ATF reverses decision.. Akins Accelerator now MACHINEGUN

Status
Not open for further replies.
All semi autos could be banned if this is allowed to stand.
Click to expand...
An interesting logical leap. What semi-auto has this decision caused to be banned so far?

I see the point, but I want to cut through the breathless hyperbole. The ATF has ruled that a mechanical contraption violates the NFA by creating a machinegun, and does so on dubious legal grounds. OK, I'm down with the objections surrounding that. However, when the ATF did so it did not rule the host gun to be illicit, merely the contraption attached to it. There is a logical step that is required before one bans semi-autos based upon this decision, and a fairly sizable one at that.

That is not to say that the ATF should not be called on its decision. It should. The letter of the law seems pretty plain to me, one would think that a court case could get it resolved in our favor.

Mike
 
:confused: I'm confused. It seems like firefaster just puts on an alternate stock that pretty much shakes the gun inside the stock when you pull the trigger? That looks like an automatic to me, except it has a different internal mechanism. It seems like it should be treated as an automatic since it's handled like an automatic. So why the balk? Is it that it shouldn't be catagorized as an automatic or that we shouldn't have the automatic ban in the first place?
 
@quatin

Both. The stock is simply a bumpfiring device. It is not a machinegun in any way, shape, or form. The trigger is still pulled once for each shot.
 
Wow, Three Pages of BS!

Has anybody read the links in the original post? There is no evidence of the ATF changing its mind on this.

:scrutiny:

Really - read it. They got the opinion of a well respected firearms attorney, not the ATF. He said that if the Hellfire POS rip off gimick was acceptable to the ATF, then the Akin's Accelerator should be acceptable, and listed some good reasons why.

Well, it was not acceptable

Does anyone have any evidence that the ATF changed their mind on this overly-expensive device that could be used only on 10/22s?
 
But aren't there 2 triggers? One internal and one external? One that you use like a trigger with your finger and one that's inside the gun and really is a mechanism that you don't have control over? I can't look at the details anymore since they took down their site...
 
Quatin,

It is a little of both. First I think the ban on full auto is wrong. I have no desire to own them but I don't think the regulation is useful and a waste of time and money.

It is also the fact that by the letter of the law the AA stock is not illegal. Yes it basically skins the automatic fire cat another way but there are no laws against doing what was done and initially the ATF rightfully saw it that way. Suddenly the ATF basically changes their mind possibly putting a business owner out of business, putting any buyers on pins and needles and possibly robbing them of their 1K if the stocks are confiscated etc.

My take is the ATF suddenly realized that this can be applied to any number of firearms and suddenly the MG ban kind of becomes moot in a way. It was a legal loophole but a LEGAL one none the less.
 
Read the paper trail, the BATFE had sent letters to Tom explicitly stating that it was LEGAL by the definition of the law.
 
I think the real issue (at least for me) is as follows. It's not whether or not the "Akins Accellerator" is an NFA item or not. The back and forth on that could tie up this forum for a long time....

Here's the issue though. The ATF originally declared this item to be perfectly legal for us plebes to own. Then, x amount of time later, they decide, "Ya know, we changed our minds. We don't want you plebes to own this nasty nasty evil device after all. It's now an NFA item."

Never mind that you have a written opinion from them that says "this is perfectly legal for the plebes without any of the NFA transfer issues, or the machine gun registry issues". Never mind that this person has invested x amount of capital into developing, testing, building, marketing, and distributing this item. Never mind that this might possibly bankrupt this company. We are the .gov, and we can change our minds whenever we wish, regardless of the consequences to those who make a living according to our decisions. [snooty british accent]We are not bothered by such things.[/snooty british accent]
 
The two issues are as follows.
First, The law says one pull of the trigger, one round fired does not equal a machinegun. This did not "find a loop hole" It followed the letter of the law.

Second and even more important is this.
ATF was sent one of these, tested it and determined that it was not a machinegun almost a year ago! Now ATF wants to change it's mind. This is pure incompentence on the part of ATF. ATF told this company that they agreed it was not a machinegun. Now that it is selling after considerable investments have been made, they want it banned because they realize that this may become popular and pretty soon everyone will have one. ATF does not like firearms in the hands of the subjects. Democrat control of Congress gives them the feeling that they can do whatever they want.
 
