WTK can I put a butt stock on this pistol - Page 2

PhilOhio · 12-04-2009, 10:34 AM

Here we go again on the detachable stock debate.

Note also that ATF has, in writing, issued a ruling that a reproduction detachable stock may also be attached to these long barrelled Lugers. That's only because, years ago, I believe it was advanced collector and author Tom Nelson who made the effort to ask them. It related to his Collector's Armory repro stocks. This should give some indication of the seriousness, or lack thereof, with which ATF regards this never ending debate as to how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

There are indeed supervisory people within ATF who understand what law enforcement is all about, and how their employees' time should be budgeted effectively.

Sure, there may also be a few bean counters with political goals in mind...disciples of Chuck Schumer et al.

Note also that in ATF's published list of which Mauser C1896 Broomhandle models may legally have original or reproduction butt stocks attached, the answer is all of them. That includes the short barreled bolos. I.e., if it is a Broomhandle, it can have a stock. Period. I believe they worded it "all models", last time I looked. If anybody should make the written request to extend the wording to original C&R Lugers (over 50 years old), I imagine it would have to be granted, for the sake of consistency and easier enforcement.

Isn't it strange that nobody has made such a request to ATF? I guess it is more fun to perpetuate the silly debate.

Note also that all C&R 1935 Browning Hi-Power and Inglis pistols may have the original or repro stocks attached legally. Those barrels are roughly 5". Was ATF worried about street crime issues when that was decided? Of course not.

The Internet seems to be a wonderful outlet for a certain type of alarmist view, warning inexperienced collectors of the horrors which await them if they violate some obscure term of some obscure subparagraph of some vague rule on something having little to do with real world law enforcement and keeping the streets safe from armed thugs.

Asked about this issue a few years back, an ATF field agent of my Internet acquaintance said that if they tried to bring in a citizen on one of these goofy technical charges, ATF management and any sane prosecutor would laugh them out of the office and/or reassign them to non-mainstream duties more befitting their demonstrated lack of common sense.

But on the Internet, common sense is sometimes in short supply. ...such as how violating so-and-so will get you "10 years at the Graybar Hotel" where "you will be the girlfriend of a large man named Igor" who is doing time for molesting donkeys.

Perhaps somebody could cite a verifiable case where somebody has done time for attaching a shoulder stock to a C&R Luger with a 4" barrel, where no other alleged real world criminal violation was involved. Yes, it is true that a prosecutor might try to hang this one on a guy who was clearly guilty of a bunch of other things, and where this charge might be tacked on for good measure, and plea bargaining value.

Common sense should enter into everybody's process of deciding how to budget their worrying time. Otherwise, it just leads to unnecessarily strained sphincter muscles.

Edward Tinker · 12-04-2009, 10:53 AM

a bit of sarcasim and irritibility at the forum members?

you are always welcome to skip the thread or write it nicer.

Plus, why don't you do this?

Quote:

"Isn't it strange that nobody has made such a request to ATF? I guess it is more fun to perpetuate the silly debate."

UNLESS IT IS IN WRITING, THEN YES, INTERNET GUESSING WILL CONTINUE.

SHOW ME IN WRITING WHERE IT STATES WHAT YOU HAVE SAID AND I'LL POST IT HERE AND STICKY IT.

Ron Smith · 12-04-2009, 11:14 AM

Phil,

The "point" being, as you have so aptly pointed out. This is the Internet, available to anyone with a computer and a finger to operate it. Therefore, if we start posting that it's okay to violate the laws of the United States, on the grounds that they are silly, antiquated, unenforceable, minor, etc.

Or, that someone knows someone, who knows someone that said "they" wouldn't do anything about it. We would be on "their" list in short order.

The Law is the Law , no matter how minor, or what anyone's opinion on it's credibility may be.

A guy rolls a stop sign and gets pulled over. When the officer asks why he didn't stop? He says, "I slowed down, what's the big deal?" The officer has him step out, and starts beating him with his night stick. The officer asks," Now, do you want me to stop, or just slow down?"

Ron

Ron Wood · 12-04-2009, 12:05 PM

I would think that one of the reasons someone has not petitioned the BATFE to legalize the use of a stock on a short barreled Luger is that anyone that has been collecting Lugers with the requisite knowledge to determine model type, variations and authenticity knows that short barreled Lugers were not issued with stocks. Collectors are not interested in non-authentic combinations. The Lugers that have been exempt, e.g. LP08s, Navys, Carbines, and some shortbarreled Lugers with rare limited production stocks such as Ideal etc., have considerable intrinsic value and were issued or originally sold with stocks, therefore possession of these historically correct examples is logical. I have little sympathy for shooters who lament that they can’t attach a stock to their short barreled Luger. If you can’t stand on your hind legs and shoot a pistol as a handgun, you probably should have bought a rifle in the first place.

Soapbox off.

policeluger · 12-04-2009, 02:10 PM

Ron and Ron.....good points, so tired of folks posting crap here, just to hear themselves rattle.....

