Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Why the panic over Saiga-12 922r?


  • Please log in to reply
39 replies to this topic

#1 RecycledElectrons

RecycledElectrons

    Member

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 42 posts

Posted 22 October 2010 - 05:34 AM

I've seen an unbelievable amount of worry over 922r on Saiga Shotguns.

I will ignore the constitutionality, and take the urban legends from this board as truth.

A Saiga-12 with a threaded muzzle has 14 parts, all foreign as it comes from the factory.

The mag counts as 3 parts. I'll assume you buy all us-made high-cap mags. (I'm ignoring the fact that the term "high-cap" has no definition for shotgun mags.)

So, if you want a pistol grip, you replace the buttstock and add a pistol grip, and you're down to 10 foreign parts. You are legal.

Alternately, you replace the nut over the threads with a US made choke or flash hider, and you are legal.

All you have to do is replace one part with a US made part (e.g., pistol grip or muzzle nut) and you are legal with US made mags on a Saiga shotgun.

Some people like the fancy trigger group modifications, and foreign mags. Cool. If you want to pick your nose with a tele-operated robotic arm, you are welcome to. I'll use my index finger.

RecycledElectrons
  • Salmonking likes this

#2 Rusty truck

Rusty truck

    I just want to be left alone!!

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 980 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 October 2010 - 07:02 AM

922r is the law!!!! Dumb law, but it's a law!!!!
Just like speed limits, building permits and the requirement to have a driver's license to operate a vehicle are the law. So yeah parts counts matter, you never know when something will happen that will cause the authorities to look at you. Last thing you need is for them to pile up a bunch of un-related charges because you where one part short of being legal.

Just follow the law and you don't have to worry about a trip to club fed where Buba and the rest of the gang in there takes turns helping you do the colan stretch standing. :cryss:
"Why fight fair when you can win?!"
"there's no such thing as too dead."

#3 Shandlanos

Shandlanos

    Guy who finally figured out how to change his title

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,956 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Omaha, NE, USA

Posted 22 October 2010 - 08:50 AM

Well, if you want a pistol grip other than the piece of shit intrafuse setup, you have to move the trigger group. If you're already going to do so, why not spend $30 on a product made by tapco that doesn't suck, and replace the FCG? That way, if you decide to use that factory 5-round magazine your weapon came with, you aren't violating federal law.

Asinine as it is, 922r is part of a federal law, not an urban legend. Your tone is unnecessarily rude and your ignorance evident.
  • volkov likes this
This would be my signature if I had anything important to say.

Bebo, ergo sum.

#4 jswledhed

jswledhed

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPip
  • 276 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seitch Tabr

Posted 22 October 2010 - 09:25 AM

Alternately, you replace the nut over the threads with a US made choke or flash hider, and you are legal.


I don't think the thread protector on the muzzle is counted as a "muzzle device" as indicated in 922R. Could be wrong, though.
I've experiments to run. There is research to be done on the people who are still alive.

#5 Mullet Man

Mullet Man

    Top Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,891 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of the F.O.I.D.

Posted 22 October 2010 - 11:10 AM

http://forum.saiga-1...showtopic=58478

There is the same debate over the thread protector.

Are you a resident of Illinois? Join www.Illinoiscarry.com

 

Items for sale...http://forum.saiga-1...-vepr12-and-ak/


#6 BretJ

BretJ

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 9 posts

Posted 22 October 2010 - 12:05 PM

I train several dozen ATF agents a year (most have been agents for at least 10 years) and have talked 922r with almost all of them. Some claim 922r died with the lifting of the "Assault Rifle" ban.....Regardless, every single one of them have told me that there is absolutely no reason they or anyone else they know would ever consider stopping someone at a range to break a firearm down to check compliance. The only time it would be an issue is if you were already under investigation for something and they wanted to nail you on federal charges. Saying that, the law is the law and I see no reason not to do it legally. While ATF might not get involved on their own, there is always the possibility that some well meaning but un-informed police officer might question the legality of a firearm and call in ATF for advice....at that point they may have to investigate. If you are "clean", the ATF guys I know would probably tell you to fix it. If you are a known law enforcement problem, they might nail you.

