Legality of Open-Carrying the Non-NFA 14" Mossberg

[1010011010]

If you can legally own pump-action AOWs in PA, then PA has already accepted the definitions and interpretations that lead to pump-action firearms such as the Mossberg 590 Shockwave or the Remington 870 Tac-14 being legal.

Briefly:
Shotguns are designed, made, or intended to be fired from the shoulder.
If a pump-action firearm is manufactured without a shoulder stock it is not a shotgun.

The Shockwave/Tac-14 is thus not a shotgun with a barrel less than 18".

The factor that lead to some previous pump-action firearms being determined to be AOWs was due to them being less than 26" in overall length.

The Shockwave/Tac-14 is thus not an AOW with an OAL<26".

This is one of those situations where two identical firearms have different legal statuses depending on their design and manufacturing history.
Since design and manufacturing history is not readily observable, you can reasonably expect LEOs and such to presume that it's illegal until determined otherwise.

So, I'd suggest keeping identifying paperwork with these firearms at all times (as you would with NFA tax registration), even though there is no requirement to do so.

[GunLawyer001]

If you can legally own pump-action AOWs in PA, then PA has already accepted the definitions and interpretations that lead to pump-action firearms such as the Mossberg 590 Shockwave or the Remington 870 Tac-14 being legal.
. . .

Actually, the reason we can have a pump-action AOW in 12 gauge is because there's a specific exception in the PA statutes that would otherwise bar it:

(1) It is a defense under this section for the defendant to prove by a preponderance of evidence that he possessed or dealt with the weapon solely as a curio or in a dramatic performance, or that, with the exception of a bomb, grenade or incendiary device, he complied with the National Firearms Act (26 U.S.C. § 5801 et seq.)

[1010011010]

Actually, the reason we can have a pump-action AOW in 12 gauge is because there's a specific exception in the PA statutes that would otherwise bar it:

(1) It is a defense under this section for the defendant to prove by a preponderance of evidence that he possessed or dealt with the weapon solely as a curio or in a dramatic performance, or that, with the exception of a bomb, grenade or incendiary device, he complied with the National Firearms Act (26 U.S.C. § 5801 et seq.)

There you go, then, PA has incorporated federal rulemaking via reference. Owning one of these pump-action firearms would be in full compliance with the NFA and it is not a bomb, grenade, or incendiary device.

[GunLawyer001]

There you go, then, PA has incorporated federal rulemaking via reference. Owning one of these pump-action firearms would be in full compliance with the NFA and it is not a bomb, grenade, or incendiary device.

I'm not sure that possessing a non-NFA firearm "complied with the National Firearms Act" if it's not registered. Sure, it's not "in violation of" the NFA, but if I ride my bicycle to the store, am I in compliance with FAA regs? Kind of, but not really, since FAA regs don't cover bikes (to my knowledge, anyway.)

Factor in the reality that PA criminal statutes never seem to define what a "shotgun" is, they just use the term and assume that we're all on board.

[1010011010]

I'm not sure that possessing a non-NFA firearm "complies with the National Firearms Act" if it's not registered. Sure, it's not "in violation of" the NFA, but if I ride my bicycle to the store, am I in compliance with FAA regs? Kind of, but not really, since FAA regs don't cover bikes (to my knowledge, anyway.)

Gets into a question of how you prove you've complied with an Act that does not have any applicable provisions with which to comply.
Is showing it does not apply and you have not violated any provisions of the Act sufficient?

Factor in the reality that PA criminal statutes never seem to define what a "shotgun" is, they just use the term and assume that we're all on board.

The statute on Prohibited Offensive Weapons includes in its definition of "offensive weapons" the following: "sawed-off shotgun with a barrel less than 18 inches".

There is no reason to specify "sawed-off" in the statute if the intent is to prohibit shotguns with a barrel less than 18 inches as "offensive weapons".

Disregarding the argument that the pump-action firearms under consideration do not meet available definitions of "shotgun", they are definitely not "sawed-off".
Though I have a feeling this particular point has likely already been raised with regards to short-barreled shotguns that have not been "sawed-off".

[gnbrotz]

Gets into a question of how you prove you've complied with an Act that does not have any applicable provisions with which to comply.
Is showing it does not apply and you have not violated any provisions of the Act sufficient?



The statute on Prohibited Offensive Weapons includes in its definition of "offensive weapons" the following: "sawed-off shotgun with a barrel less than 18 inches".

There is no reason to specify "sawed-off" in the statute if the intent is to prohibit shotguns with a barrel less than 18 inches as "offensive weapons".

Disregarding the argument that the pump-action firearms under consideration do not meet available definitions of "shotgun", they are definitely not "sawed-off".
Though I have a feeling this particular point has likely already been raised with regards to short-barreled shotguns that have not been "sawed-off".

Hobson?

[1010011010]

Hobson?

While the gun in Hobson appears to have been a normal rifle that had both the barrel and shoulder stock crudely shortened, it does have some interesting citations/quotes:

"It is not the fact that a weapon that has a barrel that has been shortened even to a length of less than 16 inches that makes it a prohibited offensive weapon. What fulfills that requirement is that the weapon was specially adapted for concealment or that it serves no common lawful purpose."

"[D]ue to the offensive character of a sawed-off shotgun, the legislature intended such weapons to be prohibited under section 908, regardless of the length of the sawed-off barrel. When the barrel of a shotgun is sawed-off, the shotgun has been reshaped and "specially adapted" or altered for criminal purposes. 18 Pa.C.S. § 908(c) (emphasis added). This is precisely the type of weapon explicitly prohibited by section 908."

Seems PA opted to double down on "sawed-off" being the important bit rather than treat it as synonymous with "short barreled" regardless of how it came to be shorter than a specified length.