Franklin Armory "Reformation" Reclassified by BATFE: A Restricted GCA SBS

wildrider666 · Dec 19, 2019

Similar to Bump Fire Stocks, BATFE Reclassified the straight land/grove cartridge firing "Firearm" into a new and restricted Category that is not yet clearly defined, nor do the have the now Restricted "Gun Control Act Short Barreled Shotgun" paperwork figured out. This will kill production and be a royal pain in the ass to current owners who will need to comply with the paperwork, travel restrictions and Resale hassles.

Anyone that doesn’t think the BATFE isn’t planning an ambush for those 12 & 20 gauge shorty firearms too, is fooling themselves.

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/b...-sbs-shotgun-halts-all-sales/#comment-4402639

RidgeRunner · Dec 20, 2019

Is it just me or are these people who insist on poking the bear with all these gray area weapons really doing us any favors with all the silly junk they are pushing? Is there a real need for these borderline weapons? Printing guns, 80% lowers, bump stocks, short shotguns / rifles etc?

Fear21 · Dec 20, 2019

RidgeRunner said:
Is it just me or are these people who insist on poking the bear with all these gray area weapons really doing us any favors with all the silly junk they are pushing? Is there a real need for these borderline weapons? Printing guns, 80% lowers, bump stocks, short shotguns / rifles etc?

I'd say "need" shouldn't be a factor. A free citizen should be able to build or buy whatever they wish, without alphabet soup randomly flip flopping on what's hunky dory Monday and then "regulated" on Friday.

Just my .02.

donr101395 · Dec 21, 2019

How did they not think it would be reclassified? It has an 11.5" barrel and a rifle stock. I think the ATF is the most worthless organization in government right behind the department of education, but people continue to push the envelope in the current climate and are doing everyone who just wants to be left a lone an injustice. Same with the idiots that continually write letters asking their idiotic idea is ok.

RidgeRunner · Dec 21, 2019

Fear21 said:
I'd say "need" shouldn't be a factor. A free citizen should be able to build or buy whatever they wish, without alphabet soup randomly flip flopping on what's hunky dory Monday and then "regulated" on Friday.

Just my .02.

so your ok with folks building "whatever they wish" I don't think you have met some of societies home grown scientist and inventors. It would be chaos in a New York Minute, you might want to rethink that just a little bit. I don't like government regulations either and don't understand why on most, but the other side of the coin may be a tad bit Mad Max ish. Do you really want anyone to have access to full auto? or Explosive devices? or Mustard Gas?
I may be wrong, I have been before, I do not have good faith in the masses left on their own .

Snake-Eyes · Dec 21, 2019

RidgeRunner said:
so your ok with folks building "whatever they wish" I don't think you have met some of societies home grown scientist and inventors. It would be chaos in a New York Minute, you might want to rethink that just a little bit. I don't like government regulations either and don't understand why on most, but the other side of the coin may be a tad bit Mad Max ish. Do you really want anyone to have access to full auto? or Explosive devices? or Mustard Gas?
I may be wrong, I have been before, I do not have good faith in the masses left on their own .

Perhaps the definition of "a free citizen" should be the focus of everyone's attention.

Define it however makes the both sides of the discussion realize the truth: a Citizen who is NOT guilty of heinous crimes against society Should be Encouraged to RESPONSIBLY own/maintain/master as many weapons as feasible. It is to the benefit of society and the Nation as a whole for as many Responsible Citizens to be peaceful yet armed and ready to defend themselves (and by default, the Nation). It is a deterrent for both petty criminals and strategic/global criminals.

Perhaps the criteria for owning or having access to the "scary weapons" (burst/full-auto, suppressors, barrel-length restrictions, explosives, missiles, tactical nukes) should be some sort of tiered system of background checks. Not the NICS, but the kind of checks you go through for a security clearance. Who knows, maybe full/burst auto could be the equivalent of a Top Secret clearance. Suppressors would no longer be NFA bullshite. Make them easier to get than muzzle brakes (seriously, if you could have either one, who the hell wants a muzzle brake vs a suppressor). Weapons of mass destruction would require safeguards upon safeguards, similar to what the US military already deals with (background checks for access to handle, 2/3/4-person concepts, multi-level approval checks, etc).

