30 round mag, stock rifle = illegal right

[SaigaShooter 0]

I'm 99% sure that this is the case, but a friend just bought a german 40 rounder and is adamant that it's legal to use in an unconverted saiga. Im right arent i?

Edited February 28, 2005 by SaigaShooter

[hoop762 0]

unfortunately, your friend is incorrect. it is my understanding that once you convert the gun to a non-import form ( the hi cap mag) you must comply with 922r and thuis must have no less than 4 US made parts tha replace stock foreign parts. Others more knowlegeable than i can give you more information though

 

HOOP

Edited February 28, 2005 by hoop762

[SaigaShooter 0]

thats what i thought, if he used a US mag, he'd already have 3 parts. but he didn't

 

This has gotten me thinking, are the sagai 30 rnd mags also illegal on stock rifles? It would mae sense that they are because they are after all high capacity.

 

Or is there some grey area that says they are ok because they aren't military magazines (like the german one)

 

On the same token however, you could get a bunch of ten rounders and make a 30 rounder.

 

 

Uhhhg laws suck, and there are too damn many of em.

[Bigfoot Wallace 0]

The saiga mags are legal because the are made for the saiga not an imported ak. it has something to do with the original purpose or something like that. A converted ak mag would be illegal without the correct parts

 

We really need a lawyer on this forum.

[Bigfoot Wallace 0]

HOOP- Lubbock Texas is the armpit of america not arkansas.

[Bvamp 604]

this confusion comes from things like the american made AR15s during the federal assault weapons ban being legal to use with high caps.

 

imported guns must have correct us parts counts to use the high cap mags, or you must stay with ten rounds or less, 5 or less on shotguns.

[k_dawg 0]

there are two ways import rifles "comply".

 

1) configured for the legally defined "sporting purpose", which is how the Saiga is imported with more than 10 "imported" parts. Part of this, is that it can not use magazines considered "military derived", i.e. regular AK magazines. Using the Saiga 30rounders would seem to imply that no-saiga rilfes would be "sporting", but that is a grey area at best.

 

2) convert it so it is not considered "imported", aka 10 or less imported parts. Then, the "sporting purpose" designation is not needed. Essentially, you are converted to a "non imported" rifle, so the import regulations do not apply.

 

If you want an "easy" way to legally use the saiga mags without any grey area's, use the US made magazines, and replace the piston rod.

[SaigaShooter 0]

Yeah, i talked him into that, do you know if the piston they have at K-var would work? (see the US gas Piston topic) or do you have another recomendation?

[CrazyJ 0]

10 rounds or less on all "imported" guns. There's no legal difference for shotgun magazines, at least as far as the feral government is concerned.

Edited March 1, 2005 by CrazyJ

[saul 0]

The regulations regarding magazine capacity and the sporting purposes test were last updated in 1998 as far as I can research. Click the link below and read the Treasury press release. That contains the most important part of the regs although some of the other links on this page are interesting.

 

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/assault/report.htm

 

According to my reading of the regulation the sporting purposes test is very narrowly applied to Military Magazines, they even create nice new acronym "L.C.M.M." for Large Capacity Military Magazine.

 

I would say that K DAWG is correct in his assumption that factory saiga mags of 30 rounds are legal to use on import rifles.

[Rebel 0]

You know,I spent $40.00 on a factory 30rnd mag so I wouldn't have to do the conversion.Since nobody seems to know if this is legal or not,I might as well do it so I can use AK mags.(75 rounder!!!)

[zipgun 0]

Pick the answer that best reflects your feelings on the subject.

 

A. "don't ask, don't tell."

 

B. The imported parts rule is a federal importation regulation and has nothing to do with owning a certain firearm after the fact.

 

C. Who's gonna know?

 

D. No harm, no foul (as in, unless you commit a crime with that rifle you will never be prosecuted for anything related to it)

 

E. As a law abiding citizen I will obey all rules and regulations to the best of my ability.

 

F. If in doubt, don't do it.

 

G. You pays your money, you takes your chances.

 

H. An improper parts count is a federal crime, turn the bastard in.

 

I. How many fu<king times are we gonna have to answer this question?

 

J. Mind your own business.

Edited March 1, 2005 by zipgun

[RDSWriter 5]

Edited March 1, 2005 by RDSWriter

[Bvamp 604]

you NEED the correct US Parts count to add a high cap to a saiga rifle. period. just go buy US made mags, simple. scarce, but they are out there.

