Franklin Armory Introduces Short Barrel 'Firearm'

[GOYABEAN]

Not sure if posted already if so Mods please delete!

Franklin Armory Introduces Short Barrel ‘Firearm’ With Standard AR Stock and ATF Approval


OutdoorHub Reporters
19 hours ago
15.7K
Shares
SHARE
TWEET
TEXT
According to the NFA an SBR is any firearm with a buttstock that has a rifled barrel of less than sixteen inches, or an overall length of less than twenty six inches. The total length is measured in the extended position. However, Franklin Armory found a shocking loophole.

As part of the new Reformation line of patent pending NRS firearms, the first SKUs in the Reformation line feature a non-NFA configuration with an 11.5″ barrel and a conventional stock as shown in the press release below:



If that just sent you for a loop, and you find yourself scratching your head wondering how they got this approved, you’re not alone . . .

However, SHOT Show is only days away at this point, and we’re definitely going to pay Franklin Armory a visit while we’re out there. We’ll find out everything you need to know, and update you with more information.

It’s also worth pointing out that Franklin Armory pioneered the NFA loophole trend with their XO26 and then a few years later with binary triggers.

https://www.outdoorhub.com/news/2018...-atf-approval/

[sota]

saw that earlier this morning. I'm very interested in how they define it.

[Gunsnwater]

I only have one question about this stuff but I'm not asking it because I don't feed trolls like the people who got arm braces messed up for awhile and have fed the bumfire bonfire.

[ExFlyinguy]

This SBR stuff makes my head spin.

I thought if it had either a barrel<16" or a OAL<26" it is a SBR?

How can this not be an SBR?

[Ricochet]

Lets say that this "rifle" doesn't need SBR paperwork.
Will that mean that all of us who have barrels under 16" with arm brace installed will be legally allowed to put a regular stock on them now?

[GunLawyer001]

Lets say that this "rifle" doesn't need SBR paperwork.
Will that mean that all of us who have barrels under 16" with arm brace installed will be legally allowed to put a regular stock on them now?

No.

[zachomega]

I don't understand the arm brace thing at all.

Just seems like arbitrary loopholes...Which is cool except that it leads to confusion about what is legal and what isn't.

Why can't somebody find a loophole like that for a suppressor?

-Zach

[GOYABEAN]

I don't understand the arm brace thing at all.

Just seems like arbitrary loopholes...Which is cool except that it leads to confusion about what is legal and what isn't.

Why can't somebody find a loophole like that for a suppressor?

-Zach

I believe there's one already for Air Guns

[sota]

The current deep think is, it has something to do with the trigger, specifically a modification to their BFS.

The specific wording of 26 USC 5845 (emphasis added):
"(b) The term “machinegun” means any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger."

"(c) The term “rifle” means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed cartridge to fire only a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of the trigger ..."

There's the idea that it may only discharge on RELEASE of the trigger, thereby negating (c) above.

So if it's not a machine gun, if it's not a rifle, an SBR, shotgun, or any of the other defined classes, it's just a "firearm."

I'm going to assume Franklin has the determination letter already in hand, and that'll be the real test/answer.

[P89]

Aren't they the ones who found the binary trigger loophole?