Posted: 1/26/2003 12:58:40 PM EDT
|
I have a question about the legality of this product on a post ban. Here are some statements from the [url=http://www.riflestocks.com/html/arbt_features.html]company web page[/url]. [B]We believe that the ARBT stock is superior to all other tactical non-collapsible stocks on the market for the following reasons: *Note: The ARBT has not been ATF approved for post-ban rifles. Check all Local, State and Federal laws before installation.[/B] Now with the description of what features constitute an assault weapon: (B) a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of - [red](i) a folding or telescoping stock;[/red] (ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon; (iii) a bayonet mount; (iv) a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and (v) a grenade launcher; If this is a "non-collapsable stock" why is it not approved for post ban rifles? Why does it need to be ATF approved? The law doesn't read "a folding or telescoping stock or non-ATF approved fixed stock." It says "a folding or telescoping stock" so if a stock neither folds nor collapses it doesn't qualify as a feature of an assault weapon, right? Please help me understand this. |
|
It's not approved because they haven't submitted it for approval. They're not saying it's illegal, just that it might be construed to be illegal and they haven't sent a sample off for classification - so buyer beware. An adjustable stock is not a collapsing or folding stock, but ATF might decide the amount of adjustability it enjoys would qualify it as a collapsing stock, so the manufacturer is just covering their bets. |