Glock (or any semi auto pistol) SBR?

Discussion in 'Semi-Auto Handguns' started by wcohio, Jun 17, 2011.

  1. wcohio

    wcohio New Member

    71
    0
    0
    Hello. This is my first post here. I hope that I've put it in the correct forum.

    I've owned many firearms in the past. I particularly like shorter, lighter guns, but I also like accuracy. I could go the route of building and registering a AR short barrel, but that would cost about 1000 dollars after building and paying the tax for the SBR, considering it was even approved.

    I really want either a Glock or an MPA (mac clone). I like the size, accuracy, durability, and vast options for magazines and attachments. However, I do not like the lack of shoulder stock. So I want to find out how I can legally put one on a gun like these, and keep the cost down, while remaining legal.

    Is it legal to put a stock on either of these guns without registering an SBR? The glock seems to be the easiest to do this with. I am also wondering about the fore-end grip. That seems to have legal issues with a pistol, also.

    I know there's conversion kits, but for that price, I'm back looking at an SBR AR rifle.

    I don't understand why these laws exist to begin with. I understand concealment, but damn.
     
  2. c3shooter

    c3shooter Administrator Staff Member

    21,344
    221
    63
    First, if you start asking for laws to make sense, I am certain that you will have many diasappointments in life.

    As far as adding a shoulder stock to a handgun- no. A handgun is defined as being fired from the HAND (note the singular case of the noun HAND?) Adding a shoulder stock to a modern handgun makes it an SBR. So does adding a grip for the other HAND- as in a vertical handgrip.

    Now go get the duct tape, wrap your head so it does not explode BEFORE you read the next-

    A Browning Hi-Power, a P08 Luger, or a Mauser broomhandle pistol that was configured to acccept a shoulder stock can be equipped with an ORIGINAL shoulder stock, and NOT be an SBR. Exception in the law.

    You may want to look at some of the bullpup designs- they can use a 16 inch bbl, have overall 26 inches, and still be very small.

    EDIT: Dang it- where ARE my manners? first post? Welcome to the forums- good folks here, locals friendly, don't bite TOO much. When you get a minute, stop by the intro section, and say howdy.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2011

  3. canebrake

    canebrake New Member

    21,833
    2
    0
  4. sweeper22

    sweeper22 New Member

    2,706
    0
    0
    I would think the two most practical and cost effective directions to take would be either:

    AR pistol (no stock)- Can build for under $700. You can get complete pistol kits (everything minus the stripped lower) here for well under $600.

    Kel-Tec Sub 2000- Very light and compact pistol caliber (9mm/40sw) carbine rifle, cost is around $350 most places. They're quite simple and reliable, and can accept Glock mags. I really think this is could a good solution for you...

    [​IMG]
     
  5. orangello

    orangello New Member

    19,156
    0
    0
    Don't forget the lil Draco AK-type pistol. Romanian AK Draco Pistol #AKAGUN-PIS (available at many places, not just this one)

    Still no stock, but you could use a sling. $350~ + shipping.
     
  6. wcohio

    wcohio New Member

    71
    0
    0
    Thanks for the replies... I'm still pretty frustrated with it all.

    I've already had my share of the curio/relic guns like the mauser. Wasn't happy with my romanian AK, so I think that puts that out of the picture. I've seen a few AR pistol kits, but it seems like a full mag would put a lot of weight there where your grip hand is, making it harder to hold up and get a good shot in. That's my beef with pretty-much all pistols. Either the barrel is too long making it too front-heavy, or it's too heavy in back making it harder to sight.

    Bullpups are probably my favorite. I'd die for a Bushmaster M17S. Can't afford it though. The Sub2000 is definitely on my list, as is the MPA carbine (although it is hard to find).

    Does anyone know if kel tec is going to continue making their 22WMR carbine? That looked like a nice target gun, but I hear they discontinued them due to keyholing issues.
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2011
  7. Morgo

    Morgo New Member

    313
    0
    0
    One of the very few times the laws here actually work out better.
    This is still considered a pistol. Based on a ruger charger and nordic kit

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  8. AusLach

    AusLach New Member

    1,553
    0
    0
    You're such an ar$ehole :eek::D

    Next time I'm down your way I'm definitely hitting you up :cool:
     
  9. Morgo

    Morgo New Member

    313
    0
    0
    Make sure you do! Should have the the HERA GCC up and going by then (think glock carbine :) )
     
  10. wcohio

    wcohio New Member

    71
    0
    0
    That looks like a nice shooter, and ruger is a definite plus on it. So this is totally legal with no hassle? What kit did you use to convert the charger? I can only find that kit for the 10/22. Thanks
     
  11. orangello

    orangello New Member

    19,156
    0
    0
    Note his location and that laws vary geographically. :(
     
  12. Gatekeeper

    Gatekeeper New Member

    3,659
    0
    0
    Morgo and AUS are in Australia. So little different laws;)

    Makes me wonder though if our SBR paperwork, while a bit of a hassle, is easier or harder than what those guys put up with and go through to get each firearm?
    [​IMG]
     
  13. wcohio

    wcohio New Member

    71
    0
    0
    Yeah, true. It's not really that bad; all I need to do is fill out the paperwork and pay the tax; but it all just gives me this eerie feeling, and I don't understand the importance of this law. Having a stock will make a gun LESS concealable. The only thing a stock will affect is accuracy and comfort. I can't think of any other reason anyone would want one. I mean, seriously. You can buy an anti-tank rifle no problem, but putting a stock on a pistol will put you in prison.
     