#7 Fumes

Fumes

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 489 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wa

Posted 22 October 2010 - 01:30 PM

Asinine as it is, 922r is part of a federal law, not an urban legend. Your tone is unnecessarily rude and your ignorance evident.


Is that a bit hash? I didn't get that from his post. I got that there seems to be alot of worry over 922r when it is a simple fix, meaning you really don't have to do too much to be compliant. But thats what I got out of it.
Anyway at what point are you in violation? When you put a US mag in the gun, or put another part on the gun that is under 922r regulations? Or are they being sold in violation coming w/ 14 parts? I find that hard to believe.

#8 -Shooter-

-Shooter-

    Make Your Own Luck

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,185 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NY

Posted 22 October 2010 - 01:54 PM

Anyway at what point are you in violation? When you put a US mag in the gun, or put another part on the gun that is under 922r regulations?


When you take it out of the "sporting" configuration that it's imported in.

Or are they being sold in violation coming w/ 14 parts? I find that hard to believe.


They are imported in a "sporting" configuration. Only when you take it out of that configuration, is when you need the foreign parts count at 10 or less.

So no, they're not in violation by coming in with 14 foreign counted 922 parts.

Do you take vitamins?
Is there Vitamin C in Newports?
No, but you can't get a snitch shanked for a dozen oranges no matter how hard you try.


"As for missing anything good, Chile has been posting some killer recipes if you have a vendetta against your asshole." - DaveM


#9 csspecs

csspecs

    Top Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,603 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

Posted 23 October 2010 - 08:36 PM

All you have to do is swap the muzzle protector (if you count it) and piston puck and you can use mags over 5 rounds. Its actually very simple.

#10 TR Young

TR Young

    Zombie Milk Jug Slayer

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,267 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Westfield, PA

Posted 24 October 2010 - 01:57 PM

....Some people like the fancy trigger group modifications, and foreign mags. Cool. If you want to pick your nose with a tele-operated robotic arm, you are welcome to. I'll use my index finger....

Well, if you call a crisp, smooth, short trigger pull 'fancy', that's all fine and good I guess. I (and many others here) consider it a much better FCG that puts the imported wishbone linkage FCG to shame.

And I agree; your post is very condescending. You act as if people are stupid to want to be sure they are in compliance with federal law.
  • volkov and Kevin in Texas like this

Please help keep this great site up and running!
CLICK HERE TO LEARN HOW TO BECOME A CONTRIBUTING MEMBER!


Law abiding, gun owning, tax paying, voting citizen. With Rottweilers.

#11 Kliegl

Kliegl

    Executive Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 865 posts

Posted 28 October 2010 - 11:19 PM

Well, to be honest, being scared into compliance of a non-enforced, arguably stupid law is not really American in spirit,
it's more like feudal England.

"My dear Petranella, while you are sorting the beans today, please take every sixth for the first 100 beans, then every
seventh, for taxes to his Lord Barack, then destroy any beans past a five hundred count. No, I do not know why, but it
is the LAW and we must comply, even though no one will ever check or know."

Now, if you've got to buy aftermarket parts, might as well get American ones. No problem there. However, I have a friend
with a Benelli M4. He bought it used, with the factory fake tube extension. He got a Benelli factory 2 round extension,
and I guess that puts him in 922r violation, however, he can argue he bought it that way, since 922r says thou shalt not
assemble. Point is, with that awesome a gun, you don't put shit aftermarket parts on it. It would be like putting a Grant steering
wheel on a Ferrari.

It's part of the American ethos, part of being independent and self reliant, to challenge stupid laws. If you just bend to the government's
every whim, why do you even own a gun? You'll just turn them in when they demand it.
"I've tasted my own piss. One time, I pissed in a beer bottle and left it among the other beer bottles on my desk. Then, I was drunk the next day and forgot which beer I was drinking and took a huge swig of my own piss, and spit it up everywhere." -Classy Kalashnikov, Saiga-12 Chat, 1/16/11

#12 self_inflicted

self_inflicted

    Life is self_inflicted

  • Contributor
  • PipPip
  • 206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kansas

Posted 29 October 2010 - 01:12 AM

Well, to be honest, being scared into compliance of a non-enforced, arguably stupid law is not really American in spirit,
it's more like feudal England.

