Mossberg Shockwave
Previous Post
Next Post

From the Second Amendment Foundation . . .

The Second Amendment Foundation and its partners in a lawsuit challenging a Connecticut gun control law have filed an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order because a new rule published by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives on firearms designation places thousands of Constitution State citizens in serious legal jeopardy.

SAF is joined by the Connecticut Citizens Defense League and three private citizens, Jennifer Hamilton, Michael Stiefel and Eddie Grant, Jr. They are represented by Connecticut attorneys Doug Dubitsky of North Windham, Craig C. Fishbein of Wallingford and Cameron L. Atkinson of Harwinton.

Courtesy FAB Defense

“When ATF published its new rule, redesignating a class of firearms known as ‘any other firearm’ or simply ‘others’ as either ‘rifles’ or ‘short barreled rifles’ depending on the barrel length, all of those guns suddenly fell within the state’s definition of an assault weapon,” noted SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “This immediately put thousands of owners of previously-classified ‘other’ firearms in harm’s way legally because now their possession is a felony.”

“This re-classification,” added SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut, who is a practicing attorney, “is a textbook example of the harm which can be caused by an arbitrary change of rules and definitions making legally-purchased firearms suddenly illegal, turning their owners into criminals, essentially by the stroke of a pen. We’re asking the court to step in to prevent a legal nightmare for thousands of Connecticut citizens.”

any other weapon AOW AR pistol foregrip fore grip
Courtesy Walker & Taylor PLLC

SAF and its partners filed an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, and a memorandum in support of their motion. In the memorandum, they say the Court “should find that the change in federal law has placed the Plaintiffs at the likely and extreme risk of being subject to the heavy burden of criminal prosecutions as felons under politically motivated Connecticut law with no prior notice and in violation of their Second Amendment rights.”

“ATF’s rule change, which became effective immediately, egregiously placed thousands of law-abiding Connecticut gun owners on the wrong side of the law, through no fault or action of their own,” Gottlieb observed. “That may be okay in a police state, but not the United States, and we’re asking the court to move swiftly in order to prevent a horrible injustice.”

Previous Post
Next Post


    • RE: “Plaintiffs at the likely and extreme risk of being subject to the heavy burden of criminal prosecutions as felons under politically motivated Connecticut law with no prior notice and in violation of their Second Amendment rights.”

      Politically Motivated? No it is motivated by blatent Gun Control. It’s nothing more than the stench from the same Gun Control that history confirms is rooted in racism and genocide…That fact is something a well paid attorney like gottleib should have included with every one of his tit for tat court cases which have been many…and tit for tat adds up to mucho dinero. Like I said…well paid.

      • While true that and a two dollar bill could get you a cup of coffee. Meanwhile we need to go after quantifiable infringements and damages to have standing to sue and vacate the laws we have so Gottleib is doing fairly well all considered.

        • Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35,000 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know you are currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,000 dollars, it’s simple online operating jobs.
          Just open the link….

      • Uhhhh, gun control IS politically motivated. The people in power need to ensure that no one can challenge their power. That is political. It is also racist in most cases in the US. It can have a basis in religion, like in Merry Old England, when Catholics and Protestants were at odds. But, there are always politics involved. If you’re really tight with the Ruling Class, then the Ruling Class will permit you to have a gun, to protect the Ruling Class. If you’re not sucking up to the Ruling Class, then you are SOL.

    • Soon soon, between what NY has going on and this the North East will have some wild gun laws by the end of the decade.

  1. Sorry, I haven’t been keeping up. Did ATF’s new rulemakeing on Short Barreled Rifles define non-shoulder mounted, non-rifled firearms as rifles?

    • No, they just made a brace into a shoulder stock using the ATF magic wand, which means that a shot-firing-thunderstick is now a short-barreled shotgun and must be registered as an NFA item.

      • Man, now I’m even more confused. What you said makes sense, but what does that have to do with the mossberg shockwave in the top picture, or the forward-gripped glock, or the SBR in the bottom pic? As far as I can tell those are classic examples of an “other firearm”, AOW and SBR; that have not been effected by the recent ruling.

        I am sympathetic to the quagmire of ATF’s latest decision, and SAF’s need to be brief in their press release, but why didn’t they just tell/show us what they’re talking about?

