losing all of it over a buyer list to them.

I'd worry about the AFT knocking on my door if I had one of these things, and if I can't produce the spring (because of disposed of it in an unauthorized way), I worry about satisfying them that I did in fact get rid of it. There very well may also be a federal law governing the destruction of machine guns.
Click to expand...

The instructions sent to purchasers by TAG (what the ATF posted regarding the AA stock) included paperwork on how to properly "dispose" of the spring. The owner had to send in the filled out paperwork (obviously to match up against the list ATF has) with the spring included. If you had sold the stock, you were required to say who purchased it and when. Assuming the number of springs you sent in (or people you gave them as 2nd party buyers) matched the number of stocks you were shown to have purchased, you'd be in the clear.

The rumor/hope was that once all had been collected, the ATF would grandfather these in as NFA items as it did with the USAS 12 gauges years ago. If that is the case down the road, they would then be registered NFA items like any SBR, SBS, etc. That is the HOPE.

The trigger on the akins recoils rearward (with the action) backwards into the stock, and is thus temporarily shielded from the users finger until the trigger resets and begins moving forward again. If the shooter pulls the trigger and holds it there without moving their trigger finger, the gun does in fact continue to shoot until empty. I think this may be able to be overcome by simply cutting the stock around the trigger back a bit, so the trigger is never completely shielded from the user's trigger finger. If the trigger was then pulled all the way to the rear, the gun would then fire one round and then the shooter would have to release the trigger to allow it to reset before firing again. If the shooter found the "sweet spot" in the trigger pull - not pulling all the way back, but just enough to fire the gun - and held their trigger finger in exactly the same place, the gun would still work exactly as the unmodified Akins does.
Click to expand...

Yes, and you can do that based on the adjustment of the accelerator device in the stock. I disagree with your assessment however, as the trigger finger is still depressing the trigger one time per round fired. The law does not state that the trigger finger must move to do so.
 
The rumor/hope was that once all had been collected, the ATF would grandfather these in as NFA items as it did with the USAS 12 gauges years ago. If that is the case down the road, they would then be registered NFA items like any SBR, SBS, etc. That is the HOPE.
Click to expand...

The difference, however, is that the USAS12 was reclassified as a DD - an NFA weapon that is still legal for to register and make, unlike MGs which were statutorily cutoff in 1986. IOW, owners of those shotguns were allowed to register them (tax free, I might add) because there was no statutory prohibition on new registrations of DDs.

Yes, and you can do that based on the adjustment of the accelerator device in the stock. I disagree with your assessment however, as the trigger finger is still depressing the trigger one time per round fired. The law does not state that the trigger finger must move to do so.
Click to expand...

I understand your point, but in the eyes of the Tech Branch its still one activation of the trigger mechanism which starts a chain reaction that ultimately results in more than one round being fired. I think a good analogy may be a semi-auto rifle hooked up to a solenoid or an electrically powered repeating trigger mechanism. The solenoid may actuate each individual pull of the trigger, but in the opinion of BATFE the trigger on the gun is no longer the "trigger" because its not the part that the user directly activates. The electric switch which starts the movement of the solenoid becomes the new "trigger". With the AA, the user pulls the trigger, and if you keep the trigger finger in the same place (in the rearward "pulled" position) the gun keep firing as it would with a solenoid or a machinegun. Its true the law doesn't state the trigger finger must move for each pull of the trigger, but if the finger doesn't move it looks more like a single pull that sets the gun in motion firing a number of shots.
 
Old news, and still a load of crap. I'm waiting till they deem any rate of fire accelerator to be illegal, like a couple states already have. When they come for my bumpfiring finger, they get the middle one first.
 
but in the eyes of the Tech Branch its still one activation of the trigger mechanism which starts a chain reaction that ultimately results in more than one round being fired. I think a good analogy may be a semi-auto rifle hooked up to a solenoid or an electrically powered repeating trigger mechanism. The solenoid may actuate each individual pull of the trigger, but in the opinion of BATFE the trigger on the gun is no longer the "trigger" because its not the part that the user directly activates. The electric switch which starts the movement of the solenoid becomes the new "trigger". With the AA, the user pulls the trigger, and if you keep the trigger finger in the same place (in the rearward "pulled" position) the gun keep firing as it would with a solenoid or a machinegun. Its true the law doesn't state the trigger finger must move for each pull of the trigger, but if the finger doesn't move it looks more like a single pull that sets the gun in motion firing a number of shots.
Click to expand...

And that is exactly my point...the LAW DOESN'T STATE that the trigger finger has to move, but they can infer and require it? The LAW does state that on pull of the trigger must not expend more than one round...ok, take an Akins with a 10/22 and pull the trigger all the way back on time...bingo - one shot.

Scary to think that the ATF can just use the law when they want, and not use it when they don't want.
 
The ATF...

Here is a little kicker...

The BATF&E says they cannot be held liable for ANYTHING they say in either writing or over the phone. What kind of crap is that?

I know of an SOT that purchased a transferable M16 from a lady getting rid of her husband's estate. This SOT aquired, from the ATF, the F4 that the weapon was registered on (as the old lady didn't know where the origonal paperwork was). They thought all was good. They paid the old lady the transferable price for it.

Well when the SOT tried to have the F4 re-registered in their name, they ATF said this was a 'post-sample'.

Ok they (the ATF) sent the SOT the form the item was registered on and it was a transferable F4. Now when the SOT tries to register the M16 to their name, the ATF says they're considering it now as a post-sample.

Long story made short. The ATF doesn't have a governing body over it willing to enforce common sense and actual law. They go unchecked on way to many fronts, and do what the hell they want to do. After all the ATF is the anti-NRA. Thay make up law that enforces what they want.

(I cant complain to badly though... their NFA Branch as been quite quick on my transfers recently... :-) I just got approved F4's for a MAC and a Sonics can in less than a month time)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top