doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com What is an antique firearm?

I purchased a damascus barreled gun through Gunbroker a while back. The seller insisted on having an FFL holder/dealer ship the gun to me. I hold an FFL. I entered the transaction in my record book, later to determine that the gun was made in 1891.

I called and spoke with a field agent at BATF and asked if I could sell the gun without going through the NICS process since it was Pre 1899 and should qualify as an antique. I thought sale of antiques did not require a backgound check.

The agent told me that the gun was not necessarily an antique as it could still fire modern ammunition. I reminded her that it had only black powder proofs. She seemed confused but unwilling to exempt the sale of this gun from the backgound check (NICS) requirement. I am at a loss whether to enter a sale in my record book or write it off as an antique.

Anyone have an experience with this type of sale?

Read paragraph (16) on page 203 of this PDF document from the ATF.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title18/pdf/USCODE-2011-title18-partI-chap44.pdf

The agent you spoke with is wrong. She apparently got confused about the part referring to replicas of antique guns that are chambered for modern readily available ammunition.

I went through this several years ago when my old FFL Dealer retired and I needed a new guy to do my transfers. The new guy was somewhat confused by the law, so we called the nearest ATF Field Office for clarification. The Agent told us that pre-1899 guns are not even considered as firearms by the ATF, and should not even be entered in the Bound Ledger Book.

Of course, many dealers and sellers cannot and will not be convinced. And you will have little luck getting them to call the ATF for clarification. Please note that some states have requirements that go beyond ATF rules.

The whole thing is kind of silly. An 1898 Parker is OK without an FFL Transfer and Background Check, but the same gun one year newer is not. When the GCA of 1968 established the pre-1899 Antique rule, an Antique was any gun over 69 years old. The date hasn't changed, so now a gun must be 118 years old to qualify as Antique.

This is correct.
I have dealt with dozens of antique and "Curios and Relics " as a licensed collector. From the functional perspective I find the federal definition of a firearm amusing considering for example that I own a British air rifle that is more powerful than various 22s and is consequently treated as a firearm in other countries.
Jeremy

Thanks Keith. I still find the Code confusing:

(16) The term ��antique firearm�� means�
(A) any firearm (including any firearm with
a matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or
similar type of ignition system) manufactured
in or before 1898;

It seems they are intending to include everything but centerfire breech loading guns.

(C) any muzzle loading rifle, muzzle loading
shotgun, or muzzle loading pistol, which is designed
to use black powder, or a black powder
substitute, and which cannot use fixed ammunition.
For purposes of this subparagraph, the
term ��antique firearm�� shall not include any
weapon which incorporates a firearm frame or
receiver...

I wish they just left 16A as "any firearm manufactured in or before 1898.

Post Deleted

Note that Rimfire breech loading guns are in the same category as Centerfires as long as ammunition is readily available.
Where the problem arose was when they allowed reproductions to fall in the same category as antiques & not require a license. You cannot reproduce for instance reproduce an 1873 Winchester & chambered in .44-40 & sell it without due process. You can however sell any original 1873 in .44-40 (or other calibers) as long as it was made prior to 1899 without paperwork.
Where many get confused is they are reading the part which applies to repo's & applying it to antiques.

Of course some states have their own interpretation which supercedes the BATF definition. Keith is definitely right as far as the Feds go...but for those of us in NY there's a whole other standard.

NY doesnt even have a notion of antique "long guns." The "antique" portion of the law pertains exclusively to handguns. As such, any long guns the BATF would otherwise consider antiques are NOT defined as such in The Peoples Republic of New York.

Such is life in a state where 70% of the population lives in 9% of the land area. We have more WMA, public and park land than any state East of the Mississippi River...and yet our laws are dictated by urbanites who live in one small corner.

- Nudge

NY defines an antique the same way as ATF. Made 1898 or earlier. "Antiques" are exempt from the SAFE Act requirements.

I was told by the state police that according to their definition, they only consider "Firearms" as hand guns and assumt weapons. But that was in reference to the states requirements for being licensed through them as a dealer or gunsmith.

Bill,

Im not looking to start an argument, but i have had this conversation with 2 different people at NY gov just recently, and they both asserted that "antique" can only be applied to a gun that you cannot readily buy current production ammumitiin and shoot it. I neglected to put quotes, because i forget the exact language.

