Trust the ATF ?.. they will set you up to break you down - Page 2

Trust the ATF ?.. they will set you up to break you down

This is a discussion on Trust the ATF ?.. they will set you up to break you down within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I hold ATF in complete disdain. The agency has its own agenda and is out of control. It served a purpose once upon a time. ...

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 40

Thread: Trust the ATF ?.. they will set you up to break you down

  1. #16
    Distinguished Member Array sniper58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,631
    I hold ATF in complete disdain. The agency has its own agenda and is out of control. It served a purpose once upon a time. That time has passed. Technology has made it possible for State Police and some local jurisdictions to run lab tests and forensics. ATF simply isn't needed like it once was. At the very least, the decision makers in this case should be removed or transferred to a gun-smuggling hotspot like Homer, Alaska. I sure hope this isn't a harbinger of things to come with the new NCIC bill - aka "Veteran's Disarmament Bill." What chance does the average citizen have against the Federal Government - and who can afford to front the legal fees?
    Tim
    BE PREPARED - Noah didn't build the Ark when it was raining!
    Si vis pacem, para bellum
    ________
    NRA Life Member


  2. #17
    VIP Member Array aus71383's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    2,543
    Trust them? No I don't. I don't want to pay for any tax stamps either - as much as I would like a FA SBR with a suppressor, I'll just manage to do without...somehow.

    Austin

  3. #18
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    45,469
    ATF should be changed into a 'hobby shop'...I'd buy there weekly!
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  4. #19
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    As the story reads the key here is that his device required nothing more than an initial finger toggle of the trigger to initiate first discharge and that his mechanized device subsequently took over and as powered by the guns recoil enabled the firearm to thereafter function in a mode that is fully automatic.

    ...[Akins] cites sections of the 1968 gun control act that define a machine gun as any "weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger."

    "That's not what the Akins Accelerator does," he said. "It isn't a gun. It isn't a machine gun. It's an accessory; that's all it is. These guys are making it up as they go along."
    ...Similar to a Hellfire - which attaches to the trigger guard and already is on the market - the Accelerator was based on the practice of bump firing.

    Once the trigger is pulled, the Accelerator's spring mechanism takes over and the trigger reciprocates at high speed, using recoil resistance to imitate automatic fire
    .
    Where is the confusion here?

    It's been well known that select fire and fully automatic fire weaponry of any sort are not legal in modern times post '40s America.
    The means to do so by anything other than human triggering of a trigger is unlawful. It's been that way since forever and all manner of schemes and methods to skirt this have been refuted and lawfully denied.
    That his advisors, attorneys, investors, his customers, and himself did not know this as fact is immaterial. Ignorance and error in judgment is no excuse.

    Akins makes it very clear in his own word describing the product that it results in automatic firing.
    Below is video of his product in action;

    Akins Accelerator
    YouTube - Akins Accelerator

    The product by action, description, and per definition is 'fully automatic' as it readily restores a firearm to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by mechanically automated functioning of the trigger via a vis his add-on "accessory" device.
    This is crystal clear.

    The DEA may have made the mistake to imply or even award approval initially, but Akins and his advisors and his attorneys and his investors as well as buyers too should have known that the Govt. reserves the right to revers it's position on any given position at any time it feels appropriate and is lawful. This is nothing new and for a product such as this which obviously by description and real world action is a device for conversion (restoration) of a firearm to fully automatic functionality one could not reasonably have thought that it would go under radar for long even as it might have been ignored or even initially approved by the BATF.

    IMHO the BATF didn't ruin Akins. Akins ruined Akins by not adhering to common sense, not reading the above stated BATF statement of functionality description with comprehension (!), which obviously was key here, and bottom line he gambled that he might could get over. He rolled snake eyes.

    - Janq is not an attorney, and would not have bought this product knowing it's unlawful in scope and spirit

    "I can't believe it's legal." - A thinking buyer who thought _exactly_ what Akins, his investors, and his attorneys/advisors should have thought
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing

  5. #20
    Lead Moderator
    Array rocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    16,215
    Unfortunately, the ATF seems to have too much power in determining what is and what is not legal.
    "In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." Thomas Jefferson


    Nemo Me Impune Lacesset

  6. #21
    VIP Member
    Array OPFOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Nomad
    Posts
    4,713
    Janq, I agree for the most part. However, the guy went through all the hoops - he asked the ATF if his devise would violate the law. They told him 'no, go ahead,' and then when he had all him money invested they yanked it out from under him. Legal, sure, but ethical? The right thing to do? I don't think so...