12-04-2009, 11:14 AM	#23
Ron Smith User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Orygun Posts: 4,243 Thanks: 118 Thanked 245 Times in 150 Posts	Phil, The "point" being, as you have so aptly pointed out. This is the Internet, available to anyone with a computer and a finger to operate it. Therefore, if we start posting that it's okay to violate the laws of the United States, on the grounds that they are silly, antiquated, unenforceable, minor, etc. Or, that someone knows someone, who knows someone that said "they" wouldn't do anything about it. We would be on "their" list in short order. The Law is the Law , no matter how minor, or what anyone's opinion on it's credibility may be. A guy rolls a stop sign and gets pulled over. When the officer asks why he didn't stop? He says, "I slowed down, what's the big deal?" The officer has him step out, and starts beating him with his night stick. The officer asks," Now, do you want me to stop, or just slow down?" Ron __________________ I Still Need DWM side plate #49... if anyone runs across a nice one. What ~Rudyard Kipling~ said...

12-04-2009, 12:05 PM	#24
Ron Wood Moderator 2010 LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Santa Teresa New Mexico just outside of the West Texas town of El Paso Posts: 7,005 Thanks: 1,087 Thanked 5,139 Times in 1,689 Posts	I would think that one of the reasons someone has not petitioned the BATFE to legalize the use of a stock on a short barreled Luger is that anyone that has been collecting Lugers with the requisite knowledge to determine model type, variations and authenticity knows that short barreled Lugers were not issued with stocks. Collectors are not interested in non-authentic combinations. The Lugers that have been exempt, e.g. LP08s, Navys, Carbines, and some shortbarreled Lugers with rare limited production stocks such as Ideal etc., have considerable intrinsic value and were issued or originally sold with stocks, therefore possession of these historically correct examples is logical. I have little sympathy for shooters who lament that they can’t attach a stock to their short barreled Luger. If you can’t stand on your hind legs and shoot a pistol as a handgun, you probably should have bought a rifle in the first place. Soapbox off. __________________ If it's made after 1918...it's a reproduction

12-04-2009, 10:34 AM	#21
PhilOhio User Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Ohio Posts: 145 Thanks: 5 Thanked 17 Times in 14 Posts	Here we go again on the detachable stock debate. Note also that ATF has, in writing, issued a ruling that a reproduction detachable stock may also be attached to these long barrelled Lugers. That's only because, years ago, I believe it was advanced collector and author Tom Nelson who made the effort to ask them. It related to his Collector's Armory repro stocks. This should give some indication of the seriousness, or lack thereof, with which ATF regards this never ending debate as to how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. There are indeed supervisory people within ATF who understand what law enforcement is all about, and how their employees' time should be budgeted effectively. Sure, there may also be a few bean counters with political goals in mind...disciples of Chuck Schumer et al. Note also that in ATF's published list of which Mauser C1896 Broomhandle models may legally have original or reproduction butt stocks attached, the answer is all of them. That includes the short barreled bolos. I.e., if it is a Broomhandle, it can have a stock. Period. I believe they worded it "all models", last time I looked. If anybody should make the written request to extend the wording to original C&R Lugers (over 50 years old), I imagine it would have to be granted, for the sake of consistency and easier enforcement. Isn't it strange that nobody has made such a request to ATF? I guess it is more fun to perpetuate the silly debate. Note also that all C&R 1935 Browning Hi-Power and Inglis pistols may have the original or repro stocks attached legally. Those barrels are roughly 5". Was ATF worried about street crime issues when that was decided? Of course not. The Internet seems to be a wonderful outlet for a certain type of alarmist view, warning inexperienced collectors of the horrors which await them if they violate some obscure term of some obscure subparagraph of some vague rule on something having little to do with real world law enforcement and keeping the streets safe from armed thugs. Asked about this issue a few years back, an ATF field agent of my Internet acquaintance said that if they tried to bring in a citizen on one of these goofy technical charges, ATF management and any sane prosecutor would laugh them out of the office and/or reassign them to non-mainstream duties more befitting their demonstrated lack of common sense. But on the Internet, common sense is sometimes in short supply. ...such as how violating so-and-so will get you "10 years at the Graybar Hotel" where "you will be the girlfriend of a large man named Igor" who is doing time for molesting donkeys. Perhaps somebody could cite a verifiable case where somebody has done time for attaching a shoulder stock to a C&R Luger with a 4" barrel, where no other alleged real world criminal violation was involved. Yes, it is true that a prosecutor might try to hang this one on a guy who was clearly guilty of a bunch of other things, and where this charge might be tacked on for good measure, and plea bargaining value. Common sense should enter into everybody's process of deciding how to budget their worrying time. Otherwise, it just leads to unnecessarily strained sphincter muscles.

12-04-2009, 02:10 PM	#25
policeluger RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Ca. Posts: 2,141 Thanks: 8 Thanked 89 Times in 54 Posts	Ron and Ron.....good points, so tired of folks posting crap here, just to hear themselves rattle.....