Long barrel Luger w/scope
 

Gun Broker auction item #3545305 shows a very pretty Luger with a 12" barrel and a 1x scope. Does anyone have any thoughts on the story behind this weapon. The seller offers very little information.

Re: Long barrel Luger w/scope
 

Looks like an early post WWI commercial, possibly rebarreled by someone like Pacific Arms with a WWII Zf41 scope on it. The scopes were 1.5 power, and crude at best. The scope was originally fitted to the K98k rifle with a mount made into the rear sight and used more as a sharpshooters rifle.

Re: Long barrel Luger w/scope
 

Did you have the web site of Gun Broker.

I would like to have a look about this pistol.

Thanks a lot.

Mauro

www.gunbroker.com (EOM)
 

Re: Long barrel Luger w/scope
 

The most important thing about this Luger is the 10 years at Club Fed you are setting your self up for by having it. It is a short rifle and thereby a Title II weapon that requires registration with BATF and a Tax Stamp. Betcha those little niceties have not been observed.


Hope this helps,


Tom

Re: Long barrel Luger w/scope
 

Thanx Tom, it is a very important piece of information that the seller never mentions. Another example of,"Buyer Beware".

Re: Long barrel Luger w/scope
 

Wonder if any of the BATF boys monitor this site? They could be knocking on the present owners door as I type this!

Re: Long barrel Luger w/scope
 

BATF Enforcement side has an Intelligence section, at least some of which actively monitors Gun sales internet sites; You can bet thay already know about this piece.


FWIW,


Tom

Re: Long barrel Luger w/scope
 

How do we know that they aren't the ones putting it up for sale? They have been known to do set ups before (Ruby Ridge)

This would be a classic way to get access to a "private" collector. This looks like one that could have been confisticated. Over the years I've been offered great deals on such weapons, not worth Fed time in a pen. Man have I got some stories, but I'm sure a lot of us do.


Roadkill

Re: Long barrel Luger w/scope
 

After several years as a Type 03 FFL with a SOT, I can assure you I don't want to be in the same zip code with an unregistered Title II weapon. No gun is worth the potential downside that such risk entails.


Tom

No that should be entrapment.
 

Putting out for sale on the web, then getting non-knowledageble buyers to try and purchase it would be against federal law.


(There is a fine line there, but I don't think they'd do that, )

Re: This gun could be LEGALLY owned
 

To John Sabato,


Not to put too fine a point on it John, but the courts have held that it is the "iron" or attaching yoke when possessed with an ineligible pistol, that constituted the illegal act. The wood without the iron but with the pistol is legal. Hence so many C96 Mausers with "ironless" holster stocks.


FWIW,


Tom

Re: No that should be entrapment.
 

I am inclined to agree with you; BATF hasn't shown any inclination towards entrapment in the last several years. Certainly, since 9/11, they have had far bigger fish to fry.


Tom

Re: No that should be entrapment.
 

Hold on..the BATF has to justify their jobs (just like any other gov't agency). As for the "bigger fish to fry"..try telling that to the cops next time you get pulled over for going ten miles over the speed limit. Just suggest it and see if it helps. Not all Federales are bad people but like any job they have their turds floating around. (and yes, they ARE reading this).

Long barrel Luger w/scope??Makes me laugh or barf? (EOM)
 

Re: No that should be entrapment.
 

Would that be entrapment any more than the childporn stings? We've heard of the "candyman" network that's put lots of people away lately. They got a Madison City policeman nearby with that. The feds set up as a kid on the internet and pull the perverts in. (Good!)


Roadkill

Re: Long barrel Luger w/scope??Makes me laugh or barf?
 

I have one with a holographic sight, and it is a blast to shoot with a snail drum and shoulder stock. It wants to make me SMILE, and I do!!


Lonnie

Tom can you cite a court case that I could read.
 

I can see a violation by possession of both pieces of the stock, but not one or the other, as long as you owned an eligible pistol. I can't see how possession of just a stock iron and an ineligible Luger could constitute contructive posssession of a SBR... I would really like to read more about this. any pointers to cases would be appreciated.


I think that there are so many ironless shoulder stocks (luger, c96, and HP) because the nasty iron was removed and placed in safe custody before these fine weapons were removed from the purview of the NFA by ATF when then classified them as C&R... The parts were never rejoined because some potential buyers were intimidated by the ATF veiwpoint.


I don't advocate breaking the law, I just wish we could pin this down without getting a "reading" from ATF that would probably be considered worthless if someone had to go to court over an unintentional violation of this wierd regulation.


regards,


John Sabato

To each his own Bob Regers and Lonnie Zimmerman
 

Luger Varieties are what make them so much fun...


-John