ATF Shotgun Study - Here it is!

[Mephis 82]

I think most of those on here forget that this study, does not go to congress for a vote. It goes directly to the AG for his signature. So with a stroke of a pen our 2A rights are severely limited. And if this gets off, then the next step is for any firearm that is not for sporting or hunting purposes to be banned. Yes, the supreme court ruled in our favor, but how many years will it take to hear another case once the oxygen thieves have crippled our 2A and our rights. You seem to forget that during a national emergency the president, under powers granted to him under the patriot act, like a dictator, can instill martial law. Look what FEMA did during Katrina, they cut phone lines, jammed communications, and even went to areas not badly hit to confiscate the citizens firearms. Which have yet to be returned. Either way, this study, the ATF's attention to the Saiga and others, is not a good thing. We are on a slippery slope, in a global anti gun environment.

 

 

Please explain how an import regulation violates your 2nd amendment rights.

 

 

Not much different than how in the UK you can buy a ford focus that gets nearly 70mpg and has the same amount of power as the american version that only gets 30. But it's illegal to import the version sold in the UK.

 

 

I'm pretty sure most people are way way over-thinking this shotgun study, if anything I'd imagine it will allow more guns to be imported than before.

[mikegraffam 11]

I think most of those on here forget that this study, does not go to congress for a vote. It goes directly to the AG for his signature. So with a stroke of a pen our 2A rights are severely limited. And if this gets off, then the next step is for any firearm that is not for sporting or hunting purposes to be banned. Yes, the supreme court ruled in our favor, but how many years will it take to hear another case once the oxygen thieves have crippled our 2A and our rights. You seem to forget that during a national emergency the president, under powers granted to him under the patriot act, like a dictator, can instill martial law. Look what FEMA did during Katrina, they cut phone lines, jammed communications, and even went to areas not badly hit to confiscate the citizens firearms. Which have yet to be returned. Either way, this study, the ATF's attention to the Saiga and others, is not a good thing. We are on a slippery slope, in a global anti gun environment.

 

 

Please explain how an import regulation violates your 2nd amendment rights.

 

 

Not much different than how in the UK you can buy a ford focus that gets nearly 70mpg and has the same amount of power as the american version that only gets 30. But it's illegal to import the version sold in the UK.

 

 

I'm pretty sure most people are way way over-thinking this shotgun study, if anything I'd imagine it will allow more guns to be imported than before.

 

Well, I'm not completely in the alarmist camp like NightArmory, I'm not really sure what martial law has to do with any of this; and I'm pretty sure I don't care to debate it to find out.

 

This shotgun study will probably make owning a Saiga and drum together as liable to a DD tax, but you'll be able to freely buy either one (like 37mm launchers with 12ga adapters or such). It will be up to us to keep it legal. I do believe that folks are panicking too much about it. But what do you expect? Firearm owners tend to be a worrisome lot; many of us go out of our way to prepare for concerns that the general population doesn't think about.

 

And while I agree, in a way, that import/export laws don't DIRECTLY infringe on our liberties. They can, and sometimes do, infringe by proxy.. in fact, this is how our rights are eroded most regularly - by secondary effects, not by direct legislation.

 

For example, Phil Zimmerman had his rights infringed on (he was censored and put in jail) due to some now defunct cryptography export laws.

 

Hypothetically, a law which banned all importation of firearms would not infringe on our 2A rights. Because we can buy domestic guns. Similarly, a law could be passed against new manufacture of functioning receivers - and it wouldn't infringe on our 2A right - because we can purchase used guns and parts to repair them. The cost could go through the roof - but the 2A doesn't guarantee that arms are to be cheap and plentiful. The NFA doesn't infringe on the 2A, because it just taxes FA and DD - we can still go into a store and buy a Mossberg pump and bear that arm. Mossberg pumps could be outlawed, and we still have the right to bear a flintlock. Ammo could be taxed at 10000%.. and none of it infringes the right "to bear arms".

 

We can, without directly infringing the 2A, pass law which disarms the public. This is happening.

 

The 2A might not be infringed by any of this.. but our inalienable right to self-defence against both common criminals, and agents of the government is being infringed. The 2A was designed to protect that right, not define it. Likewise, the 9A protects all the inalienable rights that are not specifically enumerated by the other amendments in the Bill of Rights.

 

The amendments are just legal verbiage - they are flawed, at times too general and at times too specific. It is the IDEAS that are expressed in those amendments that are sacred, and they are much broader than the relatively weak protections afforded by the Constitution.

