I know that being in possession of a short barrel for a rifle is considered constructive possession of a SBR but is being in possession of a stock for a pistol also constructively possessing a SBR? I know that pistols can be converted to rifles by adding a full length barrel and then adding the stock. This leads me to believe that it may be possible to possess an extra unattached stock for a pistol but I wanted to know if anyone knew the official ruling on this.
Can one possess an extra stock that fits a pistol?
- Thread starter DTakas
- Start date
I think it depends on the pistol. If you are talking about Lugers, Broomhandle Mausers and such. These have been added to the C&R list and removed from the NFA. As for a butstock for a modern gun, I'm sure there will be several diverse opinions posted. (All the way from "perfectly legal" to "completely illegal" and a few "it should be legal so don't pay any attention to what anybody else tells you" and "screw the law" 
)
Dean
)Dean
gunslinger555
New member
Contact the ATF and ask them, go right to the source. I would think its not legal.
Last edited:
silicon wolverine
New member
Ive never seen a definative BATFE ruling on this one. Id err on teh side of caution and have a "carbine kit" with stock and barrel together just in case.
SW
SW
Bingo. We have a winner.
If there is no other, legitimate use for which the stock can be used, you're on very thin ice. If you have the means to use the stock in a legal manner your possession of the stock would be ok (for example in conjunction with a 16" barrel for the pistol, thus making it a legal rifle).
That ruling removing shoulder stock pistols like the Mauser C96 applies ONLY when the stock is original. It doesn't have to be numbered to match the gun, but it has to be an original stock. So such a pistol with a repro stock is still under the NFA. I specifically inquired about a Belgian Browning High-Power with a Canadian Inglis stock, and was told it is an NFA firearm. Had the gun been an Inglis or the stock a Belgian one, the combination would not come under the NFA.
Jim
Jim
if you own shoulder stocks made for Glock, HK SP-89 etc and you also
own the firearms themselves, you must have a pistol which has previously
received Title 2 short bbl rifle approval for every pistol v stock combination.
It would not be an AOW as the pairing of stock/pistol creates a previously
defined status: short barrel rifle. AOW category exist for those firearms
which are not comfortably covered by any of the existing categories (short
bbl rifle, short bbl shotgun, rifle, handgun, shotgun, destructive device)
own the firearms themselves, you must have a pistol which has previously
received Title 2 short bbl rifle approval for every pistol v stock combination.
It would not be an AOW as the pairing of stock/pistol creates a previously
defined status: short barrel rifle. AOW category exist for those firearms
which are not comfortably covered by any of the existing categories (short
bbl rifle, short bbl shotgun, rifle, handgun, shotgun, destructive device)