This is an excerpt. I missed the box. I have notified the moderator.
I am so screwed.
“Under the Gun Control Act, the issue seems simple: they are pistols. “
Not that simple. A pistol is defined as ‘being designed to be fired with one hand.
An under-considered point: if acquiring high-end armaments requires great effort and cost, few are likely to throw away all that (and the lifestyle required to support it!) just for some stupid criminal act. An M777 (modern “small” artillery) costs around $700,000 ... any private citizen who buys one is living a multi-million dollar lifestyle, and odds are not going to do something that will trade all that in for a long-term stay at Graybar Hotel.
Under the NFA, “The term “destructive device” means .. any type of weapon by whatever name known which will, or which may be readily converted to, expel a projectile by the action of an explosive or other propellant, the barrel or barrels of which have a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter, except a shotgun or shotgun shell which the Secretary finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes...” 26 U.S.C.§5845
Now does that mean that the .69 caliber rifles used in the civil war are Destructive Devices?
And the currently popular 58 caliber black powder guns?
And how about the British 600 and 700 Nitro Express rifles?
I do not understand this thread.
So what does that make a Mossberg that originally had a long barrel that was cut off and shoulder stock replaced by a pistol grip?
(out of curiosity of course, my boat is at the dock ready to go)
I fired one a couple of times and thought it was basically worthless. I have discovered since then that some people actually like them.
On the other hand, I have a Winchester Defender with both a pistol grip and butt stock. I have arthritis and find it much easier to use than the standard stock.