Nevada Gunmaker Defends Design While Issuing Refunds Ahead of New ATF Rule

A Nevada gunmaker is offering a full refund to owners of one of its guns in anticipation of a new administrative regulation from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF).

Franklin Armory had prevailed in court after it challenged the agency’s ruling that firearms equipped with its “Antithesis” barrel were short-barreled rifles or shotguns that violated the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA).

A Franklin Armory statement released on Sept. 19 said that the ATF requested Franklin Armory to “call back” the 5.56 caliber versions of the barrels, “in advance of the agency issuing a new classification.”

ATF’s request indicates that the agency plans to write a rule that will outlaw the barrel design while still complying with the court’s ruling.

The company offered owners of its Antithesis 5.56 caliber firearms a full refund if they voluntarily returned them. Firearms with the combination .410 shotgun and 45-caliber Long Colt Antithesis barrel, as well as the Reformation shotgun barrel, are not affected.

Even though the company is issuing refunds, it is sticking by its claim that the guns’ designs comply with federal laws.

The company and the Firearms Regulatory Accountability Coalition Inc. sued the ATF in 2023 over its classification of these firearms.

On Feb. 18, Judge Daniel Traynor of the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota ruled that the guns did not violate the NFA or the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA) despite the ATF finding.

On Aug. 29, the ATF issued an open letter in line with the court’s decision. The letter states that the Reformation and Antithesis firearms did not violate the federal law. However, a month later, the ATF informed Franklin Armory that a new rule was coming.

“We were surprised by this in light of the U.S. District Court’s ruling in FRAC v. Bondi,” Franklin Armory said in its press release. “Be assured, this will not be the final chapter on Antithesis.”

A Franklin Armory spokesman declined to comment on the case, directing an Epoch Times reporter to court records and company statements. However, he said one term will not be found in any of the company’s statements.

“This is not a recall,” he said.

The ATF did not respond to a request for comment.

In court documents, the agency indicates that the barrels were designed based on literal definitions of common terms in the law to circumvent Congress’s true intent when it wrote the laws.

Under the NFA, a shoulder-fired rifle barrel has a spiral pattern of lands and grooves cut into the barrel. This causes the bullet to spin—like a baseball thrown by a pitcher—improving its accuracy.

Shotgun barrels have no rifling and fire several projectiles at once.

In 2017, Franklin Armory requested a classification from the ATF for a barrel design it called “NRS,” which stands for Not Rifle or Shotgun. The company named the barrel the Reformation.

The short barrel has straight lands and grooves cut along its length. The company maintains the barrel doesn’t fit the legal definition of a short-barreled rifle since the lands and grooves are not cut in a helical pattern.

Franklin Armory also claims it is not legally a shotgun because it does not have a smooth bore.

The company also produced the Antithesis barrel that is chambered to accept .410 shotgun shells and .45 caliber Long Colt pistol ammunition. Part of the classification of a gun is based on whether it takes shotgun or rifle ammunition.

No Man’s Land

According to the company and the court, this puts the barrels in a regulatory no-man’s land. They don’t fit the definition of a rifle or shotgun governed by the NFA. While the GCA covers shotguns, the government had no forms for regulating these items.

ATF lawyers disagreed on the weapons’ legal status, saying that the company’s interpretation ignores Congress’s intent. According to the ATF, the company focuses too closely on ammunition and ignores barrel design. They argued that Congress clearly included these types of firearms when developing the gun laws.

“Congress did not intend for a firearm classification under these definitions to be driven by the classification of the type of ammunition the weapon is capable of firing, as opposed to the objective design features and capabilities of the weapon itself,” the ATF states in the court record.

Judge Traynor disagreed, ruling that the agency exceeded its authority by basing its rules on what Congress intended rather than a plain reading of the law. Traynor wrote that Franklin Armory had created a weapon that “doesn’t fit into the round holes made by Congress, but that does not give ATF authority to change the shape or size of the hole to make the Reformation fit.”

“Administrative agencies need to remember they are in the executive branch and leave legislating to Congress,” he wrote.