Ridge_Runner_5 So buy a HERA stock from the same shop you buy your Glock, on the same day, and you're good to go...
Huh?
Doing the above makes ZERO difference than if you bought your Glock at your local gunstore and the HERA from a mail order dealer. The TC case was about a manufacturers "kit" sold as a receiver, pistol barrel, rifle barrel and buttstock- all in one package.
If Glock sold a stock WITH the pistol, it might seem to be the same situation as the Thompson Center case. BUT......as ATF has said, the Supreme Court decision in favor of Thompson Center applies ONLY to that particular "kit", not to other pistol/carbine kits that may be manufactured in the future.
While ATF is correct in that the court decision was only about the TC kit, it is seldom that Supreme Court decisions are not applied to other similiar situations. The "Miranda ruling" didn't require every person who had not been read their rights at arrest to appeal their case to the SC.
IANAL, but ATF seemed to be applying the strictest interpretation of the National Firearms Act possible. It is the "firearm made from a rifle" language in the NFA that results in the ATF prosecution of these cases- so all of our ire cannot be directed solely at the ATF.
Common sense would tell me whether I have a handgun or a rifle in my hands. Being that my Glock left the factory as a handgun should not change that fact-ever. On the other hand it is rather dificult to actually make a rifle into another firearm without it looking like it was made from another firearm. When the NFA was passed, modular AR style firearms were decades from being invented, so typically the only "firearms made from a rifle" would have been bubba jobs- ie. rifles that had their barrel and buttstock sawed off to make a concealable firearm. It wouldn't be too much trouble for ATF to redefine what is a "firearm made from a rifle".
