Jump to content

AegisDei

Contributor
  • Content Count

    993
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by AegisDei

  1. Just found this site and now I gotta get a Saiga (or three). Now for a few questions:

     

    #1 I want to get a few 20 round drums so I will register the Saiga as a Destructive Device. Since the DD classification trumps the SBS classification, I would like to get several barrel lengths so I could have a more modular platform. Does the barrel detach from the receiver easily (like a pump gun) or is it more or less permantly attached (like a rifle)? Or put another way, would I have to get 2 guns, say a 19" and another 8 or 12 (to register as DD)"?

     

    #2 When I was a class 3 dealer 13 years ago, I remember reading that the DD classification also trumps the machine gun classification so what would prevent one from now converting the DD into a select fire model? That would be too cool!

     

    #3 Is there any possibility that the Saiga will stop being imported due to a future AWB, arbitrary ATF decision, ect. In other words, would it be better to buy several now and sit on them to use as future projects, investments, ect. It seems that the prices are and will continue to go up.

     

    #4 A guy on gunbroker is selling a "package" that includes a full stock threaded 19" model and a factory folding stock, railed handguard and front grip. I'm assuming that you couldn't attach (or probably even have together) these extra parts until it has the correct number of US made parts . Correct?

     

    Thanks for your consideration and expertise.

    1) Barrel is pressed on, maybe with a serious press you could get it off, but over time you'd deform the barrels and receiver. Better just to get multiple guns. There is also a chance that having a drum and a S12 (even if it is not a SBS) together would make it a DD. So if you get the drum, be prepared to register all the S12s you get as DDs.

     

    2) I'm fairly sure a DD and a Class III are two separate classifications and you'd have to register it as both, but this isn't my area of expertise.

     

    3) There's a possibility. Buy now, even if they're not banned they retain their resale value.

     

    4) Don't buy that goofy package. It's cheap and would violate 922r.

  2. From my experience and readings, they're the bottom of the barrel. I'd gladly pay $150 for an ugly ass Hi-Point instead. At least it is reliable and has a life-time warranty. It might be worth it for a $150 toy, but not for a $150 gun. Just my $0.02

  3. I am trying to get all my pistol grip conversation from DPH arms and would like the expert once over on my list to see if I am missing anything or have something I do not need.

     

    Tapco G2 Single Hook Trigger Group

     

    AK-47 Saw Grip

     

    Looks like the tapco?

     

    Pistol Grip Screw and Nut

     

    Do I need this. Do they come with the pistol grip?

     

     

    Disconnector Spring

     

    Axis pin retaining wire spring

     

    AK Receiver Swell Neck Rivets W/Cross Member

    Cobra 76 write up says a rivet kit. Will this do?

     

     

    Axis Pin Retaining Plate

     

    Same thing as blackjack's shepherd hook? this item is out of stock and real unsure if I need it. Saw a thread that says it makes it easier and also threads that say it needs to be modified and that twisties or clips can be used.

     

     

    AMD-65 US Made Gas Piston

     

    Is this compatible with my S12 and does it offer anything performance wise. I will get it if it does and just one less ruskie part in my toy for compliance.

     

    ANYTHING ELSE? Ideally I only want what I need and I want it all at once.

     

    Also there seems to be some discussion on how hard it is to retain the BHO and if it makes more sense to just get a safety with a notch cut in it.

     

    OH is there anyway to get the safety from scratching up the gun?

    Damn, you've done your research...I'm on my third or fourth conversion and I still can't get everything in one order, and it sux to pay shipping 2,3,4,etc times. So nice job!

     

    You don't need the disconnector spring, that will be part of the factory FCG. Just be careful taking it apart and you can dig it out, but if that puppy goes flying it's tough to find again. You will want the PG nut/screw. You might can find something at HD or Lowes taht will work, but it's easier just to buy that.

     

    The rivets are a bitch to buck. I got the rivet kit thinking it'd be cake, and it definitely was not. Be prepared that it's a bit tougher than the write-up makes it sound (at least for me). Cobra was a carpenter and I believe had family that were machinists, so he had the tools and know-how that I do not.

