Pistol Grip Shotgun

For many years the ATF put out a booklet on identifying NFA weapons.
It plainly stated that smooth bore pistols were classified as Any Other Weapon.
 
Vintage Ordnance builds a reproduction WWII 45 ACP Liberator that has a rifled barrel compared to the original which had a smooth bore. Their website says it’s to comply with federal regulations.
 
You’re both right, and I was wrong in my last post. Apparently the ATF says that a smooth bore pistol has been designed to fire shotshells even if it’s not chambered in a shotgun cartridge. Even though rifling isn’t mentioned in the legal definition of a pistol, I suppose the reasoning is that a firearm designed to fire a bullet would have rifling and a firearm designed to fire shot wouldn’t. So I was over-thinking things now and I was previously correct before: A smooth bore pistol is an AOW (at least according to the ATF):

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/firearms-guide-identification-firearms-section-8
 
Last edited:
I know it sounds dumb but if a gun was built to be non shoulder fired, longer than 26", and with a barrel less than 16" chambered for let's say 44 magnum with a smooth bore be a "firearm"?
Click to expand...

Any thought on this?
 
I suppose it would be a generic firearm at that point. On a side note, barrel length wouldn’t matter in this case. Barrel length is only a factor with shotguns and rifles.
 
dzavoina said:
That's what it says verbatim.
Look it up yourself:
NFA, 26 U.S.C. 5845(e)

There isn't any interpretation involved.
Click to expand...
Arm braces came almost 80 years after the NFA and aren’t mentioned anywhere in the US Code nor in the Code of Federal Regulations. So why are you citing the NFA and US Code?
 
The question of whether a brace constitutes a "redesign" from the definitions of rifles or shotguns (e.g. "designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder") has been addressed by the ATF. In their letter to SB Tactical's lawyer, the ATF indicated that a properly installed brace, which has not been altered, may be fired from other positions without necessarily "redesigning" it into an NFA item.
 
dzavoina said:
That's what it says verbatim.
Look it up yourself:
NFA, 26 U.S.C. 5845(e)

There isn't any interpretation involved.
Click to expand...

And as we all know, one something has been written into U.S. Code, it is unheard of for there to be any disagreement as to interpretation. :rolleyes:

Aside from that ridiculous non sequitur, 26 USC 5845(e) says verbatim:

26 USC 5845(e) said:
e) Any other weapon
The term "any other weapon" means any weapon or device capable of being concealed on the person from which a shot can be discharged through the energy of an explosive, a pistol or revolver having a barrel with a smooth bore designed or redesigned to fire a fixed shotgun shell, weapons with combination shotgun and rifle barrels 12 inches or more, less than 18 inches in length, from which only a single discharge can be made from either barrel without manual reloading, and shall include any such weapon which may be readily restored to fire. Such term shall not include a pistol or a revolver having a rifled bore, or rifled bores, or weapons designed, made, or intended to be fired from the shoulder and not capable of firing fixed ammunition.
Click to expand...

Since the Shockwave is a title I weapon, I’m not sure why you think citing Title II regulations helps your argument, or why you would cite to (e) which specifically says that AOWs can not be “designed, made, or intended to be fired from the shoulder” when you are arguing a brace makes a weapon designed to be fired from the shoulder?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top