The legal dilemma posed by pistol-gripped shotguns

There was a similar issue back in the 50's where the government sold a bunch of M1 carbines. This would have been OK, but apparently the barrel length on M1's varies a bit. Some have barrels over 18", some have barrels a little under 18". Originally, the title I barrel length requirement for rifles was 18" (like shotguns), but when Congress realized the government had helped make a bunch of inadvertent felons, they lowered the requirement to 16" for rifles.

For some reason I was always under the impression that a Pistol Grip shotgun was an AOW and I thought I had read that you had to pay the $5 tax when you bought one, but maybe I am mistaken or the site that I read is mistaken as there is a lot of bad info out there.

The definition for AOW includes the word "concealable", so the ATF says a PGO "shotgun" is only an AOW if the OAL is under 26", or it's actually concealed. The guns they're talking about in this instance are smoothbore PGO firearms with an OAL over 26".

That is a rather badly worded sentence. I think the current interpretation hangs on shotgun shell being in there, though its position in the sentence makes it somewhat ambiguous as to the meaning. The "except a shotgun" would seem to make the exception apply to the weapon, but by adding "or shotgun shell" it makes the exception vague as no reasonable person would consider a shotgun shell a weapon on its own. So that makes the exception also possibly apply to the projectile, meaning a weapon that takes a shotgun shell is not a destructive device. A better wording would have been "except a shotgun or any weapon using shotgun shells". That wording would also make pistol grip shotguns legal in my layman's opinion. The other alternative, or course, is to remove "or shotgun shell" and better define shotguns in a way that includes pistol grip shotguns.

(Obviously, the best solution and the one I am for is the abolishment of NFA and get the feds out of the firearm regulation business.)

I have fired a pistol grip shotgun several times, but I couldn't hit sh-t with it, so I didn't buy.

Perhaps it is time we just comply with the Constitution...."shall not be infringed".

Federalist 84

If the id-10-ts we have running the asylum ever got one right, hell would freeze over.

In some state a shot gun is a rifle because it is required to have rifling's to shoot slugs and is used primarily for deer. Now a pump shotgun smooth bore with a pistol grip is commonly called a street sweeper if you load it with double ought buck shot. Most smooth bore shot guns will fire any round you put in it. Since shotguns go back to the Damascus barrel type that will not shoot rounds loaded with newer smokeless powder and were made long before the NFA and the newer shotguns are in fact a safety improvement, I can not see how the BATFE has any say over their configuration or improvements. All the law says is that they must be at least 26 inches over all length with a barrel of no less than 16 inches. find those limitation in the wording of the second amendment Individual states may require 18 inch barrels. But that brings me to another issue. Where in the federal constitution does it give states the authority to re write the federal constitution. Shall Not Infringe was put in the second amendment to prevent the federal as well as state governments from writing any laws that in any way infringe on the second amendment. As far as the wording of the second amendment and the tenth amendment goes. There are no valid state laws concerning the second amendment and the creation of the BATFE is an unconstitutional act. Article six clause two specifically state the constitution is the supreme law of this land. Therefore the individual states have no authority to re write the second amendment The BATFE amounts to a blanket infringement. Read the 26 words of the second amendment. There is no mention of open or concealed carry and no definition of what a weapon or arms is. A rock can be a deadly weapon or has no one ever been stoned to death? Remember congress has the only law making power of our government. Congress is forbidden to delegate it's authority So the BATFE has no law making authority. It was also unconstitutional for the congress to create the Federal reserve banking system and the IRS. Wages are not profit and therefore can not be taxed. People need to start reading the constitution and understand how government illegally got so big. Most of what is wrong in our country today is the fault of congress failing to do it's job correctly The constitution was not written to be interpreted it was written to be enforced as written by the government it created. the government did not create the constitution the people did to place limits of what that government could do and what it was forbidden to do. Congress is limited to two forms of taxation and is required to manage the money not the federal reserve it illegally created. Read the congressional record and you will see that congress knew that the income tax was unconstitutional. They called it a necessary emergency measure. then made it permanent. If you don't know what the constitution says then you had better start reading it. The supreme court is not permitted to interpret the constitution that created the court. Legally speaking a judge is not permitted an opinion, they are required to be un biased and rule according to the words in the law.

Well, it is not a pistol because it does not have a rifled barrel. It is simply a “firearm.” As someone else said it is not an AOW because it is over 26 inches which it the arbitrary length ATF uses to define “concealable.”

ATF has written an opinion letter that said, since it is not a shotgun, the 18 in barrel length does not apply and you can cut the barrel to any length as long as the OAL is 26 inches.

So, I started a project last summer to cut mine down to 14 inches while installing a hand-grip that would keep the overall length over 26 inches but, before I got out the hacksaw I did some in-depth research into state law.

Florida’s definition of DD mirrors Federal law, but since Florida does not issue opinion letters like ATF, I came to the conclusion that although ATF was going to accept this as a non-NFA firearms, it would be totally banned per state statute as a DD and I scrubbed the project.

It was obvious to me that it was also a DD under Federal law but I’m not an attorney so I figured ATF was smarter than me…go figure.

@ARL: Can you cite an actual source for that claim? It's not the first time I've heard it, but I've never seen any corroborating evidence.

@Chuck: The whole AOW "loophole" only applies to virgin receivers, and those that have only ever been assembled with non-stocked pistol grips: If the receiver has never had a stock attached, then that particular receiver was never "designed or intended to be fired from the shoulder" and thus the resulting firearm is not a "shotgun" because it does not fit the definition.

HSR47,

yep, that is what we are talking about. Those things that people call "pistol grip shotguns" but are not shotguns because they have never had a stock. It is not a loophole. If they are over 26 inches they are Title I firearms. Under 26 inches they are Title II AOWs.

I think that is what I said??

The 1968 gun control act was written word for word from Hitlers gun control. The whole act is unconstitutional as it infringes upon the right's of the citizens to bear arms and or weapons (note I did not say guns) and understand you fight this one need you to use the legal terms laid down long ago in a number of court rulings that have never been over turned and still valid in a court of law. So you must make it a Rights issue and not a gun issue and only stupid people cannot wrap their mind around the difference! !! You have a right to bear arms/weapons and yes firearms and their accessories (ammo & clips) are included in that broad meaning.

Maybe if the NFA and the GCA was repealed there would be NO MORE PROBLEMS!