Author
Message
para_frame
<=Porsche 944. Nurse Turtle.
Offline
Posts: 8767
Feedback: 100% (6)
Posted: 9/11/2012 11:49:27 AM EST
I found a 6 digit SN Mauser C96 in 30 Mauser in fair condition with repo stock and holster harness for $650 today. My question is I remember reading something about the use of the stock only being exempt from the NFA if it is the original stock (I know it is with Browning Hi Powers). Am I remembering correctly? If I am, does the ATF still allow people to register them as C&R SBRs or would it be like registering a new SBR? (Ignore California laws for the purpose of this thread please, you will get them wrong, thanks.)
I'd rather die on my feet then live on my knees.

I came into this world kicking, screaming, and covered in somebody else's blood, and i have no problem going out that way.
andrasik
Sunday morning metal head
Offline
Posts: 24806
Feedback: 100% (16)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/11/2012 11:50:14 AM EST
Exempt only if it is original.
"The woods are lovely, dark and deep. But I have promises to keep, and miles to go before I sleep."
Award: 24/365 Offical Stamp Collecting Expert
Award: 24/365 Most Clueless Award
para_frame
<=Porsche 944. Nurse Turtle.
Offline
Posts: 8768
Feedback: 100% (6)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/11/2012 12:16:15 PM EST
Well that answers my first question (I also found the ATFs page on "Weapons Removed From The NFA And Removed From the GCA") it also looks like the ATF won't simply register the antique pistol as a C&R SBR If I sent in the form, they would list it as a new SBR. Oh well.
I'd rather die on my feet then live on my knees.

I came into this world kicking, screaming, and covered in somebody else's blood, and i have no problem going out that way.
andrasik
Sunday morning metal head
Offline
Posts: 24812
Feedback: 100% (16)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/11/2012 12:18:57 PM EST
Originally Posted By para_frame:
Well that answers my first question (I also found the ATFs page on "Weapons Removed From The NFA And Removed From the GCA") it also looks like the ATF won't simply register the antique pistol as a C&R SBR If I sent in the form, they would list it as a new SBR. Oh well.


I figured that would be the case.

The title of a Form 1 is "Application to make and register a firearm" - emphasis mine.
"The woods are lovely, dark and deep. But I have promises to keep, and miles to go before I sleep."
Award: 24/365 Offical Stamp Collecting Expert
Award: 24/365 Most Clueless Award
Goldenlight
Offline
Posts: 1590
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/12/2012 2:26:04 AM EST
About 25 years ago, I bought an 'arsenal rework' 9mm C96 Mauser, which came with a modern reproduction stock.

I called the ATF, and spoke with several people, who ALL told me that my pistol, which had been rechambered from 30 Mauser to 9mm, and had the new stock, was completely legal, because it was on a very short list of handguns for which the modern stock was legal, because millions of these has been originally sold with the shoulder stock. Many of the stocks did not survive for 70, 80 or 90 years after they were made, and for whatever reason, it was OK to add a modern stock.

All of the people I talked to said variations of the same story, and they all referenced this 'short list' of handguns which were legal with modern shoulder stocks.

The reason I talked to several different people was because I was also interested in getting a modern shoulder stock for my WWII Nazi Luger. The call got forwarded several times, while people tried to figure out if my Luger would be legal, because there were some Lugers on the list. It turned out that my Luger wasn't legal to put a modern stock on.

Now, this WAS 25 years ago, but everyone I talked to were very clear on the stock for my C96 being legal. And, they were all very police and professional, as well. They put the paperwork to legally add a shoulder stock in the mail for me, but the $200 fee wasn't something I wanted to pay.

I shot the gun at the range a number of times, but traded it towards a 1911. THe dealer looked over the shoulder stock, which I had refinished, and he was happy to get it trade, as he said people really like them.

The laws may have changed, but if I hadn't traded that C96 away, I'd still own it, and its shoulder stock today, and would have thought it was completely legal.
Gelgoog
Offline
Posts: 2429
Feedback: 100% (6)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/12/2012 8:27:31 AM EST
Had a Canadian Inglis with original shoulder stock. Not as fun to shoot as you might think
timkel
Offline
Posts: 634
Feedback: 100% (4)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/12/2012 8:38:45 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/12/2012 9:04:22 AM EST by timkel]
I'm no lawyer. But a repro stock used to be legal on a C&R original Broomhandle pistol. They are exempt from NFA along with some Inglis and Luger pistols.

This is a sample letter I found on net. This letter was not in response to a C-96. But you get the idea.

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO AND FIREARMS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20226

MAY 29 1981

T:T:F:CHB
7540
Dr.
Odin international
Fairfax, VA

Dear Dr. :

This refers to your letters of March 13 and March 30, 1981, in which you ask that certain Luger and Browning Hi-Power pistols equipped with reproduction shoulder stocks be considered for removal from the provisions of the National Firearms Act.

It is not the policy of this Bureau to render a classification on a shoulder stock which in and of itself is not subject to the provisions of the Gun Control Act or the NFA. However, as you are aware, certain Luger and Browning Hi-Power pistols when accompanied by original shoulder stocks have been removed from the purview of the NFA.