     

    I'd also suggest getting a shephard's crook (retaining plate) instead of the retaining wire. You'll thank yourself later. And if you get a domestic stock you won't need the piston. And you might want to consider a stock, I didn't see it on your list...

     

    There's no way I've found to keep the safety from scraping up the receiver...maybe a teflon coating to reduce the friction? I'd suggest the SWIFT safety selectors if you choose to replace the factory one. If you don't replace it, you might have to cut a small notch in it to get it to clear the new trigger position. Cut the notch very gingerly because if you take too much off the safety ceases to work which isn't too safe.

     

    You may also want a new trigger guard. I would go ahead and pick that up were I you. And a selector stop. And maybe an AK buffer. Beyond that, I think you're set from what I can remember. Goodluck!

  4. I want to buy a parts kit in one pass, all at the same time, no dicking around. Who makes such a kit so I can bring my rifle into 922R legal status so I can use 10rd AK mags in Kali? Dinzag? Tapco? SKSman? I dont see any real packages offered and I dont want to buy individual parts. If there isnt a kit, which parts are the best to change/upgrade so I can spend my money in a worthwhile manner? This will be for either a Saiga .223 or 7.62

    In california? Can you have a semi-auto even if it is 922r compliant?

  5. KySoldier is speaking the truth of my thoughts...

    ::Inserts foot in mouth:: Sorry Hunter, i should've done more research. Seemed like too crazy an idea to be real.

     

    I didn't think the receiver could handle that much pressure/recoil. You sure is hell won't find me shooting a .50BMG out of anything that weighs under 35lbs, and I definitely wouldn't ask my lower to handle it. Neat idea though!

  6. people need to face the facts. there WILL be gun laws. if people stopped saying whaaa whaaa dont amke any laws, and said well, maybe the people that know what they are talking about could actually MAKE laws that made SENSE so that our right to bear arms uninfringed is not harmed, we would all be a whole hell of a lot better off.

    I hate to say it, but I agree. If someone with a lick of sense could make functional gun laws, I'd be happy. I love the 2nd, but not everyone should be armed. The constitution was written for a different time where people had education, morals, and a lot to lose. Citizens, who had the right to bear arms, were landowners: they were not vagrant crackheads.

     

    Banning guns isn't the answer, and our constitution doesn't allow for it. But licensing is one possible answer, and the constitution allows for it. The constitution doesn't say "people have an unconditioned right to bear arms" it says "a right to bear arms." Just my $0.02.

     

    However, I think BVamp is right that a rotating cylinder magazine will likely reclassify the S12 as a DD, as little sense as that makes. I don't see how a shotgun is any worse than a glock with a 32rnd magazine or an Ak with a 75rnd drum. But unfortunately the .50" rule is the rule, so we may be SOL. But hopefully someday someone may realize there's a difference between unqualified rights and qualified and when that day comes, maybe this silliness can be avoided.

  7. If it hits the public market, it hits the public market. I don't think there's much to be done. Suppressing the market may work for a while, but eventually enough people will buy it that it will become part of the public domain. Maybe an injunction against manufacture, but I don't think that will work. There is nothing inherently DD about a magazine, it's the gun that is the DD. So we hope that the gun doesn't get reclassified or at least that we get a pleasant grandfather provision.

  8. Why would the Saiga-12 be considered a Destructive Device?? Just because it may have an aftermarket drum magazine?? If that is the case, wouldn't Beta Mags make AR-15's & HK MP-5 clones Destructive Devices? There is now a drum mag for Colt 1911 pistols out on the market. Is that next??

    I'm not saying it may not happen in the future, especially with the new Democratic Congress and Senate majority. I'm just trying to understand the paranoia, I mean reasoning.

    The DD comes into play when you go over a certain barrel diameter...I believe it's 0.50" but it might be 0.60". So shotguns are automatically more susceptible to reclassification. It's not a guarantee, but it's kind of like sleeping with women in Africa...you might have a jolly time or you might get HIV.

