Call to action - mail the BATFE director to reverse the ruling on Akins Accelerator!

[jlbraun]

For those not familiar, the Akins Accelerator(tm) is a bumpfire stock that allows a high rate of fire with the Ruger 10/22. The unit functions by firing a round once for each function of the trigger. It is similar to other bumpfire devices. After getting a written letter from the BATFE that the stock was not a machinegun conversion part, they started production and sold a few hundred - only to have the BATFE say later "whoops, those are machineguns, turn 'em all in!"

Reclassifying bumpfire devices as machineguns puts all semi-autos in danger.

The main website is:

www.firefaster.com.

The sample letter is at:

http://www.firefaster.com/CalltoAction.doc

To pre-empt discussion on "well, it LOOKS like a machinegun, therefore it is one", the law very clearly defines a machinegun as:

"United States code Title 26, Subtitle E, Chapter 53, Subchapter B, Part 1, § 5845, as “... any weapon which shoots ... automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.”"

The trigger is actuated by the user's finger once for every shot. To say that it "looks like" or "functions like" a machinegun is the same line of reasoning Feinstein used to get the Assault Weapons Ban passed - conflating actual select-fire weapons with semi-auto copies. If this ruling is allowed to stand, all firearms that can be bumpfired are in danger, period.

Indisputably, the stock is not a machinegun conversion part, because the trigger is actuated once for each shot by the user's finger. It is simply a bumpfire device that happens to work well.

 

[gunsmith]

I wish I had known about this thing

when they were on sale!

Hey! can we find out the addresses of Brady type folks and call the ATF and say we sent our accelorators to them?

 

[MudPuppy]

This is a crock and beyond the scope of the ATF's jurisdiction.

Please, please, everyone respond and help in this matter. As previously stated, if this "ruling" is unchallenged, all semi-auto's could be at risk.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Indisputably, the stock is not a machinegun conversion part, because the trigger is actuated once for each shot by the user's finger. It is simply a bumpfire device that happens to work well.

"Search" is your friend. This has already been debated ad-nauseum on just about every firearms forum out there. You are beating a dead horse.

Suffice it to say there is ample mechanical justification for the ruling. In terms of "one cartridge per pull" the basic mechanical operation of the conversion kit is highly questionable, and the position of the pro-Akins folks is, at best, based on the slimmest, thinnest, most ragged edge of the legal grey-area envelope. They tried to push the line and ended up stepping over.

The Akins folks jumped the gun (pun intended). They began selling their products pre-certification under the presumption that the ATF(E) was just going to rubber-stamp it as "OK". Never mind that the bureau had already expressed serious misgivings about the functionality, telling them that it would be certified if it could be conclusively shown in testing, that the product functioned exactly as Akins claimed. It didn't. Certification denied. End of story.

You can write and call all you want but you'll be wasting time and breath. It ain't gonna be reversed.

Brad

 

[jlbraun]

The Akins folks jumped the gun (pun intended). They began selling their products pre-certification under the presumption that the ATF(E) was just going to rubber-stamp it as "OK".

False. The BATFE did explicitly give the OK to an Akins Accelerator device, serial AA1.

Look, you don't have to write. What harm would it do if a few hundred people write the BATFE anyway?

 

[romma]

I hope the Akins people sue the skirts off the BATF folks... First the tell them, they are okay, they ramp up production and marketing, then they pull the rug out from underneath them.

 

[Brad Johnson]

False. The BATFE did explicitly give the OK to bumpfire stock devices.

Bumpfire, Yes. Complete reworking of the stock and receiver to skirt the NFA laws and tring to Rube Goldbergh the device in under the "bumpfire" designation, No.

The ATFE ruling - http://www.atf.gov/alcohol/info/revrule/rules/atfruling_2006-2.pdf

Again, Akins tried to push the line. They ended up tripping over it. They tried to monkey the system based on their interpretation of a technicality and it bit 'em.

I'll save my breath and ink for a battle that hasn't already been lost.

Brad

 

[SIOP]

And while you're at it, don't forget to write to the NRA and the Republican National Committee thanking them for the '86 law that made it illegal for civilians to own new production machine guns.

 

[jlbraun]

Brad, seriously.

The reciever isn't touched, and that according to the law is the firearm. Additionally, (and I repeat myself) they explicitly got the OK from the BATFE to proceed.

I accept that you're not going to write, but why are you posting repeatedly how futile it is, "they shoulda known", etc.?

Why not just say to yourself "hmph" and move on without saying anything?

 

[Brad Johnson]

The reciever isn't touched, and that according to the law is the firearm.

Yes, and..? They still manufactured a product that, when installed, becomes and integral part of the firearm, not just an added and easily removed part. That new configuration will fire more than one shot with a single action of the operator. In other words, a machine gun. The original trigger still being attached to the receiver has been rendered a functional irrelevancy by the configuration of the aftermarket device. Akins tried to use a very, Very, VERY narrow interpretation of the bumpfire loophole and didn't get away with it.

Additionally, (and I repeat myself) they explicitly got the OK from the BATFE to proceed.

Nope, they got approval contingent on getting an operable device that function in the manner described by the manufacturer. It didn't. Approval denied.

I like the ATFE about as much as any other gunny but this time I have to agree with their decision. Given the mechanics of the part in question and the literal interpretation of what bumpfire entails (including how the user's actions initiate the firing cycle) this was a valid ruling.

In deference to a lot of the presumption surrounding the decision, it will not effect the recognized status of a true bumpfire setup. That is clear in the ATFE's letter, where that status is specifically quoted.

Why not just say to yourself "hmph" and move on without saying anything

?

For the same reason that I'd suggest an alternative route to a lost traveler. If you don't know where you are, pushing blindly forward just because you think you have to is, at best, a waste of time and resources. Sometimes it's a better strategy to stop, rethink your situation, and make sure you are using proceeding wisely.