The point is that the Citizens shouldn't be outgunned by the State/Feds. The point of the 2nd Amendment is to preserve the ability to stop a tyrannical government. By definition, a tyrannical government no longer listens to diplomacy and harshly-worded letters. It would have to be physically stopped. The Citizens must always have the ability to do that.

So yeah, Johnny H. Christ, the nicest guy in town who everyone in the community knows and respects SHOULD have access to a belt-fed machine gun and an anti-tank missile. God bless him.

FrommerStop · Dec 21, 2019

I would be interested in owning a non-twist rifled barrel since the projectiles have limited range but accurate enough it was reported to 100 yards. After that they tumbled and did not travel as far as would a bullet from a properly rifled barrel.
The loop hole they were exploiting was of no interest to me.

wildrider666 · Dec 21, 2019

If you live in a State that Baned NEW AW type firearm purchases and doesn't allow the transfer of existing Registered/grandfathered AWs, the Reformation "WAS" an option. Having seen the Atkins Accelerator decision flip, attempt to recall/track down every unit and the bankruptcy of the inventor/Company, its very risky to play in gray areas. It was a Ruling in the Atkins Case that set the case Law precedence that ATF can change its Technical Opinions, Positions without Agency liability regardless if it costs the Mfr millions of dollars.

There wasn't a recall effort on BFDs as far as I know even though it was hijacked into the NFA machinegun category by definition changes. The Atkins was just flat reclassified as a machinegun.

What I don't understand is how ATF (probably the DOJ) can "Administratively" make up a NEW Category of firearms (GCA SBS) under the Gun Control Act of 68 that does not otherwise exist. THAT would be creating TOTALLY NEW area Law that Congress did not write. BATFE/DOJ is still facing a Lawsuit over their Ban of BFDs and how it was done (changing Congresses Definition of machinegun to encompass a larger field of items than Congress specifically intended.

mooosie · Dec 23, 2019

RidgeRunner said:
so your ok with folks building "whatever they wish" I don't think you have met some of societies home grown scientist and inventors. It would be chaos in a New York Minute, you might want to rethink that just a little bit. I don't like government regulations either and don't understand why on most, but the other side of the coin may be a tad bit Mad Max ish. Do you really want anyone to have access to full auto? or Explosive devices? or Mustard Gas?
I may be wrong, I have been before, I do not have good faith in the masses left on their own .

You need to read and understand the bill of rights. Our rights are not granted to us by the government therefore they gave no power over them. The only reason there are any restrictions on firearms is because unknowing people tolerate them. At the time of the revolutionary war the colonists were better armed than the British soldiers. The standard British soldiers arm was a smooth bore musket. The colonists were using long rifles. The soldiers were out gunned by the average citizen. No where in the constitution is it written that only the government gets the good stuff. Your fear in no way trumps an individual right.

Zeroed in · Dec 23, 2019

Well Joe Biden can Kiss my Ass, He said we should go out and Buy a Shotgun.

SAWMAN · Dec 24, 2019

When Joe told me to go buy a shotgun . . . I did.
Thanks Joe. --- SAWMAN

IronBeard · Dec 24, 2019

Snake-Eyes said:
Perhaps the definition of "a free citizen" should be the focus of everyone's attention.

Define it however makes the both sides of the discussion realize the truth: a Citizen who is NOT guilty of heinous crimes against society Should be Encouraged to RESPONSIBLY own/maintain/master as many weapons as feasible. It is to the benefit of society and the Nation as a whole for as many Responsible Citizens to be peaceful yet armed and ready to defend themselves (and by default, the Nation). It is a deterrent for both petty criminals and strategic/global criminals.

Perhaps the criteria for owning or having access to the "scary weapons" (burst/full-auto, suppressors, barrel-length restrictions, explosives, missiles, tactical nukes) should be some sort of tiered system of background checks. Not the NICS, but the kind of checks you go through for a security clearance. Who knows, maybe full/burst auto could be the equivalent of a Top Secret clearance. Suppressors would no longer be NFA bullshite. Make them easier to get than muzzle brakes (seriously, if you could have either one, who the hell wants a muzzle brake vs a suppressor). Weapons of mass destruction would require safeguards upon safeguards, similar to what the US military already deals with (background checks for access to handle, 2/3/4-person concepts, multi-level approval checks, etc).

