View Single Post
Unread 09-03-2012, 10:57 AM   #10
tx_oil
User
 
tx_oil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 61
Thanks: 8
Thanked 18 Times in 13 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidJayUden View Post
Ed:
I respectfully disagree. Back in the day of the auto sears for the AR15, if you had one auto sear (or the bolt/carrier/trigger parts for the M16) AND you also had in your possession an AR15, it was "slap the cuffs on" time. The parts did not have to be on the gun.
So, my rationale that owning an artillery stock, not owning a pistol that it is legal on, would be as heinous in the eyes of the BATF.
It's probably academic, but that is one group that I sincerely hope to never do business with.
dju
The BATFE defines this as 'constructive intent', i.e, owning all the parts necessary to 'construct' a class III item. This is a completely different issue from owning a stock. Be aware, however, that in the eyes of the BATFE, an 18" shoelace is also considered a 'machine gun' and is prohibited.. because said shoelace can be used to bumpfire a semi-auto. Logic flies out the wndow when the alphabet boys get involved...
__________________
Invest in precious metals: Lead, Brass and Primers
tx_oil is offline   Reply With Quote