[PostsOnPercocet 32]

I think most of those on here forget that this study, does not go to congress for a vote. It goes directly to the AG for his signature. So with a stroke of a pen our 2A rights are severely limited. And if this gets off, then the next step is for any firearm that is not for sporting or hunting purposes to be banned. Yes, the supreme court ruled in our favor, but how many years will it take to hear another case once the oxygen thieves have crippled our 2A and our rights. You seem to forget that during a national emergency the president, under powers granted to him under the patriot act, like a dictator, can instill martial law. Look what FEMA did during Katrina, they cut phone lines, jammed communications, and even went to areas not badly hit to confiscate the citizens firearms. Which have yet to be returned. Either way, this study, the ATF's attention to the Saiga and others, is not a good thing. We are on a slippery slope, in a global anti gun environment.

 

 

Please explain how an import regulation violates your 2nd amendment rights.

 

 

Not much different than how in the UK you can buy a ford focus that gets nearly 70mpg and has the same amount of power as the american version that only gets 30. But it's illegal to import the version sold in the UK.

 

 

I'm pretty sure most people are way way over-thinking this shotgun study, if anything I'd imagine it will allow more guns to be imported than before.

 

Then you'd have no problem with them regulated ammo, right? Because it's basically that same argument. Any law or governmental action that limits or removes my ability to buy and use (properly) the gun I want is unconstitutional, period.

[Mike1234567 26]

When the 2A was first added to the US Constition I'm pretty sure MOST guns were imports.

[Mephis 82]

I think most of those on here forget that this study, does not go to congress for a vote. It goes directly to the AG for his signature. So with a stroke of a pen our 2A rights are severely limited. And if this gets off, then the next step is for any firearm that is not for sporting or hunting purposes to be banned. Yes, the supreme court ruled in our favor, but how many years will it take to hear another case once the oxygen thieves have crippled our 2A and our rights. You seem to forget that during a national emergency the president, under powers granted to him under the patriot act, like a dictator, can instill martial law. Look what FEMA did during Katrina, they cut phone lines, jammed communications, and even went to areas not badly hit to confiscate the citizens firearms. Which have yet to be returned. Either way, this study, the ATF's attention to the Saiga and others, is not a good thing. We are on a slippery slope, in a global anti gun environment.

 

 

Please explain how an import regulation violates your 2nd amendment rights.

 

 

Not much different than how in the UK you can buy a ford focus that gets nearly 70mpg and has the same amount of power as the american version that only gets 30. But it's illegal to import the version sold in the UK.

 

 

I'm pretty sure most people are way way over-thinking this shotgun study, if anything I'd imagine it will allow more guns to be imported than before.

 

Then you'd have no problem with them regulated ammo, right? Because it's basically that same argument. Any law or governmental action that limits or removes my ability to buy and use (properly) the gun I want is unconstitutional, period.

 

No, it isn't the same argument, it's exactly the same as the automotive industry. Why do you think they don't allow importation of such better cars for such a lower price? Because it'd put Americans out of work. I'm willing to wager theres some gun-manufacturer lobbying going on regarding what's allowed to be imported and what's not, because it looks like they're securing tactical weapons to only be produced on our shores.

 

 

Anything that negatively affects production and ownership of firearms inside this country, I am 100% against. Revamping import laws may block some things and may open up the door for new things, I'm all for sitting back and seeing if this may actually benefit us, because I think it will.

I just hope that they take a look at rifles, I'd so love to be able to buy a new production tigr from a gun store, like buying a saiga.

 

(would you rather see saigas imported in their proper configuration or would you like to keep seeing these abomination sporters in the gun stores? I'd gladly trade being able to buy an imported gun with a rail, for having an imported gun that wasn't wrecked by legislation.)

Edited March 2, 2011 by Tombs

[saltydecimator 482]

When the 2A was first added to the US Constition I'm pretty sure MOST guns were imports.

 

no shit!! great point. stupid cock suckers (politicians)

[buckmeister 11]

"Please explain how an import regulation violates your 2nd amendment rights."

 

If a comparable product were made domestically it could be construed as merely an import issue. The ATF uses import laws to hide the real agenda of disarming the populace. When branches of the government or sub-branches over-step the powers stipulated, the people have the right, the moral obligation to put them back in their place; especially since none listen to the ballot. How does tariff enforcement give an agency the power to even mention "sporting purpose" much less define it?

