Strange Question....

I have a friend that has a broomhandle. He was reading the ATF page and now has a question.

It is illegal to have a smooth bore pistol, right? Well, the barrel of this broomhandle has been shot out, no lands or grooves to be had/seen. It looks as if it never had them in fact.

Is this pistol legal or illegal? He didn't get it to shoot it, just to look at it (yes, he is "one of those" :rolleyes: , collector, not a shooter). He doesn't want to get it rebarreled (or a sleeve put in) because that would take away it's historical value and he sure in the heck doesn't want to have to turn it in.

Since it's a C&R type gun, is it exempt from the rules?

Thanks,

Wayne

I think some oldest Lugers show same wear - I'd have thought it was OK due to age and type and probably history. It has not we assume been reamed or modified to make it as described.

I daresay critical metallurgical analysis might even be able to prove past rifling existence - bit like the way missing SN's can be viewed.

That tho is pure gut feeling.

Not "exempt", but not an issue, either. As long as the gun has not been lapped/bored smooth, it is simply a hard-used C&R showpiece. This is mostly an action/intent question: you can own a Sten kit, and a dummy receiver, but if you own a mil-spec receiver tube, and an unmodified FA Sten kit, you'll have some hard questions to answer.

If he's really concerned, he should write the ATFE local Tech Branch, and get a letter of clarification to keep in the safe.

The question ultimately will likely be answered by a couple step rubric:

- Was the firearm *manufactured* with a smooth barrel? (In the case of a broomhandle, no)
- Was the firearm intentionally modified with the intent to create a smoothbore (in the case of one simply shot out, again, no)?

If you answer no honestly to both questions, I wouldn't worry about it in the slightest.

C&R guns are not exempt from the other rules unless specifically mentioned - it's why you can have a stock with the broomhandle, for instance, and not with a Glock 17, and not have to pay the tax stamp or jump through the hoops.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rfurtkamp

The question ultimately will likely be answered by a couple step rubric:

- Was the firearm *manufactured* with a smooth barrel? (In the case of a broomhandle, no)
- Was the firearm intentionally modified with the intent to create a smoothbore (in the case of one simply shot out, again, no)?

If you answer no honestly to both questions, I wouldn't worry about it in the slightest.

C&R guns are not exempt from the other rules unless specifically mentioned - it's why you can have a stock with the broomhandle, for instance, and not with a Glock 17, and not have to pay the tax stamp or jump through the hoops.

---

What he said +1 you have to build or modify not just wear out.

Thanks for the replies. We took it to a metalologist (sp) that I know and under a very high power microscope you could "see" the lands and grooves. Since he works for the state he signed a document saying that yes the gun did have lands and grooves but they are hard to see with the naked eye.

After we did that we got to "see" the entire gun under the scope. You'd be amazed at what that thing will pick up that you don't see.

Wayne