[RDSWriter 5]

Bvamp:

 

As a CYA individual myself, and I'd add the parts. BUT I (legally) disagree with you. All Saiga rifles and shotguns now have the ABILITY to accept high capacity magazines, but not necessarily high capacity military magazines. The 'unsporting' rule by ATF does not mention actually using one... just the ABILITY to accept a high capacity military magazine that was originally designed and produced for military assault rifles.

 

The crux of the matter will be determined by the ATFs actions on importation of rifles from Sept 14, 2004 onwards. Specifically, which of the following statements is true?

 

1. A semiautomatic firearm that is based on a 'assault weapon' design is is 'unsporting' and unimportable if it has the ABILITY to accept a high capacity magazine.

 

OR

 

2. A semiautomatic firearm that is based on a 'assault weapon'; design is is 'unsporting' and unimportable if it has the ABILITY to accept a high capacity military magazine.

 

If #1 is true then no firearms based on an 'assault weapon' design can be imported becaue all of them (theoretically) have the legal ability to accept a high capacity magazine. So, no Saigas will ever be imported again until (1) another high capacity magazine ban goes into effect and (2) all receivers are modified so that no unrestricted high capacity magazines can be used in them.

 

If #2 is true then Saigas will continue to be imported in their current configuration because they cannot (in an unmodified form) accept high capacity military magazines.

Edited March 1, 2005 by RDSWriter

[Bvamp 604]

922 goes into 10 rounds or less on imports. its still an import until you put the US parts into it.....thats how i read it.

[Doerdie 0]

The Saiga brand 30 rounders are probably why EAA dropped Saiga. They felt it was not legal, the Ruskies thought it was. Has anyone written the BATF on this? They are not "military", they are propriatary to the Saiga and should be ok, but the BATF may think otherwise.

Edited March 2, 2005 by Doerdie

[RDSWriter 5]

922 goes into 10 rounds or less on imports. its still an import until you put the US parts into it.....thats how i read it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Bvamp, I really want to understand your logic. What paragraph in section 922r deals with 10 rounds or less. 922v does mention this, but 922v is has expired as it is the AWB. 925(d)(3) deals with importation and hi-cap mags but specifically uses the term "accept large capacity magazines originally designed for and produced for the military assault rifles from which they were derived."

 

I'm not saying that the Tech Branch they won't re-interpret this to mean "any firearm that can accept a large capacity feeding device" BUT manufacturers can no longer control if and when a large capacity feeding device is made to fit their firearms.

 

This is why I say if the ATF goes with 'the ability to accept a large capacity feeding device" virtually all semiauto firearms with detachable magazine will no longer be importable. None... I doubt they want to open that Pandoras box that much.

[Bvamp 604]

if it expired, why is everyone worried about parts counts, and why arent saigas imported now with correct configs?

 

christ, what a headache the laws are

 

its unconstitutional to HAVE any to begine with, let alone play favorites with em........

[RDSWriter 5]

EASIEST ROAD BY FAR and the safest for CYA is to just put enough US parts in the firearm and enjoy. If you want to learn more... or just get more confused, keep reading.

 

-----------

 

Only 922v expired which (1) defined and banned assembly and ownership any (domestic or imported) assault weapons and (2) banned the manufacuting and ownership of the hi capacity magazines for 'civilians'. They 'grandfathered' all guns and mags assembled prior to 9/14/94.

 

But, 922(r.) and 925(d)(3) are still on the books.

 

- 922(r.) states that "No person shall assemble a semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun using more than 10 of the imported parts listed in paragraph (c.) of this section if the assembled firearm is prohibited from importation under section 925(d)(3) as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes.details imported firearms parts count and enumeration of the parts." Paragraph (c.) is the parts list. (NOTE Pistols are not listed in the first sentence - only rifles and shotguns. This is why you can make an AK pistol with 100% imported parts.)

