Akins attorney petitions scotus in accelerator rifle stock case.

B

Bill Akins

New member
bumpfire-akins.gif


In an ongoing effort to seek justice for myself as successor in interest of Akins Group Inc, as well as for my former customers and all Americans,
my attorney John Monroe has petitioned the U.S. supreme court for redress of grievance against the BATFE regarding their ruling
against my accelerator rifle stock.
http://www.fox4now.com/global/story.asp?s=10357890



.
 
Last edited:
questions:

If they sound stupid I am sorry, if there are pics well, can't see them so I am trying to understand what this does.

so obviously this goes on the back of a rifle, does the shooter hold the trigger in where the bullets are continuiously stricken by some sort of firing pin?

from the discription of the article how is that "NOT" a Machine gun, or just a modified Auto at the point of the installation of the new Stock?

I am not for either side, I am just curious.
 
I added a moving gif animation of it in action Gabe in my above post. But here it is again. Animation is cutaway view.

bumpfire-akins.gif


That should answer your questions. Stationary stock, barrel/receiver/trigger/mag all move to the rear under recoil when gun fires, stock stays stationary, recoil spring pushes gun back forward again in stock, trigger comes into contact with finger and is functioned again. One shot for each separate function of the trigger, just like section 922 of the NFA says is a semi auto, NOT a full auto.

I hope this helped you to understand. Bill.


.
 
So to fire it you just pull the trigger once and hold your finger in place.

The trigger moves back and then up against your finger again so it fires again.

Machinegun. The term 'machinegun' means any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.
Click to expand...

It appears to me it is not a MG since the trigger functions exactly once per round fired.
 
Bill:

BlindMansBluff is actually blind. As in "cannot see." He uses a screen reading software product to listen to TFL and interact with us.

I wish you luck in your endeavor. I think that the ultimate result will end up being a win in your particular situation with SCOTUS, followed by a Congressional/Presidential change of section 922 to make your product illegal shortly after, probably with greater restrictions thrown onto us along with it.

I don't consider that your "fault," however. Every man deserves justice. Your product appears to follow the letter of the law as far as I can tell, and is no more illegal in my perspective than a rubber band around the front of an AR mag well or bumpfiring from the hip via a belt loop.

While I question the resultant downrange accuracy of your product... that is not its purpose.

Best of luck!
 
Your product appears to follow the letter of the law as far as I can tell, and is no more illegal in my perspective than a rubber band around the front of an AR mag well or bumpfiring from the hip via a belt loop.
Click to expand...

Except that "bump firing" does not change the mechanical characteristics of the gun, This device does.

Stationary stock, barrel/receiver/trigger/mag all move to the rear under recoil when gun fires, stock stays stationary, recoil spring pushes gun back forward again in stock, trigger comes into contact with finger and is functioned again. One shot for each separate function of the trigger,
Click to expand...

I think the key here is what will be defined as the "Trigger."
And, the fact that rate of fire is dependent on the mechanism rather than the tactile ability of a finger.


It may follow the letter of the law, but not the spirit, I expect.
 
I think the key here is what will be defined as the "Trigger."
Click to expand...
The trigger is still the trigger. that has not changed one bit.

And, the fact that rate of fire is dependent on the mechanism rather than the tactile ability of a finger.
Click to expand...
Nothing in the law says anything about the tactile ability of the finger. A MG would still be a MG if it was operated with your tongue instead of your finger.

It may follow the letter of the law, but not the spirit, I expect.
Click to expand...
It either violates the law or it does not.
 
Bump fire from the hip with thumb in beltloop is no different from bump firing with this stock.
You pull the trigger once for each round. How is this changed? The action "floats" rearward on recoil and upon return your finger fires the next round. I think you created a real nice device.
Sorry folks but it is brutally obvious that it still takes one operation of the trigger to discharge one round from the chamber...
Blind mans bluff, I will be sending message via private means...
Brent
 
A shoelace is a machine gun, then it is no longer a machine gun.

I think the ruling will remain the same in this case, but ATF has changed positions on more than one occasion.
 
It does. A single function of the trigger is involved here.
Click to expand...

no more so than with a 1911 or any other semi auto
the trigger is depressed, a shot fires
the trigger then resets forward
then it must be depressed again to fire another shot

the trigger is manipulated for each individual shot, that means it's a semi auto

whereas one movement of the trigger for multiple shots would mean it's a full automatic.


you may be right in spirit, but wrong in reality
 
you may be right in spirit, but wrong in reality
Click to expand...

You misread the plain meaning of the statute. it refers to function, not "pull". There is a factual and mechanical difference between the example you cite and the object in question. Please put aside the gunwoobie and look at it carefully

May I suggest you read the decsion of the Circuit?

WildthenallwillbeclearAlaska TM
 
For the second and subsequent shots the trigger is not actuated by the finger pulling the trigger but by the mechanical action of the receiver coming forward to hit the trigger to the finger.

The finger pulls the trigger once and it will continue to fire as long as the finger is held in that position.

To me that is a machien gun.
 
For the second and subsequent shots the trigger is not actuated by the finger pulling the trigger but by the mechanical action of the receiver coming forward to hit the trigger to the finger.
Click to expand...
That is precisely the same mechanism of action as the Hellfire, which was determined to be legal by BATF.
 
You misread the plain meaning of the statute. it refers to function, not "pull".
Click to expand...

exactly, perhaps it's you that need to re-read the statute

the functioning remains the same with or without the stock, the conscious and deliberate act of the "pull" is what changes

the courts decision doesnt mean their interpretation is reality... it just means they havent been corrected yet.


My idea still stands.
A glove with electrodes on the back of your hand that sends quick pulses to your trigger finger and causes it to spasm rapidly resulting in a rate of fire that is faster than one could consciously pull the trigger on their own.

I could rig this up with some 9volt batteries, a glove, and an old clock
 
Last edited:
A quote from the appeal decision, bear in mind this was the plaintiff's own description, Emphasis mine.

According to Akins, a gunman pulls the trigger, then "maintains tension against the finger stops," and each time the rifle recoils, it is pushed forward by "tension supplied by the spring," which pushes "the trigger ... into the fInger[] and the rifle."
Click to expand...

This describes 1, uno, singular action by the "gunman" which results in multiple rounds being fired without manual reloading, the gun supplies the rest of the "mechanical" function. Thus the ruling.

You misread the plain meaning of the statute. it refers to function, not "pull"
Click to expand...

Correct, this mechanism functions by a singular manual application of the trigger, resulting in multiple shots.

Hope he can convince them otherwise but, looks like a machinegun to me, as much as it hurts I must agree with WA :eek: :p :)
 
This describes 1, uno, singular action by the "gunman" which results in multiple rounds being fired without manual reloading, the gun supplies the rest of the "mechanical" function. Thus the ruling.
Click to expand...

Therein lies the disagreement.
The statute clearly states that a machinegun fires with a single action of the trigger, not the "gunman"

Machinegun. The term 'machinegun' means any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.
Click to expand...

the trigger still functions with multiple actions in order to fire, like any semi auto weapon.

bumpfiring works the same way and has been ruled legal, so has the hellfire trigger assembly, and last I checked, the same result can be had with a rubber band legally.
This device does nothing but allow the operator to pull the trigger faster on a semi auto weapon

Hell, trigger cranks are legal and you dont even touch the trigger with those. A single crank can fire 10 shots, perfectly legally
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top