View Full Version : Akins Accelerator Lawsuit

March 4, 2008, 08:23 PM
Well, it appears that the Akins group (now held entirely by Bill Akins) is taking the FedGov to court over their ruling that the "Akins Accelerator" is a machinegun. Here is a link to the brief. (http://www.georgiapacking.org/docs/akins/Complaint_with_exhibits.pdf) There is no file# on the brief, so I am not positive that it has been filed. I found this on another gun related forum and without a file#, I cannot attest to its authenticity. It certainly seems, however, that Bill Akins is on the right track to pursue this matter.

4V50 Gary
March 4, 2008, 08:59 PM
Thanks for the news and the link. It's fascinating how he took a simple concept and built a stock around it. Here's a link to a letter from the owner. Open letter from the inventor (http://redstradingpost.blogspot.com/2007/12/open-letter-from-bill-akins-of-akins.html)

March 4, 2008, 10:16 PM
I would classify the stock as borderline brilliant. The one thing I would like to see come of this is a set of guidelines, hard and fast, and in writing, that the tech branch of BATFE has to follow when making decisions. Even non gun enthusiasts would be able to see that BATFE applies its rulings in an arbitrary fashion given the facts of this case.

"...yeah, that's OK, you can do that..." 3 years and hundreds of thousands of dollars later..."...sorry, we changed our minds, you have to cease and desist or become an instant felon..."

That is not how the law is supposed to work.

March 5, 2008, 01:05 AM
I hope he gets somewhere with his lawsuit.

Not just because it's a totally cool invention, but also because the BATFE also said it wasn't a MG several times before changing their minds.

March 5, 2008, 02:35 AM
I hope he wins a bundle. They sure cost him one...

March 5, 2008, 03:26 AM
I read the suit and the supporting documents. Stephen Halbrook takes BATF to task, using their own statements, previous rulings and even their previous testimony in another case. Yet BATF still insists that it's a MG because it supposedly fires multiple rounds with "a single function of the trigger".

Which is total bull pucky.

Bill Akins commented on this on the California Calguns site about how the gun operates. I think the issue could be resolved fairly easily with a short demonstration.

Said demonstration would require drilling a hole in the stock unit, behind the trigger-finger stops to allow a rod or nail to be inserted during firing. By inserting a rod when the trigger is rearward and interrupting the trigger operation it would show that the trigger is physically disconnected from the shooter's finger. Thus, the mechanism is NOT firing multiple shots with a single trigger movement. (Alternatively a light/photocell could be used to count the number of times the trigger pulls away from the finger.)

I do hope Akins prevails over the BATmen in this case. He found a specific definition in the law and engineered a legal method to speed up a semi-auto firearm's operation without turning it into a true machinegun.

For those not familiar with his stock design, here's an animated GIF file that shows how it works.

March 5, 2008, 07:18 PM
I feel the same about the 1919 AW-SIM.

March 6, 2008, 02:22 PM
It does not help them much that what they sent to the ATF and what they where selling are for different firearms. Or that they did not send the final product in for final review.