    As for whether or not the thing is actually illegal, I can't make a truly informed decision (I can't watch videos at work to see it in action). If the finger needs only touch the trigger once, then it certainly seems to violate the law. If it simply moves the trigger back to the finger (and allows the finger to manipulate the trigger without moving), then I think it's much more grey.

    In any case, Akins claim that "it's not a weapon, it's an accessory" is patently absurd - I doubt he actually believes that he can claim that as legal justification. If that's his only argument, he's certainly sunk...
    A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.

  7. #22
    VIP Member Array Sheldon J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Battle Creek, Mi.
    Posts
    2,286
    The primary problem here is he made his business decisions based upon Opinions from the ATF and opinions there just like the wind change every time someone changes their underwear.

    What he really needed was a request for a legal interruption from either his AG to the ATF, or from his Representative, something in writhing that left it written in stone and not the smoke signals he was looking at and banking on.

    BTY I looked at his overpriced gun stock when they were for sale, yeah it was cool but even I doubted it legality, and invested millions??? Doubt it several hundred thousand yes but not millions.

    I'm sorry but I do not really feel sorry for him, he tried to get something past the ATF on a boarder line issue, and hoped that the opinion would be sufficient and did not do the rest of the research on their past history or litigation of issues.

    Even if he had managed to make it a little longer as soon as the guard charges from the R to the D word they would have ended it and all of the people that had bought one would have been charged and ordered to either turn it in or get a class III license, the big difference here is a lot fewer people got hurt.
    "The sword dose not cause the murder, and the maker of the sword dose not bear sin" Rabbi Solomon ben Isaac 11th century

  8. #23
    Senior Moderator
    Array MattInFla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    4,859
    When I first saw the ads, I suspected this would happen.

    The device clearly allows multiple rounds with one rearward pull of the trigger. That the trigger then travels farther back and rebounds against the finger is irrelevant.

    Matt
    Battle Plan (n) - a list of things that aren't going to happen if you are attacked.
    Blame it on Sixto - now that is a viable plan.

  9. #24
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    Agreed OPFOR it was not a nice muchless ethical act on the part of the BATF,if his story is complete and correct toward their alleged approval of as he says teh prototype,not the finished as for distribution product.
    But...Who in their right mind thinks or expects the Federal Government and it's agents to be kind or act ethically. Akins foolishly expected, hoped for, and bet on as much.

    Akins provided the BATF a prototype. No doubt that prototype was not a 1:1 representation of the as distributed commercial product.
    Even if it was the onus lies not on the agency to interpret law and lawfullness for the contractor/vendor. It is up to Akins to _read_ the regulations and laws and comprehend them and (this is key) know of how the agency applies and enforces it's regulations and laws as a matter of relevant history. History shows and does so clearly that machine guns and machine enabled guns are verboten. This is common knowledge.

    I agree with Sheldon above 100%.
    Akins acted simplistically and with ignorance no doubt as a novice. As well he wisely sought out advisors and attorneys but they were obviously either blowing smoke up his skirt, or yes men types, or themselves ignorant of relevant laws and lacking in reading comprehension, or they stated to Akins one thing and he misinterpreted their statements of opinion as some other.
    I don't know to that ed. All I do know is that the law as stated is darn clear and Akins own words in describing the product as to function, capability, and purpose runs square against the plain English stated law, as enforced by the BATF.

    I do not feel bad for him or his personal investment losses, which were at best a gamble and are not damages. My tax dollars should not be subsidizing his gambling losses on this product which clearly was and is unlawful as manufactured, distributed, and employed.
    This should be a good lesson for others as almost every industry has regulations and laws applied to them. It is critical when in business to be aware of them, understand them, and to follow them in spirit as well as to the letter.

