AboveTheBest
Plinker
It seems to me that DNR would be chiefly concerned with the firearm's current state during use, and I can't understand why the fact that it could have a buttstock attached would give an AR pistol an advantage over one that could not have a buttstock (as it relates to taking game).
I am in no way arguing with the ATF regulation stated above, but I think the DNR is concerned with this on an entirely different level.
If they were to come to your house a week later to investigate a poaching tip, and found your SBR 300, you may have a hard time convincing them that you take the stock off while hunting. My thoughts above pertain only to my beliefs on DNR's stance on the actual use of the firearm, and does not take into account how you would prove your innocence if questioned later.
As as stated earlier, the only way to be sure would be to ask a Conservation Officer, but even that could yield a variety of results.
I am in no way arguing with the ATF regulation stated above, but I think the DNR is concerned with this on an entirely different level.
If they were to come to your house a week later to investigate a poaching tip, and found your SBR 300, you may have a hard time convincing them that you take the stock off while hunting. My thoughts above pertain only to my beliefs on DNR's stance on the actual use of the firearm, and does not take into account how you would prove your innocence if questioned later.
As as stated earlier, the only way to be sure would be to ask a Conservation Officer, but even that could yield a variety of results.