In fact, on BOTH occasions they pointed out that NY's law is stricter than the BATF's, and that this is widely not known.

All i can say is to repeat what I have been told. Half-wits in Albany...

If you can show written proof to the contrary, i will make several phone calls on Monday and i wont be polite about it. But on both occasions they sent me to a link where the exact legal text is written, and as I said, antique onlt pertained to handguns. Whixh they then explained.

I WANT you to be right here. My two experiences went another way.

- Nudge

Bill,

As.im thinking about.it now, i think last time i was so peeved that i called the NY BATF to get their impression and they flat.out told me that NY's law doesnt care about the 1899 thing.

And this was because my 2nd call to State people was related to a.pending transaction. I explained, 1897 or 1898 production sxs shotgun, and the first thing he asked me was, "Can it be loaded with modern store bought ammunition?" When i said yes, he said "the gun is not an antique according to NY law."

Again, not trying to argue. But this has been my experience.

Oh, and BTW, he said this pre-dates the SAFE Act.

- Nudge

he is Brian not Bill

look at the antique FAQs on the safe act site

https://safeact.ny.gov/gun-owners


if you ask any government employee if they regulate something - the answer is invariably yes - correctly or not

I remember reading this a while ago, I think the questions is whether or not you want to expend the countless sums on litigating second amendment rights:

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/broo...rticle-1.426098

federal law is pretty clear...if it was made prior to 1899, it is an antique...however, many responsible ffl dealers (myself included) are reluctant to ship cartridge firing firearms to unknown individuals and prefer to utilize the services of a local ffl dealer for background check, in an effort to keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of dangerous people...

https://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&a...+of+antique.gun

As I said, antique long guns are actually NOT strictly acknowledged. As such, they fall under normal long gun transfer rules. Theres no issue with OWNING them...where is gets dicey is people thinking they are free to ship and receive them without FFL transfer.

As for the SAFE Act website, be VERY careful assuming the quick shot responses they make there are correct. The number of items that have "evolved" since the law was hastily passed is incredible. You need to rest of what the legal code actually says...NOT some bureaucrat interpretation of what it means. That wont hold up in court.

My point here is...the whole issue is actually a grey area. It could well depend upon a given judge as to which way he interprets.

- Nudge

when in doubt...insist on a background check...that way one will sleep better...

Ed Good,

This isnt about the Federal law, which is clear.

As for your taking it upon yourself to decide your judgement supercedes the law...what if my pharmacist decided they didnt want to give me my medication because they dont know me? Just because someone is not known to you, doesnt mean they arent entitled to a presumption of good character.

Do you think small town cops should be allowed to kick strangers out of town? Just because they dont know them? "Oh I dont know, better just be on the safenside and boot them from the roadside cafe and send them on their way."

Laws exist to set a fair baseline of safety. Anything interpretive betond this is boumd to be abused, precisely because good judgement isnt known to be any thicker with gun dealers...than with gun buyers.

BTW, gun control people are always trying to get the upper hand by way of oh-so-reasonable means of nullifying people's right. This has brought us such creative nuggets as the last adminstration attempting to curtail the gun rights of returning soldiers. Oh and dont forget waiting periods. Those are so "reasonable." Nope, theyre just as likely to keep.the.gun out of a victims hand, as it is the aggressor.

- Nudge

You are not correct as it relates to FEDERAL law - your STATE law may vary. Antique firearms are transferable to individuals without an FFL.

Here's what ATF says about antique firearms - even FELONS can have them - the full document is here - https://www.atf.gov/file/61721/download - short version below (emphasis mine):

"1. Can a person prohibited by law from possessing a firearm acquire and use a black powder
muzzle loading firearm?
The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA) prohibits felons and certain other persons from possessing or
receiving firearms and ammunition (�prohibited persons�). These categories can be found at 18
U.S.C. � 922(g) and (n) in http://atf.gov/publications/download/p/atf-p-5300-4.pdf.
However, Federal law does not prohibit these persons from possessing or receiving an antique
firearm. The term �antique firearm� means any firearm (including any firearm with a matchlock,
flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system) manufactured in or before 1898. The
definition includes any replica of an antique firearm if it is not designed or redesigned for using
rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition, or uses rimfire or conventional centerfire
ammunition which is no longer manufactured in the United States, and which is not readily available
in ordinary channels of commercial trade.

