ok so i was on another forum and saw a 20 gauge revolver shotgun and the only info i can find on it was the two names of MC255 or MTs255 anyone know of these? can i get one in the states there russian made and i know of one guy in canada that has one but he no longer posts on the forums so i cant get any more info if we can get them here whats the price on them and where would i even begin to look? any help will be great thanks in advance
Revolver Shotgun
- Thread starter Dimis
- Start date
- Status
Those really do look quite interesting.
Even though the law clearly had things like the Striker/Protecta in mind, it mentioned a revolving cylinder shotgun in the law.
"Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder such as" and goes on to name those two.
So I think legaly they would fall under the same catagory as other revolving cylinder shotguns and be a 'destructive device' even though they only hold 5 rounds and have a much more sportsmanlike appearance.
As a destructive device they would be difficult to aquire in the US already being a rare item.
One of those cases of an "assault weapon" type law effecting even unforseen things.
Even though the law clearly had things like the Striker/Protecta in mind, it mentioned a revolving cylinder shotgun in the law.
"Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder such as" and goes on to name those two.
So I think legaly they would fall under the same catagory as other revolving cylinder shotguns and be a 'destructive device' even though they only hold 5 rounds and have a much more sportsmanlike appearance.
As a destructive device they would be difficult to aquire in the US already being a rare item.
One of those cases of an "assault weapon" type law effecting even unforseen things.
Big44mag
Member
There was another shotgun made by Sylvester Roper that looked similar to that, it was the first repeater shotgun but it was made in 1866.
I had to talk with VA state police about something similar, but the law clearly states "Spring tension drum" and "folding stock". So in VA you can get a shotgun that has a gas operated revolving cylinder, or a spring assisted drum as long as you can't hold 12 or more shells or have a folding stock.
This is direct from the code of VA
§ 18.2-308.8. Importation, sale, possession or transfer of Striker 12's prohibited; penalty.
It shall be unlawful for any person to import, sell, possess or transfer the following firearms: the Striker 12, commonly called a "streetsweeper," or any semi-automatic folding stock shotgun of like kind with a spring tension drum magazine capable of holding twelve shotgun shells. A violation of this section shall be punishable as a Class 6 felony."
So do you like how they call the Striker 12 and the Streetsweeper the same thing?
I had to talk with VA state police about something similar, but the law clearly states "Spring tension drum" and "folding stock". So in VA you can get a shotgun that has a gas operated revolving cylinder, or a spring assisted drum as long as you can't hold 12 or more shells or have a folding stock.
This is direct from the code of VA
§ 18.2-308.8. Importation, sale, possession or transfer of Striker 12's prohibited; penalty.
It shall be unlawful for any person to import, sell, possess or transfer the following firearms: the Striker 12, commonly called a "streetsweeper," or any semi-automatic folding stock shotgun of like kind with a spring tension drum magazine capable of holding twelve shotgun shells. A violation of this section shall be punishable as a Class 6 felony."
So do you like how they call the Striker 12 and the Streetsweeper the same thing?
I was talking about federal law, not state law. Some states have banned street sweepers seperately. Similar to how some states enacted assault weapon bans that were near identical to the federal one even when the federal one was in place. Some had more restrictive ones and some less restrictive, but whether the federal or state version was more restrictive, the most restrictive one trumps the other.
Being legal in the state does not mean it does not fit under the 'revolving cylinder' shotgun terminolgy at the federal level. If it does fall under that then it is a destructive device as far as I know.
im not sure but i believe even at the federal level its a revolving cylinder in combination with hold "X" amout of shells not too sure of the specifics anybody know the actual law on this? and im in delaware so if it falls under a class 3 or dd i cant own it anyway theres no liscensing for such things here (the only gun law thats bad here) other than that any more info on the gun???
P.S. take a look at zoogsters post with the pic and tell me thats not a beautiful gun and that you wouldnt want one too lol
P.S. take a look at zoogsters post with the pic and tell me thats not a beautiful gun and that you wouldnt want one too lol
357wheelgunner
Member
That gun was gorgeous, but revolving cylinders are fragile, and I wouldn't trust one for a using gun.
Phil DeGraves
Member
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2006
- Messages
- 1,531
I can't tell from the picture, but how do you prevent from hurting yourself from the gasses escaping the cylinder gap if you are using the forearm? I have a revolving carbine; you do not hold the forend or barrel with the support hand but use a regular two handed hold on the grip.
Big44mag
Member
Dimis,
I hope this helps.
Section 5845(f), Title 26, United States Code, classifies
certain weapons as "destructive devices" which are subject to the
registration and tax provisions of the National Firearms Act (NFA).
Section 5845(f)(2) provides as follows:
(f) Destructive device. --The term "destructive device" means
* * * (2) any type of weapon by whatever name known which will, or
which may be readily converted to, expel a projectile by the action
of an explosive or other propellant, the barrel or barrels of which
have a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter, except a
shotgun or shotgun shell which the Secretary or his delegate finds
is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting
purposes . . .'
Probably 3 of the most well known DDs are the Streetsweeper, the Striker 12, and the USAS 12. I'm pretty sure this would satisfy ATF to be used for "sporting purposes" as it does not have a folding stock, large capacity feeding device or any other "evil" features.
As for the escaping gasses, it looks to be pretty well diverted. I'd take one...
I hope this helps.