 

Only because we allow it.

 

It is far easier to rule with blanket laws than pursue individual criminals through enforcement of existing statutes.

 

Some would argue that public safety trumps individual liberties. Some sheeple even believe such propaganda.

 

Darn... I watched too much of the History Channel over the Presidents' Day weekend.

 

buckmeister

[PostsOnPercocet 32]

"Please explain how an import regulation violates your 2nd amendment rights."

 

If a comparable product were made domestically it could be construed as merely an import issue. The ATF uses import laws to hide the real agenda of disarming the populace. When branches of the government or sub-branches over-step the powers stipulated, the people have the right, the moral obligation to put them back in their place; especially since none listen to the ballot. How does tariff enforcement give an agency the power to even mention "sporting purpose" much less define it?

 

Only because we allow it.

 

It is far easier to rule with blanket laws than pursue individual criminals through enforcement of existing statutes.

 

Some would argue that public safety trumps individual liberties. Some sheeple even believe such propaganda.

 

Darn... I watched too much of the History Channel over the Presidents' Day weekend.

 

buckmeister

 

100% truth.

[Mike1234567 26]

"Please explain how an import regulation violates your 2nd amendment rights."

 

If a comparable product were made domestically it could be construed as merely an import issue. The ATF uses import laws to hide the real agenda of disarming the populace. When branches of the government or sub-branches over-step the powers stipulated, the people have the right, the moral obligation to put them back in their place; especially since none listen to the ballot. How does tariff enforcement give an agency the power to even mention "sporting purpose" much less define it?

 

Only because we allow it.

 

It is far easier to rule with blanket laws than pursue individual criminals through enforcement of existing statutes.

 

Some would argue that public safety trumps individual liberties. Some sheeple even believe such propaganda.

 

Darn... I watched too much of the History Channel over the Presidents' Day weekend.

 

buckmeister

 

DAMN RIGHT!!

[Xitesmai 1]

"Please explain how an import regulation violates your 2nd amendment rights."

 

If a comparable product were made domestically it could be construed as merely an import issue. The ATF uses import laws to hide the real agenda of disarming the populace. When branches of the government or sub-branches over-step the powers stipulated, the people have the right, the moral obligation to put them back in their place; especially since none listen to the ballot. How does tariff enforcement give an agency the power to even mention "sporting purpose" much less define it?

 

Only because we allow it.

 

It is far easier to rule with blanket laws than pursue individual criminals through enforcement of existing statutes.

 

Some would argue that public safety trumps individual liberties. Some sheeple even believe such propaganda.

 

Darn... I watched too much of the History Channel over the Presidents' Day weekend.

 

buckmeister

 

In this regard however the first step to removing said blocks is not force...its through the legal system...

 

even the colonists appealed to the king for representation, then demanded, then demanded again...well then we know what happened...

 

If you want to challenge the statues in place by the BATFE, take them to court and have them prove it...start a fund to sponsor a university to conduct a non-biased study to offer as counter evidence...

 

These are legitimate first steps to "taking back" gun owners rights...

Edited March 3, 2011 by Xitesmai

[Koljec 37]

"Please explain how an import regulation violates your 2nd amendment rights."

 

If a comparable product were made domestically it could be construed as merely an import issue. The ATF uses import laws to hide the real agenda of disarming the populace. When branches of the government or sub-branches over-step the powers stipulated, the people have the right, the moral obligation to put them back in their place; especially since none listen to the ballot. How does tariff enforcement give an agency the power to even mention "sporting purpose" much less define it?

 

Only because we allow it.

 

It is far easier to rule with blanket laws than pursue individual criminals through enforcement of existing statutes.

 

Some would argue that public safety trumps individual liberties. Some sheeple even believe such propaganda.

 

Darn... I watched too much of the History Channel over the Presidents' Day weekend.

 

buckmeister

 

 

I won't tell you that your rights argument is wrong -- gun rights are an important thing, but I think this is really about protecting Remington and its ilk. Our gun manufacturers have everyone convinced that they are patriots and definitely not businessmen. Meanwhile the 870 sits dusty and in the shadow of the S12 at the gun shop.

 

Every time I go to the range now, people fawn over the Saigas -- my buddies' 12s, my 410, someone every recognized my Ver 21. They all went from cult to mainstream with the 12 as the flagship model. Can't have an import shotgun taking over the domestic market.

 

Maybe we should all be fearing that the gun manufacturers have a common cause with the anti-gun folks.