  9. I really prefer the Belarus. The quick release lever makes it much easier and locks in place. It's held a zero perfectly on my S20 and S12. From my understanding the screw downs just aren't quite as secure. I've not tried them, but I give two thumbs up to the Belarus.

  10. This week the washington D.C. circuit court of appeals ruled that the Second Amendment is an Individual right and concluded that the district of Columbia's ban on guns in the home is unconstitutional. This case will now head for the Supreme Court to be heard by the Justices.

     

     

    If upheld by the Supreme Court. The ownership of Assault weapons would be considered part of our second Amendment right's and would throw a monkey wrench in the democratic plan for H.R. 1022 the new assault weapons bill.

     

     

    The sporting purposes clause of the 1968 Gun Control Act would be void. This could potentially render all Federal gun laws currently on the books as illegal.

     

     

    Yes, we would be able to order military grade S-12's from Russia and use drum mags if we so desired.

    As I explained previously, I'd bet that the SCOTUS won't touch it. You conjecture that it will head to the SCOTUS, but I'd like to hear your reasoning. Additionally, it could be a disaster if it hit the SCOTUS. They can quickly overturn such an overbroad and sweeping opinion. This is an example of conservative judicial activism that the SCOTUS would likely not take kindly to.

     

    Even if it was upheld by the SCOTUS, it has never been the case that merely because a right can't be infringed means that it can't be curtailed. The 1st Amendment is the most zealously protected, and there are tons of laws against it. It even says "Congress shall make no law." Yet they do. There is a balance that must be considered with upholding any law.

     

    Other gun laws will still be constitutional until specifically challenged and overruled. For now everything is the same except gunowners have taken the first step in the right direction down a VERY long road. Getting overly excited and assuming that we will get unlimited liberty will scare courts and congress into harsh reactions.

  11. Also, the SCOTUS won't touch this with a 60ft pole. They'd be crazy to. Roberts wants his decisions unanimous, and this will split down the middle 5-4. The actual decision won't create a big issue that needs SCOTUS involvement. Instead, each jurisdiction can choose to follow their own laws and citizens can challenge the constitutionality of them. MAYBE, if other jurisdictions rule opposite to this case, then the SCOTUS will have to become involved. But I don't think there's enough challenges to create enough conflict to raise to SCOTUS level.

     

    But it will be tough to rule against such a sweeping opinion. The majority really did cover every base, and it will forever be cited in any and every 2nd Amendment brief, argument, and decision from here out. Any court that faces a similar challenge will do so knowing that they're fighting an uphill battle. They can either side with this case, or they can try to rule against it, in which case they'll risk having their decision reversed by the SCOTUS. Some stubborn court may try to do that (California), but not likely because then they risk it becoming the supreme law of the land.

  12. It says SOOOOO much. It basically addressed every anti-gun argument and quashed it.

     

    "[T]he right to keep and bear arms was not created by government, but rather preserved by it. Hence, the Amendment acknowledges 'the right ... to keep and bear Arms,' a right that pre-existed the Constitution like 'the freedom of speech.' Because the right to arms existed prior to the formation of the new government, the Second Amendment only guarantees that the right 'shall not be infringed.'"

    =the right to bear arms deserves the same level of protection as the 1st amendment

    "The Bill of Rights was almost entirely a declaration of individual rights, and the Second Amendment's inclusion therein strongly indicates that it, too, was intended to protect personal liberty."

    =individuals have the right to bear arms, not just a collective "people"

    "The modern handgun?and for that matter the rifle and long-barreled shotgun?is undoubtedly quite improved over its colonial-era predecessor, but it is, after all, a lineal descendant of that founding-era weapon, and it passes Miller's standards. Pistols certainly bear "some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia." They are also in "common use" today, and probably far more so than in 1789. Nevertheless, it has been suggested by some that only colonial-era firearms (e.g., single-shot pistols) are covered by the Second Amendment. But just as the First Amendment free speech clause covers modern communication devices unknown to the founding generation, e.g., radio and television, and the Fourth Amendment protects telephonic conversation from a "search," the Second Amendment protects the possession of the modern-day equivalents of the colonial pistol. See, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27, 31-41 (2001) (applying Fourth Amendment standards to thermal imaging search)."