FlyChamps,

This whole sidebar conversation is about NY State law...not Federal.

I never intended to hyjack the OP, but it appears I.may have.

- Nudge

I've dealt with some auction houses that require the gun to go through a FFL because they can not definitively prove that the gun was made prior to 1898 due an absence of records that have disappeared as has happened to many English makers.

I can't blame an individual seller or auction house that chooses to CYA rather then risk having a chat with local or Federal law enforcement.

Unfortunately that happens and as you say they can't be blamed. Not much to be done in that case other than proceed through the full FFL process. With regards to records there are occassional guns I don't pursue because I can't find records that would "prove" to the ATF or other parties the age of the gun. Generally I find that if the maker is listed in Brown's Vol. 1 - 3 , then I've been able to get either an ATF sign off or import as an antique. I've found ATF also accepts published articles on gunmakers covering model ages. Not much help if a third party is insistent but it might be helfpful for those that can be persuaded.

As an aside, permitting and antique/curio&relics designation and permits are is something the exporters I use in the UK generally check as they seem to require it be confirmed as part of their export permitting regardless of the designation in the UK. A decade ago some would just ship an antique direct but no longer. Paperwork is now required but in the long term is just a hassle not a problem. Funny to sign off on official declarations that I will not use the guns in the assembly of nuclear weapons, as if anyone smuggling such material would be honest, but that's the way it is. Oddities occur for instance with the purchase of damascus barrels which are still handled as "firearms" in the UK with the requisite RFD transfers required.

Jeremy

uh nudge...one of the great things about our society, is the fact that we can choose to do business via any rules we like, so long as those rules are within the law...and as for firearms transactions in particular, it is better to be safe than sorry...

besides, most law abiding and responsible gun owners are quite willing to go thru the background check process...because they know it's purpose is to keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of dangerous people...nothing more and nothing less...

Ed Good,

If its a matter a small degree of CYA, like asking for ID, I completely underatand that. As was said above, no dealer wants 'that' phone call from the authorities.

As for keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people, well, we all want that. Thats why they HAVE to be cleared for AR-15's, etx. But with respect to guns which we KNOW are antiques...consider who buys these.

- Nudge

I can think of a numbers of states, that even if Federal law allowed me to ship an antique to someone, I would still go through an FFL because of potential complications related to the state law. CA,HI, IL, NJ, MD, MA, NY & CT are most of the states to be extra careful with.

well nudge, shirley you would agree that a sawed off double gun is certainly intimidating and potentially deadly to store clerks and others likely to be victimized by armed criminals...and that as a drive by execution weapon, nothing is superior to a sawed off 12 gauge, loaded with 00 buck...shirley you would also agree that a shotgun made prior to 1899 is just as deadly as one made after 1898...

Ed Good,

If someone buys an antique double from you, and subsequently saws it shorter...please tell me by what clairvoyance you are able to judge at the time of sale? Remember too, sawed off isnt illegal everywhere, so long as its 18.5+. Also, GOOD guys use sawed off guns for defense, too.

Buy and sell as the law prescribes. If someone seems shady, then by all means CYA and make them do an FFL transfer. Of course, that judgment only works if they are standing front of you...not if they're at a distance on the receiving end.

Im not saying a dealer isnt within his right to play it safe. But let that at least be based on something a little more hair raising than "I dont know them." Im going out on a limb and assuming theres a slightly larger number of people in the world that you dont know, than you do.

- Nudge

nudge, there is no clairvoyance involved...just trying to do business as a responsible adult...

I can't really recall having ever heard anyone accuse the Government of using sound, sane & reasonable Judgement in setting up the 1968 gun law. Its pure intention was to get a foot in the door for the purpose of pushing that door further open toward the goal of total gun bans on private individuals. Fortunately some toes were stomped in the process & a bit of the hazzle was done away with, such as ammo etc, but the foot it still there. The door wasn't as easy to push open as had been assumed & the gap has not widened much. I'm for stomping them toes even harder & kicking that foot totally back out the door.
If I tried to buy from you a gun which was known & verified to be a pre 1899 & you insisted on me going to the hassle & expense of a check I would tell you where to "Stick IT" & be perfectly willing to assist you in the process if needed. The US Constitution does say I am "Innocent" until proven Guilty & you can't prove I'm Guilty.
The 1968 gun law says a pre 1899 gun is "Not" to be put on the books.

piper, we all have the right to do business or not do business, depending on the terms of the deal...and our conscience...

