"Zorro" steps on his di . . uh, I mean cape. Len Savage's reply & the pistol-grip shotgun exception. Time to whip out those hack-saws?

Little Jimmy Vann does his Zorro impression.

Folks,

When we last left "Zorro" on CleanUpATF.org, he was saying:

Posted 10 March 2010 - 09:42 PM

It's all about truth, Doc, and you guys weren't getting it. If those posts were cut and dried complete stories I would never have intervened even if they were irrelevant to the mission but sound bites and spin are tough to watch being thrown on your co-workers. Enough about the clique; onto greener pastures.

478.11 "Firearm" is where the beloved PG shotguns are - along with stripped receivers, silencers, AOW and whatever I can't think of right now. Transfers to under 21 or interstate to nonlicensees is generally prohibited, but two specific exemptions are carved out for Rifles and Shotguns (478.99). ATF didn't help matters for so many years as we gave people two choices: Long Gun or Handgun. We finally wised up in 2008 and offered "other" for items that did not fit those two categories. I really believe the previous edition of the newsletter as I had to find that specific passage when I was in the field which was most definitely prior to 2009; the worn memory doesn't always work, but I'm pretty comfortable on that one. At any rate, if you are working a 922(g) case and a frame, receiver, or PG is invloved - possession of a "firearm".

I have to take a break now, Doc. Unless I get sucked back in or can actually offer some good info, I'll keep the bench warm.

The views and opinions expressed by the author are just that. They are not the official opinion of anyone anywhere in any capacity.

OK, I don't think that disclaimer is going to keep him from being outed on discovery in some future court case, but if he thinks that figleaf covers him, he is welcome to the false sense of security.

Then Len Savage, having tried to take it off board per moderator Doc Holliday's suggestion and failed. Replies thusly:

Posted 11 March 2010 - 05:15 PM

"It's all about truth, Doc, and you guys weren't getting it."

Name one thing that was not true....

I tried to PM you, but you refused to answer. I flatly stated that the Friesen case was started in good faith by ATF. I never blamed an Agent [though you insinuate I did].

You keep coming up with remarks like your "in the know" and hint you have information that shows I am not being truthful, yet you don't put it out for all to see. Well show me and this board then.

I commented on this thread to show all the agents reading to be aware that some...SOME cases are obviously being brought forth using "broken tools" that agents must rely on. You dismissed that as "irrelevant to the mission". I am not your enemy. I also think that this kind of information is "mission critical" for street agents.

I squarely lay the responsibility on ATF management and ATF Chief Counsel....NOT street agents.

For the record: Yes, the NFRTR is in error, to what degree, I doubt even management knows. Yes, FTB has issued some classifications that defy the laws of logic and the CFR. The reason; look at the procedure, Chief Counsel makes the final decisions on them. Making street agents aware of such things was simply that, no agenda.

Finally, unlike you I don't hide who I am. I feel no need to hide behind a mask Zorro, for I have documents and evidence that prove my statements. Facts are a wonderful thing, they give me freedom to not have to hide who I am.

Let's fix this mess. I'm here to help. My posting on this board should prove that, and frankly took an enormous amount of trust on my end. As Doc hinted at public trust will only be gained by the willingness of ATF [even the small amount of those employees here] to listen to concerns, and the willingness to work together to address them.

Your's and ours.

The choice is yours; Want to build a bridge? I'll hand you a hammer. Want to burn the one I'm trying to build? I'll hand you some matches...

Len Savage
Historic Arms

In retrospect it is easy to see that "Zorro's" decision to intervene at CUATF and pitch the management line (Little Jimmy, ist dat du?) was a strategic error. He has stepped on his di . . . uh, I mean cape, here. To the extent that Savage (and earlier the man known as "Avatar") get across to the street agents -- the ones who take it in the neck if anything goes wrong, NOT Chief Counsel's Office -- that they are being lied to, the more likely that they are to question wrongful orders. This is a "goodness thing."

Finally we have self-described "FNG" Enufsenuf weighing in with more detail on the sawed-off pistol grip shotgun issue.

Posted 11 March 2010 - 08:47 PM

Doc Holiday, on 10 March 2010 - 10:14 AM, said:

We want NO ONE who is interested in getting ATF back in the business of protecting the public to "Step OUT". And We really want to focus on the abuses and mismanagement that are bringing this agency to its knees. The Pistol grip shotgun matter was addressed in the 2009, I repeat November 2009 FFL newsletter, Not in the 1990s. You are clearly far more knowledgeable than I and in fact most of the ATF agent I know. However when I see an ATF sponsored news letter article that is sooooooooo poorly interpreted it distresses me. I will post the news letter later, however, we may try to set up an arena for these sort of issues so not to keep the meat of this website out of the mainstream posts. If not a "shotgun, Pistol or Rifle, and not an any other weapon", #1 what is it? #2 So if one of my bad guys saws off this NON shotgun, how go I convict him if hes not a felon? "Defense atty, Your honor, I would like to introduce exhibit 1, ATFs determination that my clients alleged sawed off shotgun, in fact is NOT a shotgun". If a lowly street agent like me cannot easily figure this one out, HOW can I support revoking a FFLs license for not understanding it. Its only one of two things; We either have not clearly thought this representation through, OR its the same old IT IS BECAUSE WE ARE ATF AND WE SAY ITS SO. Look, a good faith determination with common sense says a shotgun IS a shotgun, whether the factory OR my son, or your daughter chooses to put a pistol grip on it. Shotguns ARE designed to be fired from the shoulder. That doesnt mean they have to be. If we put props on a shotgun, does it cease to be a shotgun and become a helicopter which now is regulated by the FAA? Im certain you can see the underlying controversy here. Yourself and Avatar my continue this thru the CUATF email system if you like. Thats why we provided it, and No do not stand down. We want ALL the truth, not just OUR truth. That would be too much like Mr. Melson and crew.

Ok, being an old-timer, I have an FFL Newsletter (1990 Volume 1, page 4) which addresses PG shotguns and the interpretation by ATF that these firearms are not "shotguns" under the GCA. This same issue was addressed again in a February 1999 FFL Newsletter (page 3), again stating that a PG shotgun is not a "shotgun" under the GCA. So the masked man was correct in that this issue has been around for a long time. We old-timers may be old, but we still got some smarts . . . and a memory to boot! The "other" category of firearms is relatively new (2008), but the PG shotgun issue is not.

Keepin' on keepin' on!

So, if I have a Mossberg 500 Cuiser that came straight from the factory, can I lop off the barrel with a hacksaw and NOT end up like Randy Weaver with a dead wife and son?

Thanks, "Zorro" for the publicity of this curious ATF wrinkle.

Hmmm.

"Do you love it?
Do you hate it?
There it is, the way you made."
-- Frank Zappa, 1965

Mike
III