The point is that the Citizens shouldn't be outgunned by the State/Feds. The point of the 2nd Amendment is to preserve the ability to stop a tyrannical government. By definition, a tyrannical government no longer listens to diplomacy and harshly-worded letters. It would have to be physically stopped. The Citizens must always have the ability to do that.

So yeah, Johnny H. Christ, the nicest guy in town who everyone in the community knows and respects SHOULD have access to a belt-fed machine gun and an anti-tank missile. God bless him.

You've got a point there with higher level qualifications. I can tell you as a guy who has been background checked, credentialed, and drug tested for about thirty years now, each time is like the others never happened, and the cost would make the average citizen gulp for air. If I can tap into and use those investigations the .gov paid for, good for me. But if the average citizen has to pick up the tab for that, there will likely be very few who pursue credentialing, and thus very little ownership of any devices requiring higher level credentialing. So little, IMO, that the .gov will move to ban because, "Nobody wants/has those, anyway." Good idea, but I think the cost will kill it before it starts. Unless maybe we can cut some social programs and/or foreign aid to free enough funds to provide the service free of charge to law-abiding Americans.

Snake-Eyes · Dec 24, 2019

IronBeard said:
You've got a point there with higher level qualifications. I can tell you as a guy who has been background checked, credentialed, and drug tested for about thirty years now, each time is like the others never happened, and the cost would make the average citizen gulp for air. If I can tap into and use those investigations the .gov paid for, good for me. But if the average citizen has to pick up the tab for that, there will likely be very few who pursue credentialing, and thus very little ownership of any devices requiring higher level credentialing. So little, IMO, that the .gov will move to ban because, "Nobody wants/has those, anyway." Good idea, but I think the cost will kill it before it starts. Unless maybe we can cut some social programs and/or foreign aid to free enough funds to provide the service free of charge to law-abiding Americans.

True. The costs for those investigations are waaay worse than a $200 tax stamp. My suggestion isn't rooted in prolonged deliberation; it was just one option.

My overall point is that as "scary" as some may consider it, the fact remains that Citizens shouldn't be outgunned by the government. Since the government must now be able to outgun the rest of world (as the #1 military), it means, theoretically, the Citizens of the United States would have access to the best weapons in the world.

There has to be some kind of sanity check on nukes and such, and I don't have an exact answer for that. I do know it DEFINITELY can't be a high price tag (George Soros with a nuke, anyone?), and "more regulation" is the Wrong answer.

However:
Address the broken homes and dysfunctional families.
Destroy the criminal gangs.
Secure the borders (land, sea, and air).
Hold criminals accountable for their actions.
Encourage as many responsibly armed Citizens as possible by reducing needless restrictions and infringements.
Re-label "gun-free zones" as "target-rich environments".

That would get us moving in the right direction.

RidgeRunner · Dec 24, 2019

mooosie said:
You need to read and understand the bill of rights. Our rights are not granted to us by the government therefore they gave no power over them. The only reason there are any restrictions on firearms is because unknowing people tolerate them. At the time of the revolutionary war the colonists were better armed than the British soldiers. The standard British soldiers arm was a smooth bore musket. The colonists were using long rifles. The soldiers were out gunned by the average citizen. No where in the constitution is it written that only the government gets the good stuff. Your fear in no way trumps an individual right.

{QUOTE}+SNAKE-EYES
Perhaps the definition of "a free citizen" should be the focus of everyone's attention.

Define it however makes the both sides of the discussion realize the truth: a Citizen who is NOT guilty of heinous crimes against society Should be Encouraged to RESPONSIBLY own/maintain/master as many weapons as feasible. It is to the benefit of society and the Nation as a whole for as many Responsible Citizens to be peaceful yet armed and ready to defend themselves (and by default, the Nation). It is a deterrent for both petty criminals and strategic/global criminals.