    =modern firearms are protected, not just muskets

    We think the Second Amendment was similarly structured. The prefatory language announcing the desirability of a wellregulated militia?even bearing in mind the breadth of the concept of a militia is narrower than the guarantee of an individual right to keep and bear arms. The Amendment does not protect "the right of militiamen to keep and bear arms," but rather "the right of the people." The operative clause, properly read, protects the ownership and use of weaponry beyond that needed to preserve the state militias. Again, we point out that if the competent drafters of the Second Amendment had meant the right to be limited to the protection of state militias, it is hard to imagine that they would have chosen the language they did. We therefore take it as an expression of the drafters' view that the people possessed a natural right to keep and bear arms, and that the preservation of the militia was the right's most salient political benefit?and thus the most appropriate to express in a political document

    =textual and functional basis for the decision. weapons are protected regardless of status with militia. that is a purpose of weapons, but the right to be armed supercedes and precedes it.

    "Of course, the District's virtual ban on handgun ownership is not based on any militia purpose. It is justified solely as a measure to protect public safety. As amici point out, and as D.C. judges are well aware, the black market for handguns in the District is so strong that handguns are readily available (probably at little premium) to criminals. It is asserted, therefore, that the D.C. gun control laws irrationally prevent only law abiding citizens from owning handguns.

    It is unnecessary to consider that point, for we think the D.C. laws impermissibly deny Second Amendment rights."

    =fuck you democratic, socialist, public policy pushing, pansy pussies

     

    i'm gonna go drink, this deserves a celebration.

  13. http://drudgereport.com/04-7041a.pdf

     

    I know it's linked through drudge report, but it's a legit opinion.

     

    Nuts should have been paying more attention to the new posts. I just posted on the same topic myself but I found it on the Cato website.

    The more the word gets out, the better! If people start possessing in the city again it will be that much harder to dispossess them if the decision is overturned.

  14. Here's a link to my post on AR15.com.

     

    AR15.com post

     

    Got some good info, but one guy over there needs to switch to decaf. :rolleyes:

    I'd bet my ass he's a law student, an an average one at that. Most likely he's a first year law student at that. If he were a 2-L or 3-L he'd have too much work to be spending much time on his replies. And if he were a good 1-L, he'd be immersed in his job search and wouldn't have time either. He's a middle-runner that is competent enough to throw some legal jargon around.

     

    He's sitting in his classes, not learning the law, making himself feel better for dumping $15-25k a year on an education that he's not taking advantage of b/c he can't get to the top of the class where the money is made. So he takes out his misery on non-legal "laymen" and it gives him a stiffy and justifies his waste of 3 years and $75k to go to law school.

     

    Notice how he didn't claim to be a lawyer. He gave an ambiguous answer that was nothing but a smoke screen. If he claimed he is a lawyer but is not, he'd never see his license. The American Bar Association doesn't take kindly to fraud. All he says is he's not "your lawyer." He's not your lawyer, so it's true. But he's not a lawyer period! He's a law student that needs to show a bit of respect and care for his fellow gun-wielding peers.

     

    I'm not a member of ARF.com, otherwise I'd call him out. But he's borderlining misrepresenting himself on that forum, getting others to support him (which I agree, he's made good points and research), and being rude while doing it. See if he'll claim to be a lawyer. I bet he'll give some offended answer that blows a bunch more smoke then avoids the issue entirely. I think he needs to step down from his high-horse.

  15. Thanks!!! My husband got them from a Capcom Fighting Game. Juggernaut is just the name of our T-shirt business. So it works.

    http://www.comicheroes.co.uk/xmen_gifs4.htm

    I was wondering about that, thanks! Now I think I recognize her.

     

    Dude, I love your Signature!

    Thank you. I may go shirtless, I may go hungry, but I'll always have at least a pistol. Even the Bible agrees with me on this.

     

    Two Other Bible Quotes:

    "If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed." ~ Exodus 22:2

     

    "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own palace, his goods are in peace." ~ Luke 11:21

×
×
  • Create New...