7 thoughts on “File this Under Useless Crap I Want”

  1. Good luck with that since MN doesn’t allow Short Barreled Rifles. I assume there is a $200 NFA Tax stamp that is required for one of these guns.

    1. It’s actually manufactured as a pistol hence NFA laws do not apply to it. I don’t know how they get away with it exactly but everything I’ve read so far state it’s not a short barreled rifle under ATF regulations.

      Consistency and the ATF never go hand-in-hand after all.

      1. That is really weird as I remember the stock set I saw for a glock made it a short barreled rifle so I was under the impression that it was the stock itself that made it count as a rifle or shotgun less than the receiver. Otherwise I Should be able to get thst stupid stock set for my glock (which I do think is pointless but would be fun to mess with) without having to engrave and register my glock as a SBR. (And pay taxes on it)

        1. Yeah ATF laws in general make no sense. For instance if you put a stock on your Glock it’s a SBR but if you buy one of those carbine conversion kits that attach to your Glock’s frame it’s perfectly OK.

  2. You guys are thinking too hard about the NFA, it’s currently working exactly as intended.
    Getting rid of it is the only rational thing to do.

    1. You sir are completely correct. I think abolishing the National Firearms Act is something all of us can get behind.

      1. I think there is an angle we can use to that end. The NFA is a tax law intended specifically NOT to generate revenue. That, along with the Miller case, should be enough to form a solid argument.
        Not to mention that the law as it is written prohibits one from duct taping a length of 2×4 to, say a 1911s’ grip, which is in turn a device that can be used as a shoulder stock. Thereby making it illegal contraband forever.
        No-one in their right mind would ever try to defend the NFA then.

Comments are closed.