doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com 410 pistol

My original thought was in error as this(Essex) is an existing weapon that was not registered under the provisions of the GCA of 1934.
However it is certainly possible to build and register a "smooth bore pistol" today. I just turned down the opportunity to buy a registered Remington 870 with a barrel under 18" that was built with a pistol grip rather than a conventional stock. The cost for the transfer,as stated above, was $5.00 plus the paperwork.
I'm sure I'm not the only one that can see the irony if not the stupidity here. You can't register a short barrel pistol because it wasn't originally registered but you can build a brand new registered one.
Jim

Hard to imagine what it is that makes that .410 pistol so fearsome to the gendarmes federales. Do you think they would rather take on a felon armed with a (legal) Glock 21 than one with that rat-popper? "Terminally cute," is about what that is.

If you think the NFA laws don't make sense just wait untill "the one " gets sworn in and what will be banned.His AG pick Eric Holder (who pardoned Mark Rich and is a staunch antigun supporter in fact he wrote a brief to the Supreme court that state the citizens have NO right to have a working firearm in their home) will have control over the ATF and we,as gun owners are in for the worst we have every seen.
http://www.gunlaws.com/GunLawUpdate3.htm

"In making this determination, the bill says, “there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.”

In plain English this means that ANY firearm ever obtained by federal officers or the military is not suitable for the public.

That presumption can be challenged only by suing the federal government over each firearm it decides to ban, in a court it runs with a judge it pays. This virtually dismisses the principles of the Second Amendment."The last part is particularly clever, stating that a firearm doesn’t have a sporting purpose just because it can be used for sporting purpose -- is that devious or what? And of course, “sporting purpose” is a rights infringement with no constitutional or historical support whatsoever, invented by domestic enemies of the right to keep and bear arms to further their cause of disarming the innocent."


"“The Democrat members of the Judiciary Committee are all sworn enemies to the Second Amendment and are unlikely to be swayed at all by any firearms related arguments, but might hesitate to confirm based on Holder’s participation in the pardons of 16 Puerto Rican terrorists and billionaire financier and arms merchant Marc Rich [and perhaps the Elian Gonzalez abduction by federal agents Holder authorized]. Any letters to Democrats should focus on those issues."


be sure to thank all those fellow gun owners who voted for this while your handing in your guns.

I'm treating this as just a rumor at this point but what's being said is that Obama plans to issue an "Executive Order" banning the further importation of ammunition of ANY kind. He can do this without going thru Congress since it's an international trade issue from my understanding.
Jim

This is something a lot of people better be waking up to. the constitution is not about "Sports". Once everything has been outlawed except those for Sport, the Sportsman has not a defence left. You best believe the Anti's know this.

I don't read nothing in there about busting chunks of clay or even sport hunting for that matter. Not very many of us are dependent upon hunting for food for our survival. Sportsmen are the primary people standing up for the constitution, but way too many are willing to let the very ones it protects "GO".

"I don't read nothing in there about busting chunks of clay or even sport hunting for that matter. Not very many of us are dependent upon hunting for food for our survival. Sportsmen are the primary people standing up for the constitution, but way too many are willing to let the very ones it protects "GO". "

There are many,even some on here (one bozo who wants me banned!)who would gladly throw other gun owners under the bus with the mistaken view that "they will never ban what I collect/shoot".

When the second amendment was written the Brown Bess was the assault weapon of the time,and the framers knew those rights to "bear arms" where to protect US from THEM.

When the time comes how many will fall in line a register and then turn in and how many will stand up for our freedom?