The issue from a dealers perspective is the bound book. We are required to log guns in and out on a daily basis. Once a gun is logged in there is no provision I know of to log it out as "antique". If any of you have ever been through an ATF audit, I have, you understand that your goal as a dealer is to not end up with any violations in your bound book. Yes it can be more costly for a customer but I am not willing to take the risk. I import things regularly from the UK. Once they arrive I can tell some of them are antiques. It does not matter to me though because they came in on a form 6 listed as a firearm and are in my books as such. How others conduct business is completely up to them but this is a point I am not willing to argue with the ATF. I sympathize with a buyers point of view but believe in picking your battles in life as well. My pockets are not deep up enough to challenge the feds on this.

and another issue from the dealers perspective is to conduct business in a responsible manner and with a clear conscience...

Let's not forget what Ed Good really thinks about our right to keep and bear arms:














In my opinion, the only person who has been more reliably against our 2nd Amendment Rights than Ed Good is his friend and fellow anti-gunner, King Brown. Birds of a feather!

gee keet, could it be that we dont care what you think about what i think? zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...

Entering a antique gun-by mistake into bound book, does not make it a firearm.It should be able to be rectified by using "Inadvertent entry. Pre-1899 manufactured gun No FFL required" in the disposition column.Or make a single line through error and note

A call to your IOI to confirm would not hurt as he would be the one inspecting it.
As they-antique firearms, are outside the ATF jurisdiction,like air guns,they are not to be entered-knowingly,in the bound book.

http://orchidadvisors.com/wp-content/upl...Compliance2.pdf

How many audits have you been through Dave? My guess is none.

I never once said entering it by mistake made it a firearm. What I did say was I try to avoid violations by having a CYA policy as do most FFL holders.

Your free to draw a line through your entry in your bound books. I'll be sending mine to an FFL holder or have a 4473 and a NICS number for my books. Most guys who stay in business feel the same as I do.

Ed Good,

If the captioned quotes above are indeed your words, I can tell you fat King George would have proudly called you his "subject." Those words are flacid attempts at virtue signalling the degree to which you are at pains to be "reasonable."

If our founders had been similarly as "reasonable" we would be waiving the Union Jack today.

Always remember that those who would subjugate us to the wonders of authoritarian Govt will ALWAYS appeal to people's desire to see themselves, and be seen by others, as "reasonable"..."cooperative"...and "moderate."

Now please direct me to where I can find a book about "great moderates in American history"...or even "great moderates in world hjstory."

You can not. History has ALWAYS hinged upon despots who subjugate, sometimes overthrown by freedom seeking radicals who refuse to cooperate.

More guns...more gun owners...equals a greater beachhead of liberty.

- Nudge

Steve, do whatever you want I could care less !

Once again,a mistaken entry of a antique firearm in a bound book does NOT make it a firearm requiring a FFL or 4473 NICS check,the mistake can be easily rectified as is common by drawing a line though it and initialing it.This is supported by both Orchard Advisors-NSSF compliance partner,and conversations I have had with IOI agent.

http://orchidadvisors.com/wp-content/upl...-Compliance.pdf

"if you need to make corrections to your paper bound book, remember to make a single line through the error (no eraser or white-out). Then initial and date the change
made.

As I also suggested,a confirmation from your IOI would also be beneficial as he/she is the one who will audit you.

It didn't appear to me that DaveK was making the claim that SKB said that entering an Antique in the bound ledger makes it a firearm. But Dave did politely inform him that it is indeed possible to delete or negate an Antique that has been erroneously entered as a modern post-1898 gun.

I've heard SKB's excuse for entering obvious Antiques just to play it safe. By that logic, he should be entering both original and modern replica muzzleloaders just in case they might be converted to breech loaders. Or maybe he might wish to get an Any Other Weapon classification for water pipe that could be fashioned into a zip gun.

Nudge commented on the anti-2nd Amendment quotations I provided to illustrate Ed Good's (and King Brown's) views on our gun rights. I assure him those are their exact words just as they posted them on this forum. Most of their anti-2nd amendment blather was posted on Misfires which explains why they are glad that sub-forum has been locked. Now they'd like to hide from their words and pretend they support our Constitutional RKBA. Dishonesty is not civility.

"You realize you're just honking at driverless cars."