    I'm not pro BATF nor am I anti Akins.
    I'm just looking at this from the view of reasonableness, lawfulness, and common as well as business management sense.

    - Janq
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing

  10. #25
    Member Array crankshop1000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    michigan
    Posts
    328
    Sounds like if the inventor / manufacturer doesn't have enough money to dispute the ATF in court, he probably didn't spend the money up front to have the issue addressed prior to jumping into making and selling the item. That's what lawyers are here for.

  11. #26
    Senior Member Array mzmtg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Acworth, GA
    Posts
    502
    Here is the actual complaint: http://www.georgiapacking.org/docs/a...h_exhibits.pdf

    Just in case no one noticed: Mr. Akins' attorney, John Monroe, is on the GeorgiaCarry.Org Board of Directors.

    FYI

  12. #27
    VIP Member Array pogo2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Southwest
    Posts
    3,150

    Questions about product and inventor

    I don't understand a couple of things about the story or the product. The first is "what's it good for?" Why would I want to quickly dump the contents of my semiauto magazine in unaimed fire from the hip? I have just burned up a lot of expensive ammo in a short time. I can't think very many people would buy the product because it fills no useful need.

    The second question is how could the inventor be so dumb as to bet the ranch on a highly regulated product that could be declared illegal at any moment? That is a huge financial risk without much reward apparent in this kind of specialized, novelty product. He evidently saw the risk in advance, as he submitted a prototype to ATF, hoping for some sort of waiver or approval. But any such approval is worthless with a government agency, which has no motive or obligation to be consistent. A bureaucracy can and will change its position at any time for any reason or no reason, as we see here. It is best to stay out of such an arena and invest elsewhere.

    I don't have a lot of sympathy for the inventor because I think he was very foolish.
    Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the Peoples' Liberty's Teeth." - George Washington

  13. #28
    VIP Member Array dukalmighty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    15,179
    I saw the video and I can see why the ATF ruled the way it did,anytime you start trying to skirt ATF on full auto firing devices you are looking to shoot yourself in the foot,It's bad enough we got BG's with semi autos but if they could run out and buy a stock that would convert a 10/22 to full auto it would get real scary real quick,this thing is shoulder fired and accurate,anybody that has ever shot a full auto 22 can attest to the fact you can empty a magazine in about a 2 to 3 inch circle with practice.
    "Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country,"
    --Mayor Marion Barry, Washington , DC .

  14. #29
    Ex Member Array FN1910's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,235
    I don't understand a couple of things about the story or the product. The first is "what's it good for?" Why would I want to quickly dump the contents of my semiauto magazine in unaimed fire from the hip? I have just burned up a lot of expensive ammo in a short time. I can't think very many people would buy the product because it fills no useful need
    .

    I really don't understand the desire to have a fully automatic weapon that burns ammo faster than Winchester can make it but there appears to be a pile of people that want to. If you can find a way to convert semi's to fully auto and is perfectly legal then you can start hanging around in Bill Gates's neighborhood..

  15. #30
    Senior Member Array Skygod's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    648
    Thomas Jefferson once said....................

    "When your government is big enough to give you everything then it is also strong enough to take everything from you"
    U.S. Army retired
    18F4VW9

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Trust
    By eagleeye in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 70
    Last Post: January 30th, 2011, 03:25 PM
  2. 'Springfield man arrested in Amherst break-in' and ''Break-ins continue in Amherst'
    By Janq in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: September 14th, 2010, 05:21 PM
  3. When do you trust your gun??????
    By ENSANE1970 in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: September 8th, 2007, 01:26 PM
  4. When do you ever trust again? A gun that is
    By Gideon in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: August 7th, 2006, 11:22 PM
  5. In God We Still Trust
    By Bumper in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: June 9th, 2006, 08:39 AM

Search tags for this page

.22 bump fire stock atf recall

,

akins accelerator no spring

,

atf ruling on bump stock

,

bill akins bump stock before

,

bump fire stock mini 14

,

bump fire stock recall 2006

,

can the atf set you up buying a full auto

,

sample atf trust

,

setting up a trust for atf

,

setting up a trust for atf products

,

will atf outlaw the bump stock?

,

will bump fire stock work with 22 conversion

Click on a term to search for related topics.