View Single Post
Unread 09-03-2012, 04:27 PM   #17
rhuff
Patron
LugerForum
Patron
 
rhuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Az.
Posts: 2,308
Thanks: 2,737
Thanked 993 Times in 729 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Wood View Post
Ed,
The regulation states "exemptions" and they all refer to stocks that have been removed from the purview of the NFA because they are associated with their respective model Lugers. For example look at the statement "This exemption applies only to the listed Naval Luger pistols if mated to the Naval Luger stock and will not apply if the Naval Luger pistol is mated to the Artillery stock". This one instance in particular that clearly states the intentions of the exemptions. You have to have the proper Luger to match up with the proper stock. If you have a stock and do not have the corresponding Luger to go with it, it is not exempt and therefore illegal.
So I stand by my statement that owing a Luger stock for which you do not have the proper corresponding model Luger, and you also own short barreled Luger(s) or other models of Lugers for which the stock is not correct, you have no exemption. Therefore the stock is illegal to own because it demonstrates "constructive intent" to create a SBR regardless of whether you ever attach it to one of the short barreled Lugers.


This was always my understanding, but I have been wrong many times before.
rhuff is offline   Reply With Quote