Get A Grip

Much is being made of Kerry accepting a shotgun that some say would have been banned by legislation he co-sponsored.

Drudge mentioned it, then (in no particular order) it was picked up by Instapundit, Say Uncle, Jeff Blogworthy, Damnum Absque Injuria, Heartless Libertarian, No Quarters, & again No Quarters have all commented on it. I'm sure that list is not exhaustive.

Here's a picture of the shotgun in question.

Here's a close up of the part of the shotgun in question.

What has been at issue is whether or not that area constitutes a pistol grip & whether a law that Kerry supports would ban the shotgun because of that part.

The answer is yes to both: it is in fact a pistol grip & the law that Kerry was supportive of would have banned it for that reason.

In common usage most people nowadays think a pistol grip is something that protrudes at a sharp angle below the receiver of a firearm. The AWB defines it as a grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action. However from the time when curved handles became an option for long guns, they have been referred to as pistol grips.

The grip of a long gun can come in four variants: a straight grip (sometimes called English-style grip); A semi-pistol grip; a pistol grip; & a pistol grip. The repeat was intentional as there are two definitions at work (not counting the legal definitions).

As I said before any curved grip on a long gun has been traditionally referred to as a pistol grip. But since the advent of submachine guns & assault rifles most people picture a grip that comes down from the firearm at a sharp angle when they hear the term. Either style of grip is properly called a pistol grip. The Garand at the top of the page has a pistol grip & so does a Fn-Fal as well as a Thompson. A Mauser 98 & an M1 Carbine have pistol grips.

The Mosin-Nagant & the Carcano M91 do not have pistol grips.

You can see here that Stoeger offers its Uplander shotgun with either an English grip or a pistol grip. & just cause I love the damned things, here's a pic of an L.C. Smith.

A 1917 Enfield has what is referred to as a semi or scant pistol grip as does a SMLE.

The confusion comes from a popular conception of the term "pistol grip" replacing the traditional meaning, which was generally any curved grip on a long gun. These were pistols back when the term first came into use. These didn't come about till a little later. So I would submit that until recently, perhaps the last 20 years or so, the term pistol grip was generally understood to mean a curved grip on a long gun but not limited to those grips that were at a sharp angle to the centerline of the receiver.

Now that that is out of the way (hopefully) we can move on to the law that Kerry supported & whether or not it bans firearms with pistol grips.

I wrote about the bill in question a few times in the past. Here's the post I did when they reached 100 co-sponsors in the House version. The House version is the McCarthy-Conyers HB 2038 (The Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003). The Senate version is S.1431 & Kerry did in fact co-sponsor it.

As we look at the text of S.1431 we come across the following:

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

(a) IN GENERAL- Section 921(a)(30) of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

`(30) The term `semiautomatic assault weapon' means any of the following:

(D) A semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine, and that has--

`(i) a folding or telescoping stock;

`(ii) a threaded barrel;

`(iii) a pistol grip;

`(iv) a forward grip; or

`(v) a barrel shroud.

`(E)(i) Except as provided in clause (ii), a semiautomatic rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

`(ii) Clause (i) shall not apply to an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.

`(H) A semiautomatic shotgun that has--

`(i) a folding or telescoping stock;

`(ii) a pistol grip;

`(iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine; or

`(iv) a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds.

`(J) A frame or receiver that is identical to, or based substantially on the frame or receiver of, a firearm described in any of subparagraphs (A) through (I) or (L).

(L) A semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General. In making the determination, 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.'.

`(41) FORWARD GRIP- The term `forward grip' means a grip located forward of the trigger that functions as a pistol grip.

`(42) PISTOL GRIP- The term `pistol grip' means a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.

I see several areas where the shotgun pictured would run afoul of S.1431. For starters it does define pistol grip as simply a grip. It's badly worded in that an english style grip could be considered a pistol grip for the purposes of the bill.

& using the bill's definition of pistol grip (which means any grip at all) we are then confronted with the bill's definition of a forward grip: "a grip located forward of the trigger that functions as a pistol grip". Since a pistol grip is defined more or less as any type of grip then the forward stock of any long gun would constitute a pistol grip.

So Kerry's shotgun would, under S1431, have a pistol grip & a forward grip.

Another thing is magazine capacity. According to Drudge the shotgun in question is a Beretta A300. According to the specs it can hold 4 shells in the magazine & one in the chamber. Those are 2 &3/4" shells. So that would not violate the provisions of the bill dealing with magazine capacity.

However the bill says "a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds" without expanding on what the length of the rounds used to determine that number are. With shotguns in 12 gauge you have several choices: the traditional 2 & 3/4" shells; the 3" shells, the 3 & 1/2" shells & finally the 1 & 1/2" shells.

A company called Aguilla started selling the Mini-shell a few years ago. It's a delightful little shotshell that measures 1 & 1/2" loaded. That means 6 or 7 could fit in a magazine that would hold four 2 & 3/4" shells.

Now you tell me if you think some asshole won't grab a box of Aguilla Mini-shells to determine which shotguns comply with S.1431? S.1431 never specifies which length of shell is to be used to determine magazine capacity. It stands to reason that the intent of the writer of this law is to ban as many firearms as possible, so using the smallest shell capable of being fired in a shotgun would be consistent with the legislative intent.

I'm not that familiar with Beretta shotguns, but there's another way it could run afoul of S.1431: if Beretta has sold a modified version of the model in question to the military or law enforcement then it would be prohibited by the following section.

"`(L) A semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General. In making the determination, 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.'."

Note that it says just because it's used in a sporting event that does not mean it has a sporting purpose!

So if one law enforcement agency or one military unit purchases a Beretta A300 or a firearm based on its receiver then it'd be banned by S.1431.

& finally we have this little gem:

`"(J) A frame or receiver that is identical to, or based substantially on the frame or receiver of, a firearm described in any of subparagraphs (A) through (I) or (L)"

Which means if the receiver of the Beretta A300 is determined t be close in appearance to the Franchi Spas-12 then we have yet another reason the Beretta would be verboten under S.1431. who determines what is close enough is not specified, but given the obvious intent of this bill (i.e. to ban everything in sight) I'd assume it'd be under very loose guidelines of what constitutes close. One being made of metal & the other being made of metal might be enough.

So according to S.1431 the shotgun in question would be prohibited. It has a pistol grip, ,strike>a forward grip, a magazine capable of holding more than 5 shells & its receiver could be based on or similar to a military or law enforcement design.

Correction:

As Bruce of mASSBACKWARDS points out in the comments, the section of S.1431 that deals with the foregrip is only applicable to rifles. My apologies for the error & many thanks to Bruce for catching me on it.

Posted by Publicola at September 7, 2004 04:41 PM