Edited March 3, 2011 by Koljec

[Xitesmai 1]

"Please explain how an import regulation violates your 2nd amendment rights."

 

If a comparable product were made domestically it could be construed as merely an import issue. The ATF uses import laws to hide the real agenda of disarming the populace. When branches of the government or sub-branches over-step the powers stipulated, the people have the right, the moral obligation to put them back in their place; especially since none listen to the ballot. How does tariff enforcement give an agency the power to even mention "sporting purpose" much less define it?

 

Only because we allow it.

 

It is far easier to rule with blanket laws than pursue individual criminals through enforcement of existing statutes.

 

Some would argue that public safety trumps individual liberties. Some sheeple even believe such propaganda.

 

Darn... I watched too much of the History Channel over the Presidents' Day weekend.

 

buckmeister

 

 

I won't tell you that your rights argument is wrong -- gun rights are an important thing, but I think this is really about protecting Remington and its ilk. Our gun manufacturers have everyone convinced that they are patriots and definitely not businessmen. Meanwhile the 870 sits dusty and in the shadow of the S12 at the gun shop.

 

Every time I go to the range now, people fawn over the Saigas -- my buddies' 12s, my 410, someone every recognized my Ver 21. They all went from cult to mainstream with the 12 as the flagship model. Can't have an import shotgun taking over the domestic market.

 

Maybe we should all be fearing that the gun manufacturers have a common cause with the anti-gun folks.

 

Benelli took over the market awhile ago...for those that can afford them...

[toddm 0]

So we have 12 pages, most of which appear to be unfounded paranoia (though that's what everyone thought about the 94' AWB before it happened to!) and two posts from dealers/distributors/smiths saying that it's no big deal and they've been told the Saiga's will continue to flow in.

 

Does anyone have any more recent factual information on this topic?

 

Is that still the current information for those in the know, that it's just a panic issue?

 

A local dealer here said he was told by two of his distributors that there will be no more Saiga's available after a specific date but he would not allude that date aside to say a couple of months. FWIW his shop was still selling saiga's for "normal" prices and I didn't get the impression he was trying to "fear sell" me on one.

[Koljec 37]

Benelli took over the market awhile ago...for those that can afford them...

 

 

That's the thing though -- Benelli's a more premium brand. A year ago, someone shopping for a shotgun would see:

 

Remington 870 -- $300-400

Saiga 12 $400-500

Benelli $400+

 

Those numbers are really rough, but if you're at the shop and your budget is around $400, I bet you're going with the Saiga -- It's made of great materials, it's got a cool factor, it's semi auto, and it can be modified into something cooler. The Remington is the same-old rattling tried and true git 'er done gun, and the Benelli is the fancy gun. Benelli isn't hurt so much by Saiga buyers, but I bet Remington got squeezed out of some sales.

 

My experience with gun shops and Saigas tells me a few things:

 

1) a lot of gun shops are poorly run

2) a lot of gun shops have real problems stocking anything that doesn't come from a handful of suppliers who carry the usual firearms

3) gun shops increase their transfer fees in a lame effort to make money while dealing with the fact that they don't/can't stock what customers want

 

Saiga sales encounter all of those problems with the retail gun market.

 

You can blame some of the problems on gun buyers, too. A lot of gun buyers make their purchases according to biases and ridiculous ideas: "Semi-auto for home defense? Good luck dying", "Commie/Taliban gun? No thanks", and "AKs are inaccurrate. Never mind that I'm an untrained and unpracticed shot." If you're a shop owner, how the hell can you introduce anything new and good to customers like that?

Edited March 3, 2011 by Koljec

[inzami 36]

After doing some research I'm actually optimistic about what ATF will do. Given the info posted about the conversation Red Dragun Weapons had with ATF about importation of S-12 EXP 030 with skeleton stock, ATF shut down future imports of that particular shotgun mod because of a rail under FSB/GB. This batch will be allowed in. Also Brian (RDW) is expecting future shipments from Legion including S-12 040 mods which tells me that ATF is trying to stop shotguns with certain features listed in the study they released which they identify as 'non-sporting' and overall semi-auto, detachable magazine shotgun imports will not be affected.