Section 5845(f), Title 26, United States Code, classifies
certain weapons as "destructive devices" which are subject to the
registration and tax provisions of the National Firearms Act (NFA).
Section 5845(f)(2) provides as follows:
(f) Destructive device. --The term "destructive device" means
* * * (2) any type of weapon by whatever name known which will, or
which may be readily converted to, expel a projectile by the action
of an explosive or other propellant, the barrel or barrels of which
have a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter, except a
shotgun or shotgun shell which the Secretary or his delegate finds
is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting
purposes . . .'
Probably 3 of the most well known DDs are the Streetsweeper, the Striker 12, and the USAS 12. I'm pretty sure this would satisfy ATF to be used for "sporting purposes" as it does not have a folding stock, large capacity feeding device or any other "evil" features.
As for the escaping gasses, it looks to be pretty well diverted. I'd take one...
ATF decisions have the power of law on any firearm over .50 caliber due to the NFA. The NFA says all firearms over .50 caliber are destructive devices unless they are a shotgun seen fit for sporting purposes. The ATF decides what is fit for sporting purposes.
The ATF can change thier mind, and several cases have been brought against them challenging that and the ATF has won.
If they declare a specific model a destructive device it is. If they declare all models with a certain feature a destructive device then they are. You have to look at the wording of the opinions they issue.
Court cases are easy to find where something is challenged, but sometimes thier mere opinions can take a little longer to look up as they are neither statute or part of a court decision. A newer opinion can overpower a previous opinion. They create regulations with the power of law just by talking (well typing.)
That is why it can be damaging just to ask them a question and get an official response. Things previously legal can suddenly become illegal because they answer you a certain way creating essentialy a new opinion backed by the power of law even if it is different than a previous opinion. So refrain from asking them things already answered.
The ATF can change thier mind, and several cases have been brought against them challenging that and the ATF has won.
If they declare a specific model a destructive device it is. If they declare all models with a certain feature a destructive device then they are. You have to look at the wording of the opinions they issue.
Court cases are easy to find where something is challenged, but sometimes thier mere opinions can take a little longer to look up as they are neither statute or part of a court decision. A newer opinion can overpower a previous opinion. They create regulations with the power of law just by talking (well typing.)
That is why it can be damaging just to ask them a question and get an official response. Things previously legal can suddenly become illegal because they answer you a certain way creating essentialy a new opinion backed by the power of law even if it is different than a previous opinion. So refrain from asking them things already answered.
Phil DeGraves
Member
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2006
- Messages
- 1,531
Yes, it looks like the flash gap is shielded. That is COOL! Is it a double action trigger?
so basicly even if i petitioned to own the gun i may screw myself (and others) out of owning it and other firearms? or am i not understanding what your saying?
i still would love to have one (or two) just for my own collection no foul intent involved or implied i probably wouldnt even hunt with it and seeing as how i have my own range it wouldnt even leave the yard
any suggestions on what would be needed to get one imported and owned legaly? tax stamp maybe?
i still would love to have one (or two) just for my own collection no foul intent involved or implied i probably wouldnt even hunt with it and seeing as how i have my own range it wouldnt even leave the yard
any suggestions on what would be needed to get one imported and owned legaly? tax stamp maybe?
I was just saying to look for the ATF decisions regarding revolving cylinder shotguns. If it does not impact revolving cylinder shotguns in general and only the specific models then you can try to get one of these through an importer if any of them are importing them.
Don't ask the ATF if the answer is out there.
For example we have a thread on here where someone asked about thier Thompson Contender, and legaly converting it from pistol to rifle and back.
That entire issue had been resolved by a lengthy SCOTUS decision and it was perfectly legal (as long as you start with a pistol reciever and not a rifle one.) Kits are even sold for the purpose of having such a versatile firearm that can be assembled into both legal setups (has to be converted back and forth in the proper order, and never with the short barrel on it while in a rifle configuration or under 26" overall.)
Yet the guy and others like him went ahead and asked the unnecessary question, and got a much less clear response that essentialy once the legal pistol was configered as a rifle (pistol reciever) he had built (manufactured) a rifle and then subsequently converting it back into its original pistol configuration would be making a pistol from a rifle, which is not legal under the NFA.
So the ATF opinion contradicted what a SCOTUS decision had ruled, and it was something that was not even an issue until the guy and others like him asked that question and recieved a response.
ATF opinion does not trump SCOTUS decisions, but if they can then twist the facts with an argument that by thier interpretation it does not conflict with the SCOTUS decision (even if an illogical fantasy) it can still be an issue. An issue that may once again require a lengthy, expensive, court case to resolve something that was already resolved because someone decided to ask them a question that was legaly already answered.
An opinion that has not already been resolved by a SCOTUS decision is even more of an issue. If for example these shotguns were legal, and you asked if they were and they stated that they were not officialy, then they would no longer be legal even if they had been. All because you asked. They would have just gone from sporting to no longer sporting. Such is the excessive power of the ATF. They have absolute authority over all firearms with a bore greater than .50 to declare them sporting or unsporting and hence subject to the NFA or not subject to the NFA and can change thier minds at any time. So they have more power over most shotgun calibers than almost any other firearm. Its an NFA item if they say its an NFA item, even if the first time they ever officialy say it is because you asked.
So no all I was saying is do your own thorough homework and review previous official opinions, don't give them a call and get thier opinion because it seems like the easy thing to do. That is always a last resort.
Last edited:
- Status