Perhaps the criteria for owning or having access to the "scary weapons" (burst/full-auto, suppressors, barrel-length restrictions, explosives, missiles, tactical nukes) should be some sort of tiered system of background checks. Not the NICS, but the kind of checks you go through for a security clearance. Who knows, maybe full/burst auto could be the equivalent of a Top Secret clearance. Suppressors would no longer be NFA bullshite. Make them easier to get than muzzle brakes (seriously, if you could have either one, who the hell wants a muzzle brake vs a suppressor). Weapons of mass destruction would require safeguards upon safeguards, similar to what the US military already deals with (background checks for access to handle, 2/3/4-person concepts, multi-level approval checks, etc).

The point is that the Citizens shouldn't be outgunned by the State/Feds. The point of the 2nd Amendment is to preserve the ability to stop a tyrannical government. By definition, a tyrannical government no longer listens to diplomacy and harshly-worded letters. It would have to be physically stopped. The Citizens must always have the ability to do that.

So yeah, Johnny H. Christ, the nicest guy in town who everyone in the community knows and respects SHOULD have access to a belt-fed machine gun and an anti-tank missile. God bless him. {QUOTE}

Both good points, and I don't disagree. I guess I was more concerned about the criminal element, who would not care about the laws anyway, but may have easier access to stealing them, so I have no real argument, you are correct, a upstanding citizen should have access to what ever the government has and more.

htf1963 · Dec 25, 2019

outgunned...

RidgeRunner said:
{QUOTE}+SNAKE-EYES
Perhaps the definition of "a free citizen" should be the focus of everyone's attention.

Define it however makes the both sides of the discussion realize the truth: a Citizen who is NOT guilty of heinous crimes against society Should be Encouraged to RESPONSIBLY own/maintain/master as many weapons as feasible. It is to the benefit of society and the Nation as a whole for as many Responsible Citizens to be peaceful yet armed and ready to defend themselves (and by default, the Nation). It is a deterrent for both petty criminals and strategic/global criminals.

Perhaps the criteria for owning or having access to the "scary weapons" (burst/full-auto, suppressors, barrel-length restrictions, explosives, missiles, tactical nukes) should be some sort of tiered system of background checks. Not the NICS, but the kind of checks you go through for a security clearance. Who knows, maybe full/burst auto could be the equivalent of a Top Secret clearance. Suppressors would no longer be NFA bullshite. Make them easier to get than muzzle brakes (seriously, if you could have either one, who the hell wants a muzzle brake vs a suppressor). Weapons of mass destruction would require safeguards upon safeguards, similar to what the US military already deals with (background checks for access to handle, 2/3/4-person concepts, multi-level approval checks, etc).

The point is that the Citizens shouldn't be outgunned by the State/Feds. The point of the 2nd Amendment is to preserve the ability to stop a tyrannical government. By definition, a tyrannical government no longer listens to diplomacy and harshly-worded letters. It would have to be physically stopped. The Citizens must always have the ability to do that.

So yeah, Johnny H. Christ, the nicest guy in town who everyone in the community knows and respects SHOULD have access to a belt-fed machine gun and an anti-tank missile. God bless him. {QUOTE}

Both good points, and I don't disagree. I guess I was more concerned about the criminal element, who would not care about the laws anyway, but may have easier access to stealing them, so I have no real argument, you are correct, a upstanding citizen should have access to what ever the government has and more.

This is spot on and precisely what the endowed by our Creator 2nd Amendment is for.

Please read the new forum rules! REQUIRED!

Click Here: https://www.gulfcoastgunforum.com/threads/general-forum-rules-code-of-conduct.70770/

Franklin Armory "Reformation" Reclassified by BATFE: A Restricted GCA SBS

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Gulf Coast States

Member Benefits:

wildrider666

Master

RidgeRunner

Master

Fear21

Master

donr101395

Master

RidgeRunner

Master

Snake-Eyes

Master

FrommerStop

Master

wildrider666

Master

mooosie

Shooter

Zeroed in

Master

SAWMAN

Master

IronBeard

Master

Snake-Eyes

Master

RidgeRunner

Master

htf1963

Shooter

Latest posts

Members online

Forum statistics

Share this page