[Xitesmai 1]

After doing some research I'm actually optimistic about what ATF will do. Given the info posted about the conversation Red Dragun Weapons had with ATF about importation of S-12 EXP 030 with skeleton stock, ATF shut down future imports of that particular shotgun mod because of a rail under FSB/GB. This batch will be allowed in. Also Brian (RDW) is expecting future shipments from Legion including S-12 040 mods which tells me that ATF is trying to stop shotguns with certain features listed in the study they released which they identify as 'non-sporting' and overall semi-auto, detachable magazine shotgun imports will not be affected.

 

Did you read the study as to what the BATFE defines as non sporting? It includes detachable box magazines and shotguns that can be easily converted...

[inzami 36]

[ewoketeer 35]

The rail you refer to is for the scope mount. After all, it wouldn't be wise to attach a scope to the dust cover...

[Xitesmai 1]

The rail you refer to is for the scope mount. After all, it wouldn't be wise to attach a scope to the dust cover...

 

who uses a scope on a shotgun?

 

a red dot or HK sights I can see...but a scope?

[TTMR 11]

Glad to see that the Saiga seem safe, still royally pissed off at the backhanded "ban" possibility however.

[paintwagon 18]

My bet is that they choose two or three of the things from the list that allows them to curb the most 'assault' shotguns, and those will designate it a DD. Im guessing that the: 1) collapsable/foldable stock; 2)any magazine over 5 rounds, and/or the forward pistol grip/rails. I think that they will ban imports as well, as the last part of the study suggested. If you read the study, it pretty much says what the intent is. Meanwhile the only 'study' that is happening is the feasibility and strategy they will use to do what they want with the least amount of public friction.

 

I think they've been looking at this or a while, and knew the likely outcome before the 'study' was even begun....it just stands to reason, like so many things in Gubment, what you see on the surface to look like a 'process' is actually already predetermined by those with he most power and vested interest. I think Holder and other administration appointees have been chomping at the bit to get something to throw to the anti gun lobby, and the Saiga shotties with assault weapon mods will be easy pickings. I suspect everyone here should be prepared for some well orchestrated mainstream press releases as the brady campaign, Bloomberg, and everyone else will start a coordinated blitz and someone like Diane Fienstein will be waving an S-12 with an MD drum around a press conference (like she did in the 90's). The S-12 will be great campaign fodder for an administration paralyzed on gun control through legislation, and they will need a clean victory because they are already thinking about 2012.

 

Id like to hear what others think about what will happen, with more emphasis on the reality of the situation, and less about the political or legal debate. The fact is that a regulatory agency has huge powers, often with less oversight that a traditional branch of government.

Edited March 4, 2011 by paintwagon

[mikegraffam 11]

Id like to hear what others think about what will happen, with more emphasis on the reality of the situation, and less about the political or legal debate. The fact is that a regulatory agency has huge powers, often with less oversight that a traditional branch of government.

 

To understand what is happening, you have to look at ATF regulations on other devices to bring it all together.

 

You can buy a Glock pistol through the normal channels. You can go online and buy a Glock chassis system to add a shoulder stock and rail system.. and if you DON'T own a Glock, owning such a chassis requires no paperwork. If you own both, you must register your Glock as a SBR with ATF. By "constructive possession" you've created an SBR.

 

The same with a 37mm flare launcher. You can buy one online easily - it isn't considered a firearm. You can buy 37mm hulls, and load them up with lead shot. If you can find someone to sell them to you (there are manufacturer restrictions on selling to civvies - but no _law_) you can buy pre-made 37mm rounds that have rubber slugs or buckshot in them. Or you can buy any number of adapters which allow you to chamber 12ga, 357 magnum, a bunch of.22lr, or whatever in a 37mm launcher. Owning the launcher, or rounds/adapters alone requires no paperwork whatsoever. Owning both the launcher, and "anti-personnel" rounds is constructive possession of a DD, and you need to register it.

 

That is how this is going to go.

 

You'll be able to buy an S12. You'll be able to buy an MD20 or high-cap mag. Owning either, alone - your safe. Own both, and you must register your DD.

 

The question is, whether kitting up your S12 with pistol grips, lights, and whatever will also make it a DD. I hope not, but it seems to be going that way as a kitted up S12 has no sporting purpose, and therefore the sporting purpose exemption for large bore shotguns in the NFA does not apply. You see, ANYTHING with a bore size greater than .5" is defined as a DD under the NFA - with the EXCEPTION for shotguns which have sporting purpose. Thats all in the NFA, and as far as I know always has been since 1938. ATF isn't making up new stuff here.. they are applying the law as written by Congress.

 

This is not just about importation of the S12 - which I don't think is under any threat at all. But their "study" of what makes a sporting shotgun has direct implications for registration under the NFA.

