non nfa sbr ar15 loophole?

[ArmedCorgi]

He goes on to say:
Nick C says:
January 12, 2018 at 11:44
I pulled this directly from the GPO, linked from the ATF. Related to § 5845(a) (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOD...1-title26-subtitleE-chap53-subchapB-partI.pdf, page 3034) I trimmed the codes related to shotguns or clearly unrelated to this for ease of reading but feel free to read the full article yourself.

The term ‘‘firearm’’ means […] (3) a rifle having a barrel or
barrels of less than 16 inches in length; (4) a
weapon made from a rifle if such weapon as
modified has an overall length of less than 26
inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16
inches in length; (5) any other weapon, as defined
in subsection (e);

So I believe the argument here comes into play that if franklin armory doesn’t designate the gun as a “rifle” and has a barrel of less than 16″ and an OAL of greater than 26″ than it falls in some strange middle ground.

Hard to interpret though. Basically we are all just playing with legos and if you slap together the right combo without the ATFs sign off then you’re screwed.

 

[Exonautic]

He goes on to say:
Nick C says:
January 12, 2018 at 11:44
I pulled this directly from the GPO, linked from the ATF. Related to § 5845(a) (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOD...1-title26-subtitleE-chap53-subchapB-partI.pdf, page 3034) I trimmed the codes related to shotguns or clearly unrelated to this for ease of reading but feel free to read the full article yourself.

The term ‘‘firearm’’ means […] (3) a rifle having a barrel or
barrels of less than 16 inches in length; (4) a
weapon made from a rifle if such weapon as
modified has an overall length of less than 26
inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16
inches in length; (5) any other weapon, as defined
in subsection (e);

So I believe the argument here comes into play that if franklin armory doesn’t designate the gun as a “rifle” and has a barrel of less than 16″ and an OAL of greater than 26″ than it falls in some strange middle ground.

Hard to interpret though. Basically we are all just playing with legos and if you slap together the right combo without the ATFs sign off then you’re screwed.

Regardless of lengths though, you put a stock on something with a rifled barrel you have a rifle. Won't matter what they "call it".
Like trying to call a cow a pig, but in the end its still your wife.

 

[ArmedCorgi]

Regardless of lengths though, you put a stock on something with a rifled barrel you have a rifle. Won't matter what they "call it".
Like trying to call a cow a pig, but in the end its still your wife.

Only a "firearm" is what the ATF calls it not Franklin. The whole "firearm" definition he cited doesn't mention anything about having or not having a stock or shouldering. It just basically covered the measurements of the gun in question, so I don't know. This has to be either some new tech that enables the gun to squeeze through the ATF's definitions or they just found a way to assemble the components so that it, by ATF definition, doesn't classify as an sbr.

 

[Exonautic]

Only a "firearm" is what the ATF calls it not Franklin. The whole "firearm" definition he cited doesn't mention anything about having or not having a stock or shouldering. It just basically covered the measurements of the gun in question, so I don't know. This has to be either some new tech that enables the gun to squeeze through the ATF's definitions or they just found a way to assemble the components so that it, by ATF definition, doesn't classify as an sbr.

Agreed something here is only legal by the skin of their teeth.

 

[SomeSoldier]

Agreed something here is only legal by the skin of their teeth.

Its either legal or not.

 

[Exonautic]

Its either legal or not.

Yes, but unless this is some sort of airgun, than there's something small that were missing that they changed to make this legal and if one of us tried doing it, even in a free state, we'd likely be arrested because simply by looking at it there is very little difference between this and an sbr.

 

[SomeSoldier]

Yes, but unless this is some sort of airgun, than there's something small that were missing that they changed to make this legal and if one of us tried doing it, even in a free state, we'd likely be arrested because simply by looking at it there is very little difference between this and an sbr.

Honestly I was thinking about doing a build similar with a brace.

 

[freddy]

Article comments:

"Word on the street is that it's something proprietary with the rifling, where it still generates twist to stabilize, but it's not actually 'rifled'"

 

[Exonautic]

Honestly I was thinking about doing a build similar with a brace.