 

- 925(d)(3) was originally conceived from the 1968 GCA. It defines what is 'unsporting' and was expanded in 1998/99 to include semiautomatic firearms that "accept large capacity magazines originally designed for and produced for the military assault rifles from which they were derived".

 

This brings me back to the two scenarios I painted in my previous post. Is the ATF going to change the interpretation from 'military magazines' to 'hi cap magazines'? If they do the latter, I don't think we'll ever see firearms 'derived from military designs' imported again because with the expiration of 922(v) controlling the production of hi capacity magazines, all firearms technically have the ability to accept a hi cap.

 

The term 'ability' means 'a state of being able'. The term capability includes both the ability and means to achieve something. For example, I have the ability to learn German, but I do not have the capability because I am not studying it or trying to learn it. Similarly firearms have the ability to accept hi capacity mags today because 922v expired., but firearms do not have the capability until someone produces a magazine. Firearms inherently have the ability to accept a hi capacity magazines but not necessarily a militiary magazine without violating other regulations.

 

For approved Form 6 imports, no imported rifles have the ability to accept a large capacity military magazines and remain compliant with922(r.) and 925(d)(3). Therefore, these firearms do not have the ability because their ability is outlawed by 925(d)(3) as well as their receiver/trunion design. However if you eliminate enough imported parts from 922(r.), then both 922(r.) and 925(d)(3) does not apply. Hence you can do whatever you want because 922(v) is now expired.

Edited March 2, 2005 by RDSWriter

[Caspian 32]

if you write the Tech Branch, you will seal our fate.

 

this has happened many times in the NFA community where Johnny Dogooder has taken it upon himself to save us all from the jack boots by writing for clarification.

 

One accessory effectively killed by a letter to the tech branch were the drums made by combining the feed tower of a 9mm sub gun and a oumi drum back when there was a capacity ban. People and companies were making combo drums for quite some time without any problems. Then someone wrote the Tech Branch for an "official blessing" and it was squashed.

 

You should also know that a letter from the Tech Branch is only an opinion and is not valid in a court of law.

 

Trust me, don't go poking the hornets nest.

 

caspian

[RDSWriter 5]

Edited March 3, 2005 by RDSWriter

[expeditionx 1]

I emailed EAA about the issue of using the saiga 30rd mags on a standard non-modified saiga 7.62x39.

I clearly mentioned that I wanted to know the legalities of doing this from their perspective.

 

Even though it would not be from the ATF, any kind of answer would help begin to put an end to this.

 

Just from the usual type of semiauto-rifle imports that are being sold, it would appear that if the mags that could hold more than 10 rounds were allowed to be used on new products that do not contain less than 10 foreign parts as prescribed by the compliance parts list that the new products would have such mags sold with the rifle.

 

I kind of wonder why tapco does not jump into this deal and form hundreds of usa made saiga compatible 30rd / and 100 rd drums that work flawlessly. It a goldmine waiting to happen.

[Caspian 32]

[Caspian 32]

I kind of wonder why tapco does not jump into this deal and form hundreds of usa made saiga compatible 30rd / and 100 rd drums that work flawlessly. It a goldmine waiting to happen.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The market is not large enough to justify tooling up.

 

I looked into making Saiga 12 mags and the tooling costs alone hit $115K. Add in production and manufacturing costs alone are around $30+/mag. Not cheap enough to turn a profit.

 

They cranked out the Galil handguards and plastic folding stock knowing there are millions of AK's out there. there are only thousands of Saiga 7.62 x 39's in the gun population.

 

caspian

[RDSWriter 5]

Caspian: Personally, I do not know of any individual or dealer that has been prosecuted for 922r/925d3; nor do I have any verifiable proof. I'm not saying that this won't/hasn't happened... but I haven't found anything yet.

