Navy Luger or not?

mrerick · 02-27-2017, 11:50 AM

Pay attention to John's post above.

Just owning the stock without a proper Artillery Luger could be considered "constructive possession" and be prosecuted.

Also, the first one looks refinished.

The second one with the very long barrel is more interesting. I suppose that it could be one of those modified by Pacific Arms after import to the USA although I don't recall them fitting Navy sights to them.

And no, barrels are factory serialized to the gun, and it would not be possible to restore it to original condition, although you could spend quite a bit to restore it to original configuration - and still have a shooter.

02-27-2017, 11:50 AM	#17
mrerick Super Moderator - Patron LugerForum Life Patron Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Eastern North Carolina, USA Posts: 3,919 Thanks: 1,377 Thanked 3,135 Times in 1,518 Posts	Pay attention to John's post above. Just owning the stock without a proper Artillery Luger could be considered "constructive possession" and be prosecuted. Also, the first one looks refinished. The second one with the very long barrel is more interesting. I suppose that it could be one of those modified by Pacific Arms after import to the USA although I don't recall them fitting Navy sights to them. And no, barrels are factory serialized to the gun, and it would not be possible to restore it to original condition, although you could spend quite a bit to restore it to original configuration - and still have a shooter. __________________ Igitur si vis pacem, para bellum - - Therefore if you want peace, prepare for war.