bmarvin Posted May 8, 2018 Report Share Posted May 8, 2018 I've started collecting C&R stocked pistols (High Power, Mauser, Colt Woodsman)I've read conflicting informationOne camp says that unless it's specifically named as exempt from NFA by the ATF then it must be registered.The other side says that if a C&R pistol was slotted for a stock and a stock was produced at that time, then the pistol can legally have the stock.The ATF has written letters allowing reproduction stocks on Broom Handles, Lugers and High Powers. Early Radom pistols were slotted but original stocks are impossible to find. They are not listed as exempt from NFA on the C&R list.Is a C&R slotted Radom legal with a reproduction stock?Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jl7422 Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 Stocked pistol must be specifically listed as exempted from the NFA in order to be so. As you review the list, some are noted by date of manufacture, some by serial number range, some by a blanket description, some by specific serial number. If your Radom example is not specifically listed there is a process for adding it by petitioning the ATF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timkel Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 I also collect C&R stocked pistols. The common ones are specifically exempt but some still are not listed. I have wondered about the Astra Star, Random, and Mauser 1934 pistols. Astra Star model Ahttps://www.gunbroker.com/item/769728277 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jl7422 Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 The Star Model A is listed and is exempt from NFA when accompanied with original holster stock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSMGguy Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 (edited) "Is a C&R slotted Radom legal with a reproduction stock?" No, looks like it isn't, and that possessing both the pistol and the stock constitute possession of a prohibited weapon, whether the stock is mounted to the gun or not. The ATF is probably never going to ask to inspect the gun, but they have every right to. Why take the chance? Along the same lines, WWII Canadian Chinese contract Inglis Hi-Power pistols with their ORIGINAL stock/holsters are specifically mentioned in ATF 5300.11. Reproduction stocks have been sold in the US for years, many with fake Canadian markings. Is it legal to own both the pistol (or any other slotted hi-power) and the repro stock? Read the letter linked below. What if an owner has both the Inglis CH Hi-Power and the original stock, and also owns another slotted Hi-Power not specifically mentioned. Does that second Hi-Power constitute a prohibited weapon? http://www.titleii.com/bardwell/atf_letter70.txt Edited May 9, 2018 by TSMGguy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jl7422 Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 The question posed by TSMGguy comes up periodically among Luger collectors--most all wartime Lugers have the stock lug but only specific ones (navies, artilleries, carbines) are legal with the stock. So you've got a stocked artillery and 3 more wartime guns with stock lugs on the frames. . . the collective thinking in the luger community is if you possess the proper approved combination of gun and stock, and do not attach the stock to a non-designated pistol, you are not in a "constructive possession" violation. The reality is these pieces so seldom come out to the range, and people know so little about them, the question never really comes up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StooperZero Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 (edited) I blame the internet for a lot of confusion on this topic- it's usually from people who don't own anything even related to the issue. They just blab away based on what they've "heard or read" . Other than this site and one or 2 others which have real owners/collectors VS fanboys or youtube plebs , I don't even click on these types of forum threads anymore in those places. If the atf is coming at anyone with a "constructive possession" charge, They're already up to their eyeballs in something much worse. **" I have wondered about the Astra Star, Random, and Mauser 1934 pistols." ** Biggest thing is even finding one other than auction sites that won't run you into the poor house. Having shot some strange stocked pistols of that era, I'm basically convinced it was a cool gimmick to sell more pistols. I'd take a double action revolver VS my stocked C96 any day. Edited May 9, 2018 by StooperZero Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmarvin Posted May 9, 2018 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 My thoughts seem to be the same as everyone here. If it's not listed as exempt, it needs to be registered or it's illegal.Thanks for the confirmation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StooperZero Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 If it's not listed as exempt, it needs to be registered or it's illegal. OR it's so rare they don't even have an example to go by. If you got the $$$$ for that category of stuff, Its worth submitting a inquiry/petition to have it added to the list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalbert Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 I'd like to hear the The Lone Ranger's opinion on this. Please don't take this as gospel, but thinking back to the 80's, I know my local gun shop owner was paranoid about only certain pistols having stocks, and that they needed to be original. However, I remember the owner saying something about a change in the rules in the 1990's. I don't recall specifics, but I remember that something changed, whether it was a clarification letter he received from ATF, or a regulatory change. I'd like to see if The Lone Ranger knows about my recollection. David Albertdalbert@sturmgewehr.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timkel Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 Something must have changed. Way back I remember seeing Broomhandles and Lugers with their slots welded so they could not accept a stock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StooperZero Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 Something must have changed. Way back I remember seeing Broomhandles and Lugers with their slots welded so they could not accept a stock. bubba'd welds or Versailles Treaty guns?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timkel Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 Something must have changed. Way back I remember seeing Broomhandles and Lugers with their slots welded so they could not accept a stock. bubba'd welds or Versailles Treaty guns?? The welds were not clean at all. Just a stick weld spot in the slot. Just enough metal to block the slot. So bubba would be my guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jl7422 Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 It is not uncommon to find Lugers and Broomhandles with the stock lug crudely removed. Post NFA '34 there was confusion about stocked pistols in general. More than a few owners decided to play it safe by rendering their pistol incapable of being attached to a stock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timkel Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 And if you have one, it can be repaired.https://www.gunbroker.com/item/769471198 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StooperZero Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 explains why i came across slotted broom handle grip frames awhile back . that would still be a lot of work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmarvin Posted May 10, 2018 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 This link has an ATF letter stating that reproduction stocks were allowable on Luger and Hi Powershttp://luger.gunboards.com/archive/index.php/t-28986.htmlOf course it's dated 1981 so the ATF could have changed their mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timkel Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 I can see why people were defacing their slots after 68 GCA passed. But in the 50 years since then the ATF has released several letters exempting C&R pistols with stocks from NFA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lone Ranger Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 Mr. Albert - no bells ringing here (except in my ears). Could be if I saw something, the light would come on or just something I am not aware of. Another possibility is that things can sit idle for many years and one day someone notices and it becomes "news" (two specific examples I can recall at the moment is transferring post-86 to importers or manufacturers when ceasing operation - never heard it mentioned then presto starting in 2008 everyone on the net cites it, although rarely 100% accurate - and alter/obliterate markings on NFA). I have inquired with a wiser person and will come back to update if anything useful comes up. Private correspondence is difficult - see the arm braces - three letters, three directions but only one letter was public so I would be hesitant to hang my hat on someone else's letter/product and yes, things change ala Akins Group where ATF wrote two classification letters on their stock design then reversed after they went into production. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimB Posted May 11, 2018 Report Share Posted May 11, 2018 Okay, a few points guys: Back in the 35 NFA EVERYTHING with a shoulder stock was NFA, even cap & ball revolvers. There was no initial Antique exemptionTreasury ignored the law for the most part, by the 50s exempted cap & ball, by the 70s were exempting certain fixed ammo firearms. Around 77 ? BATF issued a letter to odin international clearing their repro stocks on certain exempt Browing HPswhat happened was no one expected the flood of CH Inglis guns from Chinain the mid 90s Ed Owens issued his opinion that to be exempt they should be fitted only with original butts.That was Ed's opinion, nothing more. or less Okay... Since there have been folks who spun up repros of Polish 35' butts and Finn Lahti stocks that crop up attached to gunstruth ?nobody cares Most gunbroker Inglis guns with stocks are blatant NFA under Owens Now you want curious ? There are a few P08 smiths that will build your junker into either a perfect Naval or Artillery model, some even re serialize it.yeah so bozo can do a stock. base conversions run around $1500nobody really cares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now