Delaware_Dan 0 Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 I just found this, the only modifications are adding the Tacco PG stock. There are no other US parts on this thing so it has it be illegal right? Maybe I just haven't lurked around here for a while. Did I miss something? http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=121317934 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mikkelibob 0 Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 I just found this, the only modifications are adding the Tacco PG stock. There are no other US parts on this thing so it has it be illegal right? Maybe I just haven't lurked around here for a while. Did I miss something? http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=121317934 Yeah, as far I know its not legal once the factory 10 rounder is in place. That's one of weird things about the saiga's, its probably a better idea to replace the handguard before you do the stock, that way you are compatible with both US made 30 rounders and the 10 round russian mags. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Delaware_Dan 0 Posted January 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 I have a standard 7.62x39. If I put a Tapco stock on it and it was the only modification done to the rifle, would that be legal? I feel like if I put a pistol grip on it then I need to have the 5 US parts right? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mikkelibob 0 Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 I have a standard 7.62x39. If I put a Tapco stock on it and it was the only modification done to the rifle, would that be legal? I feel like if I put a pistol grip on it then I need to have the 5 US parts right? http://forum.saiga-12.com/index.php?showtopic=32402 Yep. If you put a tapco stock on it (with a pistol grip) it is now no longer in "sporting" configuration. Therefore you are going to have to be in 922r compliance. You can get get 5 parts with a US made magazine (2 for buttstock, pistol grip, and 3 for the magazine). Since magazine ownership is not constructive, its only a federal crime when you put the original 10 rounder in the gun. Now for fun go check gunbroker and try to identify the pics of those who should fear the ATF kicking in their doors. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cma g21 3 Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 (edited) I have a standard 7.62x39. If I put a Tapco stock on it and it was the only modification done to the rifle, would that be legal? I feel like if I put a pistol grip on it then I need to have the 5 US parts right? The number of US parts doesn't matter, it's the number of foreign made 922r listed parts (10 or less = compliant). http://thegunwiki.com/Gunwiki/BuildSaigaVerifyCompliance http://home.comcast.net/~navy87guy/home/922r.html Basically if you convert the imported gun to a condition in which it could not be legally imported, 922r applies and you must reduce the number of foreign parts (listed in 922r) to 10 or less. Saigas are not imported with pistol grips, although the Russians do make them in that form. Since they don't import them (despite their obvious market appeal) it's logical to assume their importation isn't legal. So, adding a pistol grip would triiger 922r. With the Tapco Intrafuse and US made mags (922r parts count of 10) you'd be compliant. With the Tapco Intrafuse and foreign made mags (922r parts count of 13) you'd be non-compliant. Edited January 28, 2009 by cma g21 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
WardenWolf 6 Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 (edited) The person who built it is technically the person who'd be in hot water. There's nothing preventing you from buying it and replacing the magazine, making it legal. A Saiga shotgun threaded for chokes has 14 foreign parts. Replace the stock and you have 13. Replace the mag and you have 10 and legal. Edited January 28, 2009 by Mike the Wolf Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wheel 0 Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 Just to clarify: if you add a foreign made pistol-grip, you are adding an imported part that is counted for 922r compliance. I'm using the CAA pistol grip with the different front and back strap inserts, so that makes 15 counted parts. I have to now replace at least 5 of those counted parts with US made parts for compliance. I'm doing: stock (1) FCG (3) Gas piston (1) This brings me to 10 foreign parts regardless of which mags I use, so my factory mag is no less legal than my AGPs. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
22_Shooter 1,560 Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 I just found this, the only modifications are adding the Tacco PG stock. There are no other US parts on this thing so it has it be illegal right? Maybe I just haven't lurked around here for a while. Did I miss something? http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=121317934 Assuming the gas piston was not swapped for a US made, then that rifle is only 922r compliant when using complete US made magazines. 14 - 1 (US made stock) - 3 (US made mags) = 10 foreign parts. I have a standard 7.62x39. If I put a Tapco stock on it and it was the only modification done to the rifle, would that be legal? I feel like if I put a pistol grip on it then I need to have the 5 US parts right? http://forum.saiga-12.com/index.php?showtopic=32402 Yep. If you put a tapco stock on it (with a pistol grip) it is now no longer in "sporting" configuration. Therefore you are going to have to be in 922r compliance. You can get get 5 parts with a US made magazine (2 for buttstock, pistol grip, and 3 for the magazine). Since magazine ownership is not constructive, its only a federal crime when you put the original 10 rounder in the gun. Now for fun go check gunbroker and try to identify the pics of those who should fear the ATF kicking in their doors. You don't need 5 US made parts to get compliance. You only need 4. Also, that Tapco stock/PG combo only takes 1 foreign part away. The PG is not replacing anything that was there before. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
kmoore 3 Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 Since magazine ownership is not constructive, its only a federal crime when you put the original 10 rounder in the gun. Now for fun go check gunbroker and try to identify the pics of those who should fear the ATF kicking in their doors. Is there a definitive statement that magazine ownership can't be construed to be constructive intent? Most here don't see it that way, but I don't know that anyone really knows, we're erring on the side of caution. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cma g21 3 Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 Is there a definitive statement that magazine ownership can't be construed to be constructive intent? Most here don't see it that way, but I don't know that anyone really knows, we're erring on the side of caution. FWIW, there's a letter from the BATFE to that effect, stating the magazine parts count only when inserted in the gun. I saw a copy posted on one of the gun boards, but don't remember which one. Still (IMHO), it's better to be safe than sorry when dealing with Beaurocrats (especially of the BATFE variety). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mav 459 Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 All very confusing, as I would guess it was meant to be. My question, since i don't particularly like the tapco, does the RAA skeleton stock count for me or against me? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
22_Shooter 1,560 Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 All very confusing, as I would guess it was meant to be. My question, since i don't particularly like the tapco, does the RAA skeleton stock count for me or against me? Well it's foreign made. What other parts do you plan on swapping out? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mav 459 Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 All very confusing, as I would guess it was meant to be. My question, since i don't particularly like the tapco, does the RAA skeleton stock count for me or against me? Well it's foreign made. What other parts do you plan on swapping out? well, i would like to have a forearm with a rail, and of course hi caps, other than that the other stuff i wanna do is add ons like scope mount, which dont count right? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cma g21 3 Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 well, i would like to have a forearm with a rail, and of course hi caps, other than that the other stuff i wanna do is add ons like scope mount, which dont count right? The scope mount doesn't count towards compliance. Starting count = 14 -1 for US made forearm = 13 -3 for US made mgazines =10 So, as long as your magazines (that can hold more than 10 rounds) are US made and the forearm you install is US made, you're compliant. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
WardenWolf 6 Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Since magazine ownership is not constructive, its only a federal crime when you put the original 10 rounder in the gun. Now for fun go check gunbroker and try to identify the pics of those who should fear the ATF kicking in their doors. Is there a definitive statement that magazine ownership can't be construed to be constructive intent? Most here don't see it that way, but I don't know that anyone really knows, we're erring on the side of caution. The ATF did definitively state that it is legal to possess parts that, if assembled, could make a non-compliant rifle. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.