"My dear Petranella, while you are sorting the beans today, please take every sixth for the first 100 beans, then every
seventh, for taxes to his Lord Barack, then destroy any beans past a five hundred count. No, I do not know why, but it
is the LAW and we must comply, even though no one will ever check or know."

Now, if you've got to buy aftermarket parts, might as well get American ones. No problem there. However, I have a friend
with a Benelli M4. He bought it used, with the factory fake tube extension. He got a Benelli factory 2 round extension,
and I guess that puts him in 922r violation, however, he can argue he bought it that way, since 922r says thou shalt not
assemble. Point is, with that awesome a gun, you don't put shit aftermarket parts on it. It would be like putting a Grant steering
wheel on a Ferrari.

It's part of the American ethos, part of being independent and self reliant, to challenge stupid laws. If you just bend to the government's
every whim, why do you even own a gun? You'll just turn them in when they demand it.


I don’t know, openly admitting that you MAY violate a federal law on a PUBLIC forum, might give someone a reason to CHECK. Just my two pennies.

V/R

self_inflicted
  • Kevin in Texas likes this
"All that we are is the result of what we have thought. The mind is everything. What we think, we become."
- Maharishi Mahesh Yogi

"Assault is a type of behavior, not a type of hardware."
-Alan Korwin

#13 my762buzz

my762buzz

    Executive Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 835 posts

Posted 29 October 2010 - 08:17 PM

However, I have a friend
with a Benelli M4. He bought it used, with the factory fake tube extension. He got a Benelli factory 2 round extension,
and I guess that puts him in 922r violation, however, he can argue he bought it that way, since 922r says thou shalt not
assemble.


Yep, that would follow the same 922r compliance issue. I read about an Los Angelos, CA LEO posting something in regards to this sometime back on the Benelli website.
An ATF agent warned LA officers about taking department M4 shotguns that their department offered to sell them once the weapons were retired. Keep in mind the extension tubes were already installed and they were simply taking private possesion of the guns. They could not have been thought of as potentially comiting a felony but rather simply owning uncompliant shotguns.
Why in the hell would the ATF care about career LEOs privately owning 922r uncompliant guns? Considering all the chinese 870 copies being extended lately I am really surprised this has not made a bigger splash on the radar. And for anyone that wants to argue technicalities, the law reads "No person shall assemble a semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun using more than 10 of the imported parts." Any shotgun includes pump action ones. If importers could import higher capacity shotguns, they would, but they can't because high capacity ready has been banned as a feature for rifles and any shotguns. Like has been said before, they have bigger fish to fry, but if enough people violate the law at some point it goes on their radar and then they can't keep ignoring this. I guess it will take one well notarized arrest and prosecution and then everyone and his brother will finally stop argueing that it might not be illegal to do what the law says not to do. I don't even think winning a major supreme court case on this issue will make things better. The 10 parts rule could be repealed
from the GCA and then Congress could rewrite a new amendment to the GCA that would require any semiauto rifle or any shotgun to have zero imported parts if not importable. This would shut down conversions of saigas and assemblies of parts kits altogether. Since the topic would even be open to discussion in session, this might inspire a new presidential executive order banning semiauto rifles altogether and this part would not need any new law to pass just a simple presidential order to the treasury. This is sort of why encouraging others to violate the law will not help anyone but most likely raise the issue among the regulators which will pass the torch to the law writers and its like rolling dice in Washington with gun rights.

#14 my762buzz

my762buzz

    Executive Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 835 posts

Posted 29 October 2010 - 08:51 PM

I train several dozen ATF agents a year (most have been agents for at least 10 years) and have talked 922r with almost all of them. Some claim 922r died with the lifting of the "Assault Rifle" ban....


I suppose the same ones could just as easily say the 1986 machine gun ban died off with the expired assualt weapon ban. I don't expect government employees to know every law and regulation but you would think they would at least check up the chain of command before giving legal advice on a very specific law among thousands of other Federal gun law regulations. Even the agents that are verteran specialists in NFA rules, often have no idea of actual import regulations. I wouldn't expect a general field agent to know anything way out of the scope of his duties.
Its not like I would ask a U.S. marine to cite every hague accord or geneva convention international law agreement regulation that the US military bothers to cooperate with. I would wager that even most JAG