Couple stuck in a traffic jam in NYC...today's Pepper and Salt in the Walleye Journal.

Reminds me of you guys when you get on ed and King.


________________________
Politics is the entertainment division of the Military/Industrial complex. Warren Zevon

Yep....just as I thought, never been through an audit.

The point I was making, which you completely missed, is that the goal of an FFL holder is to not rock the boat. The auditor may or not feel like hearing your story. If they are in a bad mood, they write you for the violation and you have to prove you were in compliance. Time and energy I do not have to waste. When you import as shipment of guns you submit a form 6 and then a 6A to confirm what was in the shipment. The last thing I need is to have a bunch of imports crossed out and say they were actually antiques. Then what? maybe send the ATF a note telling them not to worry about logging in half the shipment, really just antiques you see. THAT will raise a bunch of questions. Questions you do not need or want.Likely a bunch more paperwork too.

You can call the local ATF office and ask someone to give you an interpretation of an issue as they see it. That does not mean your inspection will been done by the same IOI officer or that the one who does your inspection will see things the same way. You are most likely technically correct in that an antque can be edited in the book with a simple cross out. You may also want some proof to back your antique claim especially if and when dealing with small obscure makers in a situation where a serial number alone is not proof. Why would I or any other FFL holder want that kind of headache? We do not and that is my point.

Thanks Keith,
and that is the point-BTW Steve,as usual,as NO clue about what I may or may not have been through audit wise or me.He just likes to think he is special.

Once again,addressing the OP,if you have mistakenly made an entry of a known antique firearm,it is common practice for errors in bound books,noted by both NSSF,Orchard Advisors and used by many FFL's ,to simply draw line through it and,once again,suggested if you feel the need to call your IOI (you can BTW easily note the time/date/subject,again as many FFL's do should another IOI question it as I do anytime I call).

Your the "special" one Dave....as in short bus special.

Here. Chew on this: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/3rd/054088p.pdf
Not even federal judges can agree on what is, or is not, an "antique" firearm.

I decided to take a little look. I like the 'and' part. Hand grenades?

The case needs more than a "little look". The short version is he was charged - 2 separate charges - with having an unregistered sawed-off shotgun and unregistered destructive devices (the hand grenades). He defended the sawed-off shotgun charge by arguing it was an "antique" as defined in the statute. (He really didn't have much of a defense as to the grenades.)

The dispute over the shotgun was not whether it was pre-1899 - there was consensus it was made sometime between 1870 and 1883. Rather, it was over whether the fact it could fire 12 gauge ammunition while only being marked 18.2 (mm, the common Belgian mark of bore diameter) meant it was not an antique because it could use modern ammunition. The judges decided the statute was "vague" (in the lawyerly sense) because it could be read both in favor of the government's position and in favor of the defendant's position. Because they decided the statute was "vague" they had to toss his conviction on the sawed-off shotgun count. (Note that the 2nd Circuit had previously decided the statute was not "vague", deciding it in favor of the government's position.)

That didn't change much for him, though, because the conviction on the grenade count stood up. Because he would have gotten the same sentence for just the grenade conviction as he did for both the grenade and the sawed-off shotgun counts, he got no relief (other than a decrease in an assessment from $200 to $100). He still got the same 46 months in prison.

There you have it Little Creek remove from your book as described or play it safe and treat as a firearm and risk being cited for erroneously placing it in your book.

I believe Keith, SKB, and Dave K amongst others have effectively laid out courses of action, and described the risks

Forget the thread diversions and other silliness which is hard to avoid for some posters.

Focusing on your dilemma. Unfortunately the BATF is not a consistent and predictable enforcement agency.

You can be right whichever course you choose and still be screwed.

Ultimately what level of risk are you willing to tolerate?

I wish you the best.

when in doubt, follow the spirit of the law...no law enforcement official will fault you for that...

The Spirit of the law is that an ""Antique" SHOULD NOT be entered into the bound Book.
As previously stated I simply would not buy an antique which the seller tried to Force me to register. There are plenty of Dealers who sell antiques all the time with no paperwork involved for me to patronise those who refuse to do so.

old hypocrite, oops I'm sorry... I mean old colonel, makes an interesting point about this issue when he predictably whines and stomps his feet about what he perceives as "thread diversions" and "silliness". Being anal retentive will do that to you. For some odd reason, whenever he posts, I think of a nosy old woman peering disapprovingly out of the curtains like Gladys Kravitz on the old "Bewitched" show. It's so nice to have an estrogen filled thread moderator.

