c96 + stock no longer NFA?

[heviarti]

I've been seeing alot of c96s with stock on gunbroker with no mention of NFA. have they been delisted? I'm talking stock and lug here...

[Trebor]

My understanding is that as long as it is an original stock, and not a repro, it is now legal. The change dates back about 10 or 15 years ago, I think.

It only applies to C&R items with original stocks, btw, not modern handguns or repro stocks.

[SaxonPig]

A number of years ago the ATF amended the restrictions on stocked pistols after collectors were horrified that folks were grinding off the attachments on Lugers. As I understand it, they are legal to use on any military pistol that originally had the stock attachment. I think even reproduction stocks may be used (I have seen them for sale) as long as the gun is original to use them.

[doubs43]

The grinding of the Luger stock lugs began with the NFA of 1934. The grinding resulted from people who did not understand the new law. The gun alone or the stock alone was allowed and the gun could be owned with a stock that did not have the iron. The stock with iron could also be owned if the lug had been ground and IMO that's where the confusion began.

Reproduction stocks ARE NOT legal for the C-96, Browning Hi-Power and the Luger. Original stocks are, of course, legal. (I have corrected this after reading dogtown tom's post which contains newer information than I was aware of.)

BUT, for the Luger, it MUST be the CORRECT stock type; e.g., a Navy Luger must have a Navy stock and the Artillery Luger must have an Artillery stock. Under NO circumstances is a stock of any kind allowed on a short barrel Luger.

Anyone with a C&R license should have the BATF rules and can verify what I'm saying.

[SaxonPig]

So you're saying the 6" Luger can be stocked but not the 4"?

I have to admit that doesn't sound right to me. Both were originally equipped with stocks and what difference does 2" make? If that's the law it would be another screwy one that makes no sense.

[dogtown tom]

doubs43 :..Reproduction stocks ARE legal for the C-96, Browning Hi-Power and the Luger...

Reproduction stocks are NOT legal for attachment to the Mauser C96, Browning Hi Power or Luger unless you hold a SBR tax stamp.

Current ATF regs say it has to be an original stock. As of 1999 a reproduction/replica/copy is an NFA violation unless you have a SBR tax stamp.

Only certain 96 Mauser, Lugers and HP's are exempt from the National Firearms Act. You can see the complete list at:http://www.atf.gov/firearms/curios/1972-2007/section3.pdf

It's getting harder and harder to tell an original from a copy. When the ATF ruled in 1981 that a replica stock holster was okay, quite a few very good copies were imported. Sportsman's Guide was selling Inglis HP wood stock copies last year for about $80 each. A genuine WWII vintage stock holster should run you at least $275-350.

ATF has issued conflicting "opinions" regarding replica stock/holsters.
I printed and keep both letters with my stocked Inglis.

From 1981 (said repros are okay):
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/atf_letter58.txt

From 1999 (said repros need $200 tax stamp):
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/atf_letter70.txt

****Only those Inglis Hi Powers with a Tangent rear sight are exempt from the NFA when a stock is attached. A number of fixed sight Inglis Hi Powers had a stock slot cut at the factory but ARE NOT exempt from the NFA.


.

[doubs43]

So you're saying the 6" Luger can be stocked but not the 4"?

Only if the 6" Luger in question was Naval issue. The list of firearms removed from the NFA list is specific on which models can be mated with an original stock.

I have corrected my earlier statement concerning reproduction stocks as dogtown tom's letter from the BATF reverses the earlier ruling that reproduction stocks were acceptable. The whole shoulder stock issue seems very silly to me but that's government.

[Jim Keenan]

When the NFA was first passed, the primary point of attack was the machnegun and the St. Valentine's Day Massacre was used to "prove" the need for the law.

But the Roosevelt administration did the usual bit of hauling in as exhibits every "gangster" gun they could think of, whether gangsters used them or not. Two special targets were seen as really "sneaky" and used only by foreign criminals - the silencer* and the shoulder stock pistol. The latter was especially evil since the idea of changing a common pistol into a rifle was certainly un-American.

So Congress threw them into the law along with other "underhanded" weapons and, of course, machineguns.

*Yes, I know, but they called it silencer then and the law still does.

Jim