More Crazy Stuff for the Mall Ninja...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Looks like an expensive and impractical carbine that wont do anything a high point 9mm carbine won't. High point carbines are reliable and i doubt they would get outshot by a glock with a shoulder stock.
 
Looks like a $200 tax stamp and a handgun forever reclassified as a Title II "short barreled rifle."

(Thus, moved to NFA sub-forum.)
 
All it is is a buttstock attached to a handgun, making it meant to be fired from the shoulder and thus a rifle. Which would be fine, if the barrel was over 16".

At that point (actually right at the moment you installed the shoulder stock), the ATF would consider that the firearm (the serial numbered Glock frame) IS a rifle, and putting the pistol barrel back into it (even if first removing the butt stock) would make it an unregistered Title II Short-Barreled Rifle. As in, "a firearm made from a rifle" as defined by the NFA '34.

Everyone seems to mention a longer barrel in these discussions. The NFA doesn't care how long the barrel of a handgun is. A 37' barrel on a handgun would be fine. It's the full butt stock that makes it intended to be fired from the shoulder -- and that's the distinction.
 
I like it... Not worth any money realistically, but still "cool"...
And if you started with a 5" threaded barrel on your Glock, could you screw-on an 11.1" extension to the barrel to make it a std carbine? I know it sort of defeats the goal, but it could be a work-around...

Or how about you mount the actual pistol in the rear of the butt-stock and have a bullpup trigger further forward with the longer barrel? hmmm....
 
And if you started with a 5" threaded barrel on your Glock, could you screw-on an 11.1" extension to the barrel to make it a std carbine? I know it sort of defeats the goal, but it could be a work-around...

Any removable (screw-on) barrel extension would not count toward making it a Title I rifle. The extension would have to be pinned and welded or otherwise permanantly attached.
 
I think I'd rather have my SUB-2000. Pistol caliber carbines seem pretty impractical to me but they are a lot of fun to shoot.
 
Looks like a $200 tax stamp and a handgun forever reclassified as a Title II "short barreled rifle."

(Thus, moved to NFA sub-forum.)
Just for the future, a firearm labeled SBR can be removed from the registry and brought back into Title 1 status. Unlike a MG which is once a MG, always an MG.
 
Yes, that is true, sort of. It actually isn't removed from the registry, FWIR, but a note is made in the registry that the gun with that description and serial number is no longer registered as a Title II weapon.
 
I also would not want to have a carbine made from a Glock. Every carbine, no matter what size or caliber, that I know of at least, has some from of manual safety. This is key because you're using a sling at most, not a holster. Glock handguns can get away with no safety because they rely on a high quality and secure holster to prevent anything from interacting with the trigger until you're drawing. Not so with a carbine. I would never sling a gun that I couldn't put on "SAFE". It's a neat idea, but I'll take a UMP any day.
 
The guys at Houston Armory had one of their full auto glocks outfitted that way in a showcase this weekend. Did not catch the price, was more interested in something I find a little more practical.........an real clean Uzi :)

http://www.houstonarmory.com/

If you drop them a line I am sure they will give you the full details on it. They are located in Stafford if anyone is interested in looking up their shop.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top