But anyhow, this subject provides a perfect example of just how and why Gun Rights and Politics are so very important to the pursuit of our passion, hobbies, and even businesses of dealing with firearms.

A few notable people here are very concerned about the "risks" of merely complying with the law as Congress wrote it. They are worried about perverted interpretations of the law that may cause them headaches or even an unjust prosecution. But if you look back over the history of enforcement of the Gun Control Acts and persecution and harassment of FFL holders, the vast majority of that unjust treatment of law abiding citizens has resulted from edicts, judicial appointments, or appointments of anti-gunners to head the BATF made by the very same Liberal Left Democrat politicians who are staunchly supported and defended by the likes of King Brown, Ed Good, Dave-in-Maine, and SKB.

It's a sad time indeed when so-called "Free men" have to cower in fear of their government because they do not have either the good sense or the will to confront perversions of justice... or to elect politicians who will uphold their duty to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. They probably ought to play it safe and not exercise their Free Speech Rights by speaking or writing about their use and possession of firearms, just in case someone like Hillary Clinton ever gets elected... by people and FUDD's like them.

Since we are straying off topic....this was easily the best post of 2016.

Hey, that's a pretty lame comeback Lefty Stevie. I thought you told us all several times that you were IGNORING my posts? You and old hypocrite need to lay off the estrogen, and do what you say.

Are you still crying about Trump getting elected?

I see you and read your ignorant posts lil k but you are not worth responding to.

I assume your parents knew what a POS you would become before they named you and decided not to capitalize your name, or are you damn dumb to capitalize your own name?

Lil k the boards favorite libtard...did you where your white panties to show your solidarity when you cast your vote for Hillary sweetheart?

Been hitting the bong again Stevie? Or have you been taking spelling and writing lessons from your little buddy nca225?

How can you see and read my posts when you IGNORE them sis?

And your last two posts were certainly an excellent example of NOT responding to my posts. What a dickhead! Once again, your intelligence comes shining through. You wear--- not "where"--- your stupidity and support for anti-gun Liberal Left Democrats like a florescent orange vest.

Ed Good once tried to tar me as a Liberal, which just goes to prove that you and Ed have about the same I.Q.

Steve,

as you have proven time and time again, you have some major issues and are in need of help,for your own good you better get some before its too late pal.
Now run along and see if you can get through just one day without being an arrogant prick that your are on here.

Dave, if anyone here has issues it is you and lil k. You two might get a discount with a good therapist you have so very much to work out. Her gender identity and self loathing alone could take years.

You two must hate competition in the arrogant prick category.....you both have that down pat.

Now why don't you lil pricks bugger off.....

I'm not going away because some internet trolls are spewing the BS they have been at for years.

I, for one, wouldn't want you to go away Lefty Stevie. You have always provided the perfect example of the FUDD's and Libtard gun owners who support and defend Liberal Left anti-gunners, and then stupidly wonder why more restrictive gun laws get passed.

I personally would never do business with anyone like you or Ed who, in my opinion, does much to undermine our 2nd Amendment Rights.

Go take another hit off your bong, and think about the good old days under Obama when you could legally use the ladies room.

I have decided, with the help of a few of the responders here, to enter the sale of this gun in my record book. BATF will not know whether it was/is a pre-1899 gun anyway.

When I buy another antique firearm and it is shipped to me by an individual, I certainly won't enter it in the record book!

Interesting case. The shot gun in question is a short shotgun, ie sawed off and therefor requiring registration under the 1934 act. The antique exemption comes under the 1968 act. The opinion draws heavily, if not almost exclusively, on the National Firearms Act USC 5801-72, which is under the IRS. This leaves considerable ambiguity about whether the case is about antique long guns, as generally bought, sold, and used for sporting purposes by the good folks on this board, or sawed off guns, generally shunned for sporting purposes.

The definitions of Antiques ARE NOT the same under the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the National Firearms Act. A pre-1899 manufactured Antique not regulated by the Gun Control Act of 1968 MAY BE considered a Firearm by the National Firearms Act and regulated by it.

Short barreled shotguns are regulated by the National Firearms Act if they do not meet THAT Act's definition of an Antique.