Our Firearms Classification Panel has examined your request and it is their opinion that the above mentioned pistols equipped with currently made reproduction shoulder stocks which either duplicate or closely approximate the dimensions and configuration of the original stocks would also be primarily of interest to collectors
and not likely to be used as weapons. Therefore, any Luger or Browning Hi-Power pistol which would be removed from the purview of the NFA if equipped with an original shoulder stock, would also not be subject to the NFA if equipped with a reproduction shoulder stock which either duplicates or closely approximates the dimensions and configuration of the original stock.

It must be pointed out that should one of the subject reproduction stocks be attached to any handgun which has not been specifically removed from the purview of the NFA with an original stock, the combination would be subject to all of the registration and transfer provisions of the NFA.

We trust that the foregoing has been responsive to your inquiry.
If we can be of any further assistance, please contact us.

Sincerely yours,

[signed]
C. Michael Hoffman
Assistant Director
(Technical and Scientific Services)
Originally Posted By para_frame:
I found a 6 digit SN Mauser C96 in 30 Mauser in fair condition with repo stock and holster harness for $650 today. My question is I remember reading something about the use of the stock only being exempt from the NFA if it is the original stock (I know it is with Browning Hi Powers). Am I remembering correctly? If I am, does the ATF still allow people to register them as C&R SBRs or would it be like registering a new SBR? (Ignore California laws for the purpose of this thread please, you will get them wrong, thanks.)


Makarov
Member
Offline
Posts: 6095
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/12/2012 9:42:03 AM EST
Originally Posted By timkel:
I'm no lawyer. But a repro stock used to be legal on a C&R original Broomhandle pistol. They are exempt from NFA along with some Inglis and Luger pistols.

This is a sample letter I found on net. This letter was not in response to a C-96. But you get the idea.

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO AND FIREARMS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20226

MAY 29 1981

T:T:F:CHB
7540
Dr.
Odin international
Fairfax, VA

Dear Dr. :

This refers to your letters of March 13 and March 30, 1981, in which you ask that certain Luger and Browning Hi-Power pistols equipped with reproduction shoulder stocks be considered for removal from the provisions of the National Firearms Act.

It is not the policy of this Bureau to render a classification on a shoulder stock which in and of itself is not subject to the provisions of the Gun Control Act or the NFA. However, as you are aware, certain Luger and Browning Hi-Power pistols when accompanied by original shoulder stocks have been removed from the purview of the NFA.

Our Firearms Classification Panel has examined your request and it is their opinion that the above mentioned pistols equipped with currently made reproduction shoulder stocks which either duplicate or closely approximate the dimensions and configuration of the original stocks would also be primarily of interest to collectors
and not likely to be used as weapons. Therefore, any Luger or Browning Hi-Power pistol which would be removed from the purview of the NFA if equipped with an original shoulder stock, would also not be subject to the NFA if equipped with a reproduction shoulder stock which either duplicates or closely approximates the dimensions and configuration of the original stock.

It must be pointed out that should one of the subject reproduction stocks be attached to any handgun which has not been specifically removed from the purview of the NFA with an original stock, the combination would be subject to all of the registration and transfer provisions of the NFA.

We trust that the foregoing has been responsive to your inquiry.
If we can be of any further assistance, please contact us.

Sincerely yours,

[signed]
C. Michael Hoffman
Assistant Director
(Technical and Scientific Services)
Originally Posted By para_frame:
I found a 6 digit SN Mauser C96 in 30 Mauser in fair condition with repo stock and holster harness for $650 today. My question is I remember reading something about the use of the stock only being exempt from the NFA if it is the original stock (I know it is with Browning Hi Powers). Am I remembering correctly? If I am, does the ATF still allow people to register them as C&R SBRs or would it be like registering a new SBR? (Ignore California laws for the purpose of this thread please, you will get them wrong, thanks.)




The problem is that ATF flip-flops on this issue and the letters ARE VERY FIREARM SPECIFIC. They also are not binding unless you obtain a specific written opinion regarding a specific (by the serial number) firearm. In addition to the 1981 "opinion" (cited above) ATF subsequently issued a seemingly contradictory opinion in 1999 in which they stated that a reproduction shoulder stock WOULD NOT be legal (an original stock would still be legal) BUT the firearm in question was specifically a Canadian Inglis No.1 BHP (not Belgian). Now to muddy the waters even further, in 2002 ATF issued another opinion affirming that "Mauser model 1896 pistols with reproduction shoulder stocks ARE LEGAL (as non-NFA items) provided the pistol is original production (not a modern reproduction) and the stock is a "duplicate or closely approximates the original design". Now for the kicker-READY-If you would like to read/print an official copy of these opinions on the ATF website, YOU CAN'T!!! While dealers and collectors are betting time in a Federal prison for violating the SBR rule, there is no "Official" notice that this or that configuration is legal or not. You can find a lot of bits and pieces of these letters on the Internet but none are complete (at least the ones I have seen) and they all look is if they could (or have) be easily altered or faked.

Personally, I believe the reproduction shoulder stocks on an original Mauser "Broomhandle" fitted for such a stock by the manufacturer is legal and does not require an NFA stamp. However, if I ever owned such a combination (original Broomhandle with a repro stock) I would only be able to show a Judge and Jury a screen shot from the Internet as a defense against prosecution by ATF. A position I would not want to be in