I already have a lower i plan on doing that with actually.

 

[Marine Cpl]

I already have a lower i plan on doing that with actually.

That's definitely safer. It can't be called a rifle at that point. But a cop could call it a pistol with features and the ride starts.

 

[Exonautic]

That's definitely safer. It can't be called a rifle at that point. But a cop could call it a pistol with features and the ride starts.

Yeah but that's winnable in court. I wont have to write a dissertation to explain it to the judge and jury. And I know and can explain why its legal.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Yeah but that's winnable in court. I wont have to write a dissertation to explain it to the judge and jury. And I know and can explain why its legal.

I get that but the ride is still a ride that's why it isn't popular. If you look look up NY's definition of an assault pistol, it's exactly that.

You'll have to prove that it isn't an assault pistol and they'd have to say okay it isn't.

 

[Airborneguy]

The term “Shotgun” means 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 shotgun shell to fire through a smooth bore either a number of ball shot or a single projectile for each single pull of the trigger.
From atf. So smoothbore would not cut it.

That description specifically states “shotgun shell”. If it’s smoothbore but firing brass cased rounds...

 

[Airborneguy]

Article comments:

"Word on the street is that it's something proprietary with the rifling, where it still generates twist to stabilize, but it's not actually 'rifled'"

Thank you

I got it 3 posts in.

 

[freddy]

Thank you

I got it 3 posts in.

Smoothbore, yes. But the item of merit is generating bullet spin in the absence of rifling...

 

[Prudii]

Looks cool, I figure it probably falls into the "firearm" gap somewhere.

 

[Edwardteach72]

 

[Edwardteach72]

clifnotes

sounds like what is keeping this from being a "rifle" is the binary trigger (so far that is the best hypothesis i have heard so far)

and as the video explains (with ATF definitions as well) a rifle is a blah blah blah "to fire only a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of the trigger"

not sure if thats what it is


***edit*** so he ends with talking about how the Binary could possibly be what wins the case, but th semi auto would then make it not good to go based on ATF definition.

so he goes on to say he thinks based on the new patent he is thinking that it makes it so that the semi auto may not be able to be used.. or more awesomely (similar to some competition shot guns) the echo trigger in semi would bypass the pull of the trigger firing a round and would only have it fire a round on a release (so 2 functions needed to fire 1 round) he explains it a bit better

 

[Airborneguy]

Binary trigger wouldn’t require a new patent though.

 

[Edwardteach72]

Binary trigger wouldn’t require a new patent though.

the guy speculates that the new patent may be that the binary trigger would bypass the semi out option and not allow that to work.. or that it would allow semi out but only on the release and not the pull of the trigger

 

[ArmedCorgi]

 

[Airborneguy]

Proprietary rifled bullet in a smoothbore barrel?

 

[Uzi]

I knew what he was going to say less than one minute into the video. I figured the first thing he was going to do was dismiss a non rifled barrel and then talk about at some point, the potential of firing with the release of the trigger as opposed to the pull as described by the ATF. I think that's the best guess, I've heard so far.

 

[Exonautic]

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2018/01/23/shot-2018-secret-franklin-armorys-reformation/

And there ya have it folks, straight lands and grooves. Accuracy on this thing will be garbage past 100 yards with reported 4-5" groupins at that distance.

 

[MilesTeg]

Well that's a big no thanks!

 

[Edwardteach72]

not at $2,100, when you can get a pistol AR with a sig brace or the "shockwave" brace or what ever its called or hell even that new honey badger looking arm brace. the "pistol" will do everything this does and better

 

[ArmedCorgi]

Well, that's a huge let down.

 

[Exonautic]

Well, that's a huge let down.

You're telling me. Ive been waiting for that article all day.

 

[freddy]

Well, technically, in the absence of the binary trigger it is $1,665 according to article.

 

[freddy]

If the upper or barrel is available for sale then the potential exists for a legal unregistered & undocumented SBR given an 80% lower. Maybe. For some people (in NYS especially) that does bring a lot to the table compared to a AR pistol.