lfine Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 Anyone have any scoop on this? https://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/franklin-armory-introduce-non-nfa-11-5-inch-ar-pattern-firearm/ As in how it's legal - and if it's legal in all states? I'm reminded of the Mossberg 590 and how its legal in many places but not in Ohio. https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/mossberg-590-shockwave-legal-ohio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonytheTiger Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 Good question. Looks a helluva lot like a rifle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tattooo Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 How can they pull that off ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garmil Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 My guess is basically a different type of binary trigger that gets around the rifle definition. Possibly only firing on release rather than the pull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flatland Shooter Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 They start with a lower receiver that was never designated a rifle or a pistol and they classify it as a "firearm". Its the same loop-hole used for the Mossberg Shockwave and Remington Tac-14. Any barrel length is permitted as long as the over-all length of at least 26". The Texas governor signed a House bill in May 2017 making these legal in the state August 1st. Somebody made a comment on a forum (sorry, I don't remember where) that if the "firearm" was concealed under a coat it could be re-classified as AOW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfine Posted January 13, 2018 Author Share Posted January 13, 2018 I'll be curious to see if its ATF legal everywhere or, like I saw about the 590, its only skirting some loopholes in some states. Either way, good luck to them. Great to see innovation continuing anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flatland Shooter Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 (edited) When I was i Oklahoma late last summer,. I found a gun store that had the Mossberg Shockwave in stock. It was the first time I'd seen one and asked about the legality. Per the shop, Oklahoma law at that time did not address "firearm" either way. So they were not illegal, but then some may say were not officially legal. Either way, they were selling them. It was the same in Texas until it was addressed last May. Several Texas shops had the Shockwaves in stock but were not selling them. I found a small LGS that had several on the shelves for several months and wanted to get rid of them. They made me a good deal and I picked mine up early August 1st. Hopefully it has changed for additional states. Edited January 13, 2018 by Flatland Shooter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flatland Shooter Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 Can anyone familiar with the current Form 4473 tell me if it has a catagory for "firearm" along with "pistol", "rifle" and "shotgun"? If so, in theory maybe we can buy a stripped lower and classify it as "firearm" and build one ourselves. I'll let one of you brave souls be the test case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfine Posted January 13, 2018 Author Share Posted January 13, 2018 Well, here's the Buckeye Firearms Group reading on the Shockwave not being legal in Ohio because of a technicality with our laws. Surprised me but I was glad i read it first as i was looking into purchasing one. https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/mossberg-590-shockwave-legal-ohio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garmil Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 1 hour ago, Flatland Shooter said: They start with a lower receiver that was never designated a rifle or a pistol and they classify it as a "firearm". Its the same loop-hole used for the Mossberg Shockwave and Remington Tac-14. Any barrel length is permitted as long as the over-all length of at least 26". The Texas governor signed a House bill in May 2017 making these legal in the state August 1st. Somebody made a comment on a forum (sorry, I don't remember where) that if the "firearm" was concealed under a coat it could be re-classified as AOW. Not following your logic on that. A shockwave is not designed to be fired from the shoulder which is in the atf definition of shotgun that’s whys it’s not a shotgun. this new rifle is designed to be fired from the shoulder which would classify it as a rifle has to be one of the other stipulations is how I see it. The only other one is the talk of trigger pull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flatland Shooter Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 (edited) Agreed. http://shockwavetechnologies.com/site/?page_id=88%2F Edited January 13, 2018 by Flatland Shooter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunCat Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 4 hours ago, Flatland Shooter said: Can anyone familiar with the current Form 4473 tell me if it has a catagory for "firearm" along with "pistol", "rifle" and "shotgun"? If so, in theory maybe we can buy a stripped lower and classify it as "firearm" and build one ourselves. I'll let one of you brave souls be the test case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flatland Shooter Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 Thanks Steve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k80clay Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 The term “rifle” is defined by 26 U.S.C. 5845(c) and 27 CFR 479.11 as “a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed cartridge to fire only a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of the trigger, and shall include any such weapon which may be readily restored to fire a fixed cartridge.” Says rifles are made to fire with a single PULL of the trigger. Franklin Armory probably has a release trigger in it doesn't fire with a pull, therefor it is not a rifle and is not subject to the NFA. There's probably a catch in there that says the firearm NEVER had a pull trigger installed, and if you put one in you're subject to all NFA rules, bla bla bla. Just like with the shockwave - you can't do anything to it. Can't change grips, put a stock on it, put a pistol grip on - nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