        • What it boils down to is my legally purchased Springfield Saint 300BLK pistol is now an SBR, making me a felon in 120 days. F÷=/ them. I won’t comply. If I live to testify I will.

        • And if the bass turds go after my dog it’s game on! I recently got a hip replacement and am scheduled for a second. I’m getting better so you better get me now!

        • “What you said makes sense, but what does that have to do with the mossberg shockwave in the top picture, or the forward-gripped glock, or the SBR in the bottom pic?”

          I believe the forward-gripped Glock is now an SBR under ATF regulations.

          (I will say this – A Glock with a forward grip like that, and a can, and a select-fire ‘switch’ would make a dandy poor-man’s MP5-type weapon for home defense…)

        • Since 2006, pistols with vertical fore grips (VFG) have been considered AOWs because they are no longer designed to be fired with one hand and are concealable if the length is under 26″. AOWs are already NFA items with $200 to create, but only $5 to transfer. For some reason, angled fore grips and hand stops got the green light. So, pistols over 26″ were OK with a VFG and brace, but they are SBRs now.

          The rule also says all braces on an unrifled firearm, like the Shockwave, is a short-barrel shotgun because it was designed for two hands and now has a stock. They aren’t offering free stamps for SBSs.

        • Thank you Anymouse. That is understandable, SAF is talking specifically about non-pistol “other firearms” with a brace, not AOWs or smoothbores per-se. I still don’t know what the special Connecticut wrinkle is, but I’m not worried about that, at least I still understand the current NFA-ATF climate.

          Those photos really messed me up!

  2. I’ve been a CT resident for 50+ years
    A gun owner for 30 years
    An instructor for 25 years
    An 07 FFL for 15 years.

    I’ve got a good grasp of the laws in CT and always appreciate a good lawsuit against the forces of tyranny.

    But this seems to have zero merit. CT and Fed law define different firearms differently. That’s just how it is. For example, CT law considers any firearm with a barrel of less than 12 inches to be a handgun. That’s why the other must have a barrel longer than 12″.

    The ATF’s rewriting of the definition of what a rifle is will have no impact on CT law, which uses its own definitions.

    All that a CT other owner has to do to comply with the federal directive is remove the brace. The ATF directive explicitly says that receiver extensions do not make something into a rifle if they are necessary for the function of the firearm.

    In fact, CT Others pre-date the launch of the SB brace. Original CT Other firearms simply had a buffer tube, sometimes covered with foam. But no fin or brace.

    But then again, Mr. Gottleib is much smarter than I am. Either way, no explanation of this suit, including this article, has provided sufficient detail to explain how the suit matters.

    • Is there any text or tradition supporting the restrictions for rifles, AOWs, SBR, or others relevant to Bruen? May not be the best way to chip away at it but would need to read up on it more.

      • No, because handguns and rifles, and everything in between, were treated the same way at the founding.

        In the interest of fairness and non-discrimination, we must demand the same for guns today… 🙂

  3. New riddle that will stump anyone who isn’t a POTG (so at least 60% of Americans):
    “You went to bed a law-abiding US citizen and woke up the next day as a felon.
    You did not travel to another jurisdiction while you slept.
    You did not sleep-walk and murder someone while you slept
    You did not sleep-walk and commit any other crimes, felonies, misdemeanors, or even violations of law while you slept.
    The government did not pass any new laws while you slept, and no new laws took effect while you slept, either.
    How did you go to bed as a law-abiding US citizen and wake up as a felon in the exact same jurisdiction?”

    Answer: While you slept, the BATF redefined something that you legally owned and made it illegal in your state (or more often, in the entire United States).

    • Who are you and where have you been? You are absolutely correct in your analysis. I am now supposedly a felon. We will see in the weeks and months to come.

      P.S. Get out of NJ while you can!

      • Or you know only break one law at a time. Kinda easy to be an unintentional felon in NY/NJ…… almost by design.

  4. I love my shockwave. When I showed my step father, who owns a 10 gauge long boi fudd, his reaction was exactly the reason I bought it. Most people have no clue. He’s been converted. He used to be “I don’t want to get in trouble” and now he is “who’s going to stop me?”.

  5. Where was the lawsuit when Washington defined all semi-automatic rifles as assualt weapons? because now they can ban all of them this year by pushing an assault weapon ban. Which they’re doing…Washington is a lawsuit rich environment that can set all kinds of freedom precedents if we could just get some support.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here