Brad

 

[dave_pro2a]

Quote Brad: "configuration will fire more than one shot with a single action of the operator. In other words, a machine gun."

Please cite a source for your definition of a machine gun. A Law or court ruling.

If you can't then...

 

[Brad Johnson]

Please cite a source for your definition of a machine gun. A Law or court ruling.

If you can't then...

The ATFE, perhaps?

"Any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot,..."

If you're going to go into the same old "but the trigger is..." then don't even bother. That kind of legal hair-splitting is the reason this issue exists in the first place. And it's yet another reason for anti-gunnies to look down on the rest of us who actually try not do to stupid crap that invites the prying eyes of the ATFE.

Brad

 

[dave_pro2a]

Quote Brad: "That kind of legal hair-splitting is the reason this issue exists "

No, "legal hair-splitting" exists because of the law. A law is either poorly written, or poorly thought out, thus arises lawful exemptions and allowable, yet dubious, activities.

With a single action of the trigger means just that. The fact that there's a different method of producing a similar result is moot, the law/rule/precedent is all about the trigger (and the reciever).

 

[LAR-15]

If your not going to do anything about this, don't post in this thread.

Start a new one.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Guys, really, you need to brush up on some basic mechanical concepts. Have you ever actually looked at the Akins setup? To argue the old "trigger & receiver" line is just ... well, it's just silly. The mechanics of the Akins device are so overtly designed to skirt the law by trying to stay within the boundaries of "bumpfire" that it's patently laughable. Believing it has a snowball's chance in hades to begin with is pretty telling of the desperation gunnies will go to in order to wink at each other and brag about how they put one over on the ATFE.

Why not put that effort and energy into getting regulations relaxed instead of continually presenting reasons for the ATFE be even more overbearing? Jeez, guys, don't you see that you are creating a big part of your own problem?

Brad

 

[LAR-15]

You make no sense.

Please explain what you mean in clearer terms.

Thanks

 

[Brad Johnson]

You make no sense.

Please explain what you mean in clearer terms.

If you have to ask, then explaining it won't help.

:banghead:

Brad

 

[MudPuppy]

Yes, I've seen the schematics of the device.

And if you'll look at the big picture, and not just this device, you'll see the ATF is changing the interpretation of the LAW to no longer rely on one TRIGGER PULL, but one ACTION OF THE TRIGGER FINGER.

When you bumpfire any semi-auto, you become a felon. Which is nuts, Brad, unless you're a "what do you need one of them black rifles for?" kind of guys.

 

[jlbraun]

Brad,

At this point, using your "lost traveler" metaphor, this "lost traveler" does not want your help in this matter.

Perhaps you should start another thread entitled "Why I think the Akins Accelerator is obviously illegal and fighting the BATFE's interpretation is futile".

I am sure you will get many responses.

 

[Robert Hairless]

jlbraun:

At this point, using your "lost traveler" metaphor, this "lost traveler" does not want your help in this matter.

Perhaps you should start another thread entitled "Why I think the Akins Accelerator is obviously illegal and fighting the BATFE's interpretation is futile".

I am sure you will get many responses.

Darned right! We don't want anyone disagreeing. When you begin a message thread entitled "Call to action - mail the BATFE director to reverse the ruling on Akins Accelerator" that's what you want and that's what you should get! Anyone who has another opinion should get lost.

 

[CDignition]

The gun fires once per each trigger actuation. NOT finger pull...but trigger actuation. This is the Lynchpin... A MG works by firing more than one shot PER trigger pull... the AA works by moving the trigger back and forth each time a round fires.... taaa daa...one round per trigger pull... BATFE needs to go away.

 

[clarence222]

Glad we don't all have Brad's attitude

You can write and call all you want but you'll be wasting time and breath. It ain't gonna be reversed.

If thats the case then there is no sense in trying to get any law already passed repealed or even slightly. That said I don't think the BATFE will change the ruling so we need to get in touch with our reps and get the BATFE changed or done away with.


If we don't fight for the small things then there isn't any reason to fight for the big things.
For many years carrying concealed was not allowed in many states now all but 2 states allow some form of CCW, Illinois and Wisconsin being the 2. Those laws were already inplace yet we fought and they changed. The AWB of 94 could have very well been made permanent, yet again we fought and made sure it didn't happen.

My point is when we give up fighting for any of ur rights we are in effect giving up the fight for all of our rights.

 

[XD Fan]

I do not fully understand the controversy in this thread. I admittedly have notseen the schematics nor am I an engineering wizard, but if this Akins device allows the trigger to reset between shots fired, I do not see anyway this could be legally considered a MG. That is a single action of the trigger for every round fired.

If this is true the BATFE is way out of line.

 

[Prince Yamato]

Why are we trying to reverse a ruling on a $1500 piece of crap? And would everyone please quit demonizing Brad. I find it ironic that people will complain about the ATF ad nauseum, but when it comes to skirting federal law, will quote the ATF verbatum. Look, you want a machinegun, buy a machinegun. They don't allow them in your state? Move. Do you feel as I do that everyone should be able to own every small arm? Overturn the Federal Firearms Acts. Start with the 1986 ruling. If that ruling never came to be, we'd all be finding the Akins Accelerator laughable. The guys who made this walked a very thin legal line and tripped. I can't imagine any of you honestly thought this device would get an approval letter.

 

[jlbraun]

@Yamato

I can't imagine any of you honestly thought this device would get an approval letter.

Did you read the documentation page? They tested an Akins Accelerator device, serial number AA1(!), and approved it.

"Our examination has determined that the submitted stock assembly does not constitute a machinegun as defined by the NFA."

Does it get any more clear?