valerko Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 Well shockwave is legal in NY , by same logic this would be as well. That would be ultimate FU to our dictator governor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flatland Shooter Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 My only concern is spending lots of dollars and future politicians changing the rules. Anyone remember the 12 gauge Street Sweeper revolving shotgun? I believe it was in the mid-90's they got reclassified. One day legal, the next day not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jclaypool Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 1 hour ago, Flatland Shooter said: My only concern is spending lots of dollars and future politicians changing the rules. Anyone remember the 12 gauge Street Sweeper revolving shotgun? I believe it was in the mid-90's they got reclassified. One day legal, the next day not. I think about this a lot lately when pondering the status of all the NFA work-arounds. I really love seeing all of the innovation that shows the asinine nature of this antiquated legislation. Though It is disheartening to think that at any minute the BATFE could "reclassify" any of these items or accessories. The work being done to attempt to redefine semi-automatic firearms right now is terrifying. As purely a capitalism loving American, I hang my head in shame. I hope companies like this keep fighting the good fight as long as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k80clay Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 1 minute ago, jclaypool said: I think about this a lot lately when pondering the status of all the NFA work-arounds. I really love seeing all of the innovation that shows the asinine nature of this antiquated legislation. Though It is disheartening to think that at any minute the BATFE could "reclassify" any of these items or accessories. The work being done to attempt to redefine semi-automatic firearms right now is terrifying. As purely a capitalism loving American, I hang my head in shame. I hope companies like this keep fighting the good fight as long as possible. 1 hour ago, Flatland Shooter said: My only concern is spending lots of dollars and future politicians changing the rules. Anyone remember the 12 gauge Street Sweeper revolving shotgun? I believe it was in the mid-90's they got reclassified. One day legal, the next day not. Calling the thing the "street sweeper" probably didn't do it any favors. I think it was one of the new no-no's in the 94 AWB, but a lot of things got swept up in that fiasco. I had a Ruger P89 then (only gun) and I remember buying USA "hi cap" magazines a few days after the ban. Didn't work - at all. You could actually see the feed lips were not even parallel. Didn't matter. You could fix it later. What mattered was it was "pre ban". Magazine manufacturers must have had the machines turned up to 125% just to crank them out as fast as they could. Back then, the big question to the ATF was why was a magazine made on Sept 12 1994 ok and one built Sept 13 1994 was the creation of the devil himself. Of course, there was no answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathanb Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 Gonna be another poke the bear and get bit type situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluedevil008 Posted February 1, 2018 Share Posted February 1, 2018 It avoids the rifle designation by the barrel not having rifling (or just straight rifling, can't remember). The bullet itself resembles a dart and has stabilizing fins. Manufacturer claims 4 MOA at 50yards (2 inches), but tends to destabilize after that distance. So pay $2K for a gun that is only usable within 50 yards, ammo is going to be super expensive, probably have awful ballistics, and run the risk of being regulated. Not to mention the old police officer isn't going to know that it's not an SBR when you get pulled over. No thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tattooo Posted February 1, 2018 Share Posted February 1, 2018 I agree it is a 2 grand mantle piece. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garmil Posted February 1, 2018 Share Posted February 1, 2018 Seems pretty useless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flatland Shooter Posted February 1, 2018 Share Posted February 1, 2018 Only benefit I see is if they flood the market and no one uses one in a crime. May make it easier in time to remove the $200 penalty and registration for SBRs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garmil Posted February 1, 2018 Share Posted February 1, 2018 (edited) so since this is legal are we going to see just the straight rifled barrels of under 16" sold for people to swap in to rifles? or would that not be legal. I wouldn't mind a short barreled 9mm pcc without a stamp, and at those ranges it may be accurate enough. Edited February 1, 2018 by Garmil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tattooo Posted February 1, 2018 Share Posted February 1, 2018 IANAL but I doubt swapping to a rifle would be legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now