AOW as a 'Masterkey' NOT illegal per BATFE 1/19/2011

[Martin Draco]

Concealability hasn't got squat to do with this. The barrel on the 12ga is only 8", it is a smoothbore and is now shoulder-fired. It meets the definition of a SBS.

I never said it made any sense. We're talking about the ATF. I was just trying to think of their justification for it. I'm just as puzzled as you...

 

[UncleMike]

Right, caselaw says letters are not a defense to prosecution. It must be designated and published as a ruling to have legal force.

Yup!!
If it's not a Statute, or a standing Court Ruling, it's just an opinion.
We all know how much trouble opinions can get you in to.

 

[pftraining_in]

I was notified by the NFA branch that I could engrave a SBR upper and did not have to engrave the receiver when building a SBR. During another call I was told that I would have to notify the ATF in writing anytime I attached a different length upper on my SBR and that I would have to file a form 1, but not pay a tax, for each upper under 16" I own for my SBR.

The letters and answers you receive from individuals in the branch are about as helpful as getting legal advise in jail from an inmate.

 

[Fargo]

I wouldn't do it because, federal law questions aside, you would still be violating Indiana's SBS law...

 

[E5RANGER375]

I wouldn't do it because, federal law questions aside, you would still be violating Indiana's SBS law...

not as i see it. im really surprised that some here aren't applauding the ATF on this one. we get an inch and then gun owners complain!?!?!?! WTF?

 

[revsaxon]

we get an inch and then gun owners complain!?!?!?! WTF?

We wanted a mile though...

 

[E5RANGER375]

We wanted a mile though...

me too brother, me too!

 

[CarmelHP]

Yup!!
If it's not a Statute, or a standing Court Ruling, it's just an opinion.
We all know how much trouble opinions can get you in to.

Also, an official ruling with agency holdings issued by the Director or revenue ruling by the Secretary is authoritative and legally binding. A tech branch letter is not.

 

[VUPDblue]

not as i see it. im really surprised that some here aren't applauding the ATF on this one. we get an inch and then gun owners complain!?!?!?! WTF?

You're not getting it. The letter they issued is specific to the person who received it and is not legally binding. I'm tickled pink that they ruled in "our" favor on this one (as I mentioned above) but I still feel that they are wrong. The consequences of a gun owner following the advise of BATFE in this case could include fines and jail time. If you see a ruling on this subject as described by CarmelHP then you will literally see me dancing in the streets. Until then, that tech branch letter is nothing more than an interesting topic for conversation and that setup is still illegal under Indiana law.

 

[E5RANGER375]

You're not getting it. The letter they issued is specific to the person who received it and is not legally binding. I'm tickled pink that they ruled in "our" favor on this one (as I mentioned above) but I still feel that they are wrong. The consequences of a gun owner following the advise of BATFE in this case could include fines and jail time. If you see a ruling on this subject as described by CarmelHP then you will literally see me dancing in the streets. Until then, that tech branch letter is nothing more than an interesting topic for conversation and that setup is still illegal under Indiana law.

Thanks for the clarification! your right ... i didnt get it.

at first i was like

and now im like

it would suck to have the atf kick down your door because you were wrong or didnt do your homework.

 

[Fargo]

not as i see it. im really surprised that some here aren't applauding the ATF on this one. we get an inch and then gun owners complain!?!?!?! WTF?

How about you go ahead and explain "How you see it"? I am really curious how you think this is legal under Indiana law. Because I'm fascinated with how this is going to work I'll even give you the first three code cites:

IC 35-47-5-4.1

[FONT=&quot]IC 35-47-1-10 [/FONT]

IC 35-47-1-11
Joe

 

[schapm]

How about you go ahead and explain "How you see it"? I am really curious how you think this is legal under Indiana law. Because I'm fascinated with how this is going to work I'll even give you the first three code cites:

IC 35-47-5-4.1

[FONT=&quot]IC 35-47-1-10 [/FONT]

IC 35-47-1-11
Joe

See the post right above yours.

 

[E5RANGER375]

How about you go ahead and explain "How you see it"? I am really curious how you think this is legal under Indiana law. Because I'm fascinated with how this is going to work I'll even give you the first three code cites:

IC 35-47-5-4.1

[FONT=&quot]IC 35-47-1-10 [/FONT]

IC 35-47-1-11
Joe

will you pay my retainer to argue this issue?

 

[jbombelli]

That's what they're saying right NOW. Wait until it's actually done, and see if they don't bust the guy, and that letter never makes it into evidence.

 

[Fargo]

will you pay my retainer to argue this issue?

Not until I see your law license lest I become an accessory to you committing the misdemeanor of practicing law without a license...

IC 33-43-2-1


Joe

 

[tradertator]

I guess if I pick up a AOW shotgun, I'll get the Remington instead of Mossberg, due to the location of the safety. Really doubt I would mount it on my M4 though, even if it was legal.

 

[snipersixx80]

ok i just MADE my masterkey system with my ar 15...super shorty shotgun with AOW tax stamp (5 bucks) used scope mounts around barrel and cut into the quadrail...now that i have one made and can be used...i am officially taking it off cause there is no real answer to any question from atf phone calls to state police as well as chief of police in my town...knowing that i have one ready like a condom is a lot better than keeping it mounted and paying the price if the law is this screwy..hahah come on zombie apocolypse

 

[VUPDblue]

Because BATFE may have said it is legal at a federal level, it is still NOT legal per Indiana statute.

 

[Kase]

ok I'm not real good with all the AOW/SBS/SBR stuff, so school me here...

If I were to (hypethetical situation) mount a an 870 with a legal barrel length of 18 1/2" to the bottom of an M4 (Remember this is hypothetical, it would look stupid), it would be completely legal and I would need no tax stamp at all? Probably a dumb question, but I just have to ask.

 

[VUPDblue]

That would not be against any law I can think of.