 

This being said, I'll have to do some digging because I remember some conversations with dealer(s) about some of their customers getting firearms seized and subsequently destroyed for non-922r compliance. NOTE: These people apparently got arrested on much more serious charges. I get the distinct impression - based on the dealers comments - that 922r is really never prosecuted. Rather it is used as leverage and taken off the table if a good plea bargain can be reached on other, more serious charges.

 

Thanks for the offer on Bardwell's stuff... great stuff, it's too bad he's not as active in writing the Tech Branch anymore.

[Caspian 32]

Here's an example of how useless a letter from the tech branch is:

 

First lettter says making a hi cap is "o.k."

Letter from Ed Owen (Tech branch Supervisor prior to current supervisor)

 

Secont letter says, "no, no"

Letter from Curtis Bartlett (i think he's gone now, but am not positive)

 

As you can see, letters are opinions and change when the guard changes. Therefore, if you are relying on the letter from the past Chief to allow you to do something you may be incorrect.

 

Therefore, if Johnny Dogooder would have let sleeping dogs lie, then there would have been no clarification in writing. We actually could have used Letter #1 as an affimative defense. Thanks Johnny Dogooder.

 

*note: these letters deal with hi cap mags when they were banned. this is only an example of the uselessness of a letter and how it was used to screw us.

 

caspian

[Oldwheat 0]

Caspian: Personally, I do not know of any individual or dealer that has been prosecuted for 922r/925d3; nor do I have any verifiable proof. I'm not saying that this won't/hasn't happened... but I haven't found anything yet.

 

This being said, I'll have to do some digging because I remember some conversations with dealer(s) about some of their customers getting firearms seized and subsequently destroyed for non-922r compliance. NOTE: These people apparently got arrested on much more serious charges. I get the distinct impression - based on the dealers comments - that 922r is really never prosecuted. Rather it is used as leverage and taken off the table if a good plea bargain can be reached on other, more serious charges.

 

....This is what I've always said...Unless you are on the ATF shit list you are pretty safe...(But if you are, they will tag you for the tiniest infraction...example- David Koresh / Waco)..............From personal experience ...

[RDSWriter 5]

Caspian:

 

I disagree with your use of these letters. They are perfectly consistent. In the first letter, the writer asks about making a 50 rd capacity M3 magazine our of two 30 round M3 magazines. The resulting magazine would still be able to be used in the original firearm. In his response, Chef Owens states:

 

"Please be aware that this determination... covers only those large capacity ammunition feeding devices which are constructed as detailed in your letter."

 

In the second letter, Bardwell asks about the legality of modifying a magazine to fit a different firearm. (I'm guessing that maybe Bardwell described a donor upper plus a Suomi/PPsh or other drum lower?) In his response Chief Bartlett was consistent with Ownens ruling... because he did not toss out the ability to modify large capacity feeding devices if such modifications allow the magazine(s) to be used in the firear for which they were originally designed. He states:

 

"If the altered magazine could no longer function in the firearm for which it was originally designed, it is our opinion that a new magazine has been manufactured. The fact that the materials used to construct the new magazine were made prior to September 13, 1994, would not mean that the magazine was manufactured prior to that date. The altered magazine would be a large capacity ammunition feeding device and it would be subject to the prohibition in section 922(w).

 

If the magazine has minor modifications performed, such as cutting an additional slot for a different style of magazine release, and it still functions in the original firearm for which it was designed, we do not believe that it would be considered a new magazine. However, it major changes are made it is possible that a new magazine has been manufactured. It is not possible for us to render a final opinion on such magazines without examining a sample."

 

You'll note that a few months prior, Bardwell asked about taking 9mm mag and converting to 10mm. I'm guessing that it could have been used in the same firearm, but not for the firearm for which it was orginially designed. He basically got the same respone as above - no go.

[Caspian 32]

Explain to me how the bottom magazine of the double Greas Gun mag still functions in the firearm for which it was designed. The botom mag had the top cut off making it useless as a feed device.

 

There is NO difference between a double grease gun where the bottom mag is functionally useless and a Soumi drum conversion where the drum is functionally useless (because the feed lips were ground off). In both cases only the top magazine functions in the firearm as designed.

 

Caspian