LugerForum Discussion Forums my profile | register | faq | search
upload photo | donate | calendar

Go Back   LugerForum Discussion Forums > General Discussion Forums > Off Topic & Other Firearms

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Unread 07-08-2019, 01:17 PM   #8
Olle
User
 
Olle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,149
Thanks: 159
Thanked 664 Times in 318 Posts
Default

This SBR business is starting to get ridiculous, especially since the "experts" at ATF have been going back and forth with it for years. IMO, an AK or AR-15 without buttstock is more dangerous than one with a stock, it's a very awkward weapon that can't even be aimed properly. Still, this configuration seems to be what ATF prefers in order to "satisfy the letter of the law".

I can't remember where I read this, but somebody traced down the origin of the SBR to an oversight in the NFA of 1934. The original proposal included a restriction that made handguns subject to the $200 tax stamp, so they had to define what constitutes a pistol. The proposed pistol restrictions were later removed, but some of the definitions were left in the final document. Thus, the law came to define a rifle of certain dimension as a pistol, and being a pistol it cannot have a buttstock. In other words: The whole SBR thing appears to stem from a simple mistake, which is now causing great confusion among gun owners, as well as ATF agents.
__________________
Deer Hollow Enterprises, LLC
Gun repair and restoration
Olle is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1998 - 2026, Lugerforum.com