Here's the issue though. The ATF originally declared this item to be perfectly legal for us plebes to own.
Click to expand...

They did? :confused: Look, I am not calling you a liar; Maybe they did! But would you please show it to me?
 
I am trying to look this with an open mind. Maybe its a good thing it gets banned. Hold up...stay with me for a second. Would you rather it gets banned, or in 2 years when Emperor Hilary takes charge, someone comes out and says, "Here is a semi automatic weapon. Here is this completely legal kit. Here is this completely legal kit on this completely legal semi-automatic weapon. (start Hilary drill sgt voice) Now its a MACHINE GUN! 5 minutes in a shop and MILLIONS of so-called hunting rifles are military style weapons!"

I understand no one wants to sacrific a little liberty for a little security, but we also need to look at all outcomes. I don't think the ATF is going to push for a ban on semi-autos because of this thing (they would do it reguardless), but I can see it staying legal and causing 100x more trouble in a year or two. :cool:
 
@Malum Prohibitum
http://www.firefaster.com/documentation.html
Click to expand...
That seems to be a letter giving the official opinion of a privately-retained lawyer as to whether or not he thought it complied with federal law. It is not from the BATFE.

Mike

Edit Oops! There's more down the screen. My bad! Stand by...

Ok. Well, there is still some ambiguity there, but very little of it indeed, and most of it centering around the malfunctioning prototype. That, however, seems to be moot. So, the ATF approved the design, then changed it? OK...did they give a rationale as to why?
 
I'm not pulling the cat's tail! I'm just holding it and the cat's doing the pulling. = I'm not pulling the trigger, the trigger is pushing off on my finger. Bottom line... The gun is continously firing without any further input from the shooter other than the original trigger pull. Sounds like FA to me.:evil:
 
BATFETech2P1.GIF

BATFETech2P2.GIF
 
Conarch, read the whole thing, there are actually two letters from the BATFE on their letterhead both from the Chief of the Firearms Technology Branch,
 
I'm not even in your country and I know that it's bad what happened to this guy, and am sending an email of moral support. I think it's pretty pathetic how people are helping to justify ATF's actions.



deadin said:
Bottom line... The gun is continously firing without any further input from the shooter other than the original trigger pull. Sounds like FA to me.
Click to expand...

Wow, that's convincing. The definition of FA that you just made up with no authority whatsoever co-incidentally supports your opinion!


Outlaws- or should I say Mr. Ruger, your tolerance for abuse of others is quite human and quite common, but it's not a positive trait.
 
I do not know why those three letters at the bottom did not come up before, but Tom Bowers is not Mr. Akins. Is this the same device?

Isn't Tom Bowers the guy that runs the Politically Incorrect Machine Gun Page?
 
Outlaws- or should I say Mr. Ruger, your tolerance for abuse of others is quite human and quite common, but it's not a positive trait.
Click to expand...

Hey buddy, I have stated before in a lot of threads that I fully support full auto. I just don't like people trying to work around the laws, because when they get the spot light on them, it looks like they were doing something wrong....and in the case of circumventing the FA laws, this guy could have screwed us all. Refusing to call a spade a spade is not a positive trait either. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
JPFO alert and some questions/thoughts thereon
Replies
9
Views
844
alan
A
dogtown tom
  • Locked
ATF's Top 10 Frequently Asked Firearms Questions and Answers
Replies
1
Views
992
Sam1911
S
hso
  • Locked
BATFE Comment Period:Application of the Definition of Machinegun to “Bump Fire” Stocks
Replies
3
Views
1K
Theohazard
Theohazard
dogtown tom
  • Locked
ATF Open Letter to FFL's 3/22/2022 on Forced Reset Triggers
Replies
2
Views
526
dogtown tom
dogtown tom
2
  • Locked
CRPA/NRA Lawyer Undermining ALL Our Rights (long)
Replies
6
Views
918
Jim March
J
Back
Top