ATF Seizing AA-12 Shotguns?

[Helmut]

I wonder what the basis is?

Saw this on another forum.

[Black Majik]

Saw that big post on Arfcom GD, seems like it...

[ef9boy88]

It looks like they've determined them to be machine guns. Anybody know how the semi auto versions are different than the full auto? How difficult would it be to make it full auto?
Not asking because I want instructions, asking because that appears to be the issue in the letter posted.

[KeyserSoze_]

There is also a different letter that went out to FFLs with post samples about a marking issue.



There is the ar-15 thread about it: https://www.ar15.com/forums/general/-/5-2250920/

[elSquid]

The letter is explicit:

A) on an AA12, the right side plate is considered the receiver.
B) both the semi auto and MG versions use the exact same sideplate
C) per Federal law, a MG receiver is a MG
D) therefore the semi auto versions are MGs. ( Also - Assume that converting semi to full auto only requires non controlled MG parts? )

If you take an M16 lower, but build it out using semi auto parts, it’s still a MG.

— Michael

[big red]

Isn't registering everything so great? they know exactly where to come get it. This "mistake" i believe has been done a few times before with various "rebuilt" versions of some military rifles and the builder tried to go cheap and use the same receiver or side plate. A letter beats a couple of guys in black suits and dark sunglasses showing up on your front door step.

[bohoki]

i dont know how this works but couldnt they just turn over the receiver?

there are not many but it is a bit scary that the atf can give approval then remove it after people have already plunked down $3500

i assume the company will probably come out with a new design (probably a little lump on the semi-auto receiver) that make it so it won't fit in FA kit

[sbo80]

it would seem this is not really the ATF simply "reclassifying" something, but really this is all the manufacturer's fault. And the ATF is just now discovering it and trying to rectify it.

[-hanko]

Per BATFE, the marking used by the manufacturer did not meet the current BATFE rules on marking.

It's also OLD news.

[SkyHawk]

Per BATFE, the marking used by the manufacturer did not meet the current BATFE rules on marking.

It's also OLD news.

It looks like two issues?

1) it uses a full auto sideplate, which makes it a machine gun
2) it does not have the markings that would be required for a machine gun

[sigstroker]

Of course it doesn't have those markings. The manufacturer intended to make semi-autos.

[OCEquestrian]

it would seem this is not really the ATF simply "reclassifying" something, but really this is all the manufacturer's fault. And the ATF is just now discovering it and trying to rectify it.

Yup...design flaw. Is the manufacturer still around?

[deckhandmike]

it would seem this is not really the ATF simply "reclassifying" something, but really this is all the manufacturer's fault. And the ATF is just now discovering it and trying to rectify it.

Reminds me of when I got my letter about my threaded barrel Walther P22. I was excited I got a box in the mail, opened it. It was instructions to send back my gun or become a felon.

[Quickdraw559]

Correct me if I’m wrong here, as often times I am, but there exist ar-15 lower receivers that cut the fc pocket to accept an auto sear like the m16, right? They exist, and they’re completely legal. They can also use an m16 bcg (not that it matters regarding functionality). The only thing they lack in the lower are an actual autosear and pinhole correct?

Could this determination have consequences regarding these lower receivers, or does the lack of pinhole keep it safe from machine gun classification? If it is the pinhole that would classify this lower receiver as being a machine gun, then why aren’t autosears available to the public? It’s not considered a firearm, and your lower receiver is not capable of accepting the part. It would seem very patriotic to own them, “in case of emergencies,” even if they just sit in a box, untouched, for generations. Are they priming the pump with all of these seemingly redundant classifications, knowing they will eventually overlap, leading to eventual confiscation(s)?

It seems that this is a very slippery slope we are on. What if an 07FFL invents a new autosear that does not require the machining of a new pinhole? Drop-in full auto in your ar-15? Wouldn’t that trigger a reclassification, followed by confiscation of firearms now deemed to be “full-auto capabale,” since they use the same receiver, which is classified as the “firearm?”

The federal government is going to get its newest look at American compliance. We’ll see how this goes....

[wpage]

A very slippery slope and no mention of any compensation.

Not very nice to the recipient of the letter.