Why the big deal about pistol stocks?

D

Dr. Strangelove

New member
After reading the "Legality of a Removable Rifle Stock on a Pistol?" http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3523311#post3523311 thread, I'm just confused. Why does it make any difference whether or not someone puts a stock on a pistol? It doesn't make it any more powerful or into an automatic weapon, it just makes it..... longer. :confused:

So I could get a pistol with a 24" barrel in a rifle cartridge if I wanted to convince someone to build it, but not a rifle with a 10" barrel in a pistol cartridge? What? What sense does that make?

The Taurus Judge™, is ok as a pistol that fires shotgun rounds, but I couldn't attach a stock to it or have a normal shotgun with the same barrel length as the pistol? Again, what?

This actually is a serious question for you NFA types, why do these laws make sense? What difference does it make how long a barrel is or if I put a stock on something or not? A firearm is a firearm, in my eyes.

Since I'm currently looking for a job anyway, maybe I should go to work for the BATF and get this craziness straightened out!
 
Back in the early '30s, there were several gangsters running around with cut down BARs (full auto .30-06) along with Thompson subguns and cut down shotguns and more common rifles. Easy to conceal while robbing banks. The government didn't think they could ban any type of gun, so they decided to tax them. This did two things. One, average citizens couldn't afford NFA guns and had to live without them. Two, BGs didn't register their guns and thus acquired another federal charge when arrested. At the time, they wanted to include all handguns as NFA items, but this was dropped.

At that time, they defined a short barreled rifle as a shoulder fired weapon with an overall length less than <26" or a barrel <16" (I think this was originally 18", but was lowered to 16").

And these many years later, you are still stuck with this definition and prohibited from putting a shoulder stock on a non-NFA registered handgun.

PS. Caliber doesn't matter, just demensions and a shoulder stock. You can already buy AR (.223) and AK (7.62x39) handguns.
 
Last edited:
This actually is a serious question for you NFA types, why do these laws make sense? What difference does it make how long a barrel is or if I put a stock on something or not? A firearm is a firearm, in my eyes.

Since I'm currently looking for a job anyway, maybe I should go to work for the BATF and get this craziness straightened out!
Click to expand...

This is a serious answer to you Dr. Srangelove, they don't make sense. What maters is the ATF says "you can't put a stock on a handgun, have a rifle or shotgun with a short barrel, or have a fullauto without giving us $200 first"

HKmp5SD nailed it with his explanation.

Good luck straightening out the BATF!
 
PS. Caliber doesn't matter, just demensions and a shoulder stock. You can already buy AR (.223) and AK (7.62x39) handguns.
Click to expand...

Oh, I know, the XP-100 and TC's have been around for years, more of an exercise in thought. I just don't see why we can't have reasonable laws that make sense.

Another thing that just popped in my mind, since it's a tax stamp, why can't you just buy the stamp, like any other tax? Why does it require the massive paperwork it does? Seems like if it's just a tax stamp, anybody with the money should be able to buy one.
 
Last edited:
I know that newly made handguns with shoulder stocks are considered SBR's, but what about C&R guns like C96 Mausers, Lugers, and some GP35 Hi-Powers that were originally made with detatchable shoulder stocks (often doubling as holsters)? Are those still subject to NFA rules or are they exempt?
 
but what about C&R guns like C96 Mausers, Lugers, and some GP35 Hi-Powers that were originally made with detatchable shoulder stocks
Click to expand...

Amazingly, ATF can't make up their mind.

They say that C&R guns with the original shoulder stock are exempt from the NFA.

They then state that a C&R gun with a reproduction stock is also exempt:

http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/atf_letter58.txt

Only to turn around and say a Canadian Inglis No.1 Chinese contract Browning Hi Power with a reproduction stock still falls under the NFA.

http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/atf_letter70.txt
 
Let me cornfuse this some more.

I bought a VQ 10/22 receiver and built a Pistol.

I then put a full stock and a 16" bbl on it.

Then I took the full stock back off and put an 11" bbl back on it.

Perfectly legal

Buy a ruger 10/22 and put an 11" bbl and a buttstockless stock......NFA Violation:confused::rolleyes:;)
 
Since I'm currently looking for a job anyway, maybe I should go to work for the BATF and get this craziness straightened out!
Click to expand...

Please... just remember to bring some wader's and a good shovel cause there's going to be a lot of [stuff] that needs shoveling.
 
WRONG, guys, it is not BATFE making those rules, it is another bunch of idiots we call Congress. BATFE enforces the laws and is authorized to make certain regulations, but the business of short barrel rifles and shotguns and making pistols out of rifles is IN THE LAW. If you want to change the law, write to your congressman and senators (lotsa luck!), and stop ranting about BATFE.

Jim
 
WRONG, guys, it is not BATFE making those rules, it is another bunch of idiots we call Congress.
Click to expand...

Shh... Don't you know what a scapegoat is?? :D

And sadly I don't think there is going to be much reasoning or persuading with the aforementioned bunch of morons we call Congress. VOTE THE BUMS OUT!!
 
Let me cornfuse this some more.

I bought a VQ 10/22 receiver and built a Pistol.

I then put a full stock and a 16" bbl on it.
Click to expand...

Was the receiver registered as a pistol to begin with? If not you were in the wrong from the getgo. If it was, bully for you.
 
I bought a VQ 10/22 receiver and built a Pistol.

I then put a full stock and a 16" bbl on it.

Then I took the full stock back off and put an 11" bbl back on it.

Perfectly legal
Click to expand...

Once a rifle always a rifle. You can't go from pistol to rifle to pistol. Doesn't work that way. Sure you can get away with it (how would they ever know?) except you are admitting to it in a public forum.
 
I did my research prior to doing this project.

See HKmp5sd's post. I don't have the link handy, but you can research it easily.
 
If you are waiting for NFA regulations to make sense, you could be waiting awhile.

As far as Thompson Centerfire and the ATF, ATF still regularly issues letters on regulation that would seem to be in conflict with the ruling in that case. For example, they still contend that two SBR uppers, a registered SBR lower and an unregistered 16" complete rifle constitutes an unregistered NFA weapon. That would seem to be in conflict with Thompson Centerfire to me; but the ATF is sticking to that.

Unless you want to be the guy who risks the federal charge and pays the lawyers to appeal it to the Supreme Court, I would pay attention to the written answers the ATF gives and ignore the holding in Thompson Centerfire.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top