  14. JonM

    JonM Moderator

    20,110
    15
    38
    thats correct. nfa laws make no sense because they were designed to keep firearms out of the hands of black people, mexican people and indian people in 1938. recently in 1968 the democrats decided cant have easy access for nfa items for white people too. then in 1986 ronald reagen decided increase the racist ban by outlawing all new machine guns.

    so the rules are the rules until we get real conservatives in charge of all three branches to rewrite or better yet remove nfa rules and the batfe.

    best bet is find a lawyer familiar with federal nfa and your state nfa rules. consult wih a nfa lawyer do not take for rote what a dealer tells ya lots of em go on hearsay. there is a dealer here in wis that thinks you go to jail for just touching a nfa weapon you dont personally own....
     
  15. Morgo

    Morgo New Member

    313
    0
    0
    Its a great shooter, with the new hornet trigger unit it puts a full mag into .5" at 25 yards from the factory barrel (which is cut down to 7")
    Perfectly legal here, at present, but as mentioned the laws vary by location :)
     
  16. Morgo

    Morgo New Member

    313
    0
    0
    Once your licenced here its not much of a hassle, juts need to fill out a PTA (permit to acquire) send it of in the mail and once it comes back you can buy what your after.
    This Ruger is my little loop hole exploit as it still meets the definition of a handgun here though we still can't have semi auto rifles so you guys are still way out in front even with the $200 tax stamp and paper work.
     
  17. wcohio

    wcohio New Member

    71
    0
    0
    Yeah, I learned my lesson from that. I bought a Taurus 9mm handgun in VA about 5 years ago, and they told me it was fine if I had the gun in my trunk. I got pulled over for a tail light that was out on the way home, and the cops gave me some shady story about, "Hey, there's been a lot of drugs moving through here; do you mind if we check your car?" I couldn't say no, because they would just hold me there until they got a warrant to search. So I agreed.

    I had the gun in the trunk in a locked case. I told him about it immediately, and he calls a deputy to the scene. Has me stand up against the wall of a building while they thoroughly inspect my brand new gun, in the case, locked in my trunk, with no bullets. He's sitting there waving it around on the side of the road for everyone to see as they drive by, with my girlfriend and I plastered up against the wall. He tried to give me some kind of crap about the gun being concealed, but said since it still had the "factory oil" on it - whatever - he suspected I was not intentionally committing a crime, and I could go, but I had to stick the gun up on the dashboard.
     
  18. big shrek

    big shrek Well-Known Member

    1,832
    43
    48
    Weird cop...that's backwards from just about everything they're taught down here...

    Reminder, never drive cars that are similar to those that drug dealers use...those old Chevy/Caddilac Box styles get pulled over more.
    I try to avoid Chevy products anways...gimme a Dodge or Ford :)

    "You ever consider a career in Southern Law Enforcement?" Crockett to Tubbs, First Episode of Miami Vice.

    Let's see, bikini babes 10 months of the year...nice weather, no snow...he might have a point ;)
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2011
  19. JonM

    JonM Moderator

    20,110
    15
    38
    you should not have consented to a search. tail light out is not grounds for a search warrant. neither is a cop pulling people over in a drug running area. what he did was very illegal as he coerced you into a search.

    for a cop to search a vehicle you must be suspected of an actual crime a broken tail light is not a crime. if you were drunk or had a open container of alchol or drugs in plain sight or were driving reckless they could have arrested you then searched the vehicle in conjunction with an arrest. even then they would be restricted to the passenger compartments until a warrant was issued or the vehicle impounded.
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2011
  20. robocop10mm

    robocop10mm Lifetime Supporting Member Lifetime Supporter

    11,380
    1
    0
    #1. He had no right search so he embarked on a fishing expedition. Remember these words "No sir, I have no contraband in my car, but you do not have consent to search my car."

    #2. He could not "hold you there until they got a warrant to search". A search warrant requires something called Probable Cause. If he had Probable Cause, he would not have needed a search warrant for a vehicle because of the moveablility of the car and something called exigent circumstances. Officers are allowed to detain people a resonable time. Holding you for hours awaiting a warrant on a flimsy traffic stop is not reasonable and anything discovered would certainly be subject to the exclusionary rule and inadmissable in court.

    Learn about your rights or they will be trampled on.