 

So.. Get your $200 ready for ATF if you live in a DD-friendly state. For those not in a DD-friendly state, I'm sure ATF will have a final ruling on mag capacity limits for shotguns. It'll probably be 5 rounds; which means all you guys with 10 rounders in NY are screwed. The mag may meet NY's capacity limit, but NY doesn't allow DD's. It is doubtful (and probably illegal) that they will tax the mags, so you won't have to pay $200 per mag/drum. You pay $200 to be able to use hi-cap mags/drums with your S12. They may even waive that tax for a time for all us previous owners.

 

I'm not too worried about it.. in fact, in a weird way it is helpful to me. I've been real slack about setting up a trust for NFA stamps. I really want a suppressor for my M1A SOCOM, but have been too lazy to deal with forms and the wait. When they force registration, I'll HAVE to get everything in order, and then I'll go nuts with my stamp collection.

 

Bottom line, if you live in a free state you'll be able to keep your gear. Just pay your taxes. If you don't know about NFA registration, NOW is the time to start reading up and getting things in order.

Edited March 4, 2011 by Michael Graffam

[Mephis 82]

[inzami 36]

The reason I thought of the side rail is because #6 is very specific about the rail location which is allowed as technically it is a rail and it is not on top of the receiver or barrel. Sometimes bad rules get created by omission. I will email them to make sure they account for this since for AK-based sporting weapons side rail is the default feature.

 

"(6) integrated rail systems (other than on top of the receiver or barrel);"

[Mephis 82]

The reason I thought of the side rail is because #6 is very specific about the rail location which is allowed as technically it is a rail and it is not on top of the receiver or barrel. Sometimes bad rules get created by omission. I will email them to make sure they account for this since for AK-based sporting weapons side rail is the default feature.

 

"(6) integrated rail systems (other than on top of the receiver or barrel);"

 

 

Can almost promise with 100% certainty, as long as it isn't weaver or 1913, they won't call it a rail.

 

If any of these import companies have common sense they'll stop calling it a rail and call it a scope mount.

Edited March 4, 2011 by Tombs

[PostsOnPercocet 32]

This thread is sad. Bunch of gun owners hoping and trying to list reasons as to why the government will "let" us keep some of our rights.....

[inzami 36]

This thread is sad. Bunch of gun owners hoping and trying to list reasons as to why the government will "let" us keep some of our rights.....

 

Hey, I still hope there's some 'of the people by the people' left in there.

Edited March 4, 2011 by Inzami

[inzami 36]

Depends on the definition of what a rail is. The definition below would make Saiga rail fit the definition.

 

"(6) Integrated Rail Systems.42

This refers to a mounting rail system for small arms upon which firearm accessories and features

may be attached. This includes scopes, sights, and other features, but may also include

accessories or features with no sporting purpose, including flashlights, foregrips, and bipods.

Rails on the sides and underside of shotguns—including any accessory mount—facilitate

installation of certain features lacking any sporting purpose. However, receiver rails that are

installed on the top of the receiver and barrel are readily adaptable to sporting purposes because

this facilitates installation of optical or other sights."

Edited March 4, 2011 by Inzami

[Xitesmai 1]

This thread is sad. Bunch of gun owners hoping and trying to list reasons as to why the government will "let" us keep some of our rights.....

 

Its not a matter of "let"...its a matter of action / reaction and law...

 

If the BATFE decides to ban importation of the Saiga 12 due to the prevalence of non-sporting capabilities..

 

..its the Peoples option to challenge that ruling under a court of law...legally

 

...reacting in any other way is a sure way to "prove" to the BATFE that their decision was correct...

 

I'm sure the NRA is already all over this..

 

As a side note the BATFE loves to bring out their "sporting purposes" language...however Heller vs DC the Supreme Courts opinion was that the core holding in D.C. v. Heller is that the Second Amendment is an individual right intimately tied to the natural right of self-defense.

 

As such a "sporting purpose" does not need to exist to own the Saiga 12 in whatever configuration for home defense...however this needs to be clarified by the courts...

 

I just dont want to be the test case for it...I'll pay the $200 for the stamp if I have to.

[TTMR 11]

[quote name='PostsOnPercocet' timestamp='1299245246' post=I just dont want to be the test case for it...I'll pay the $200 for the stamp if I have to.

 

 

Same here, even if just to have free will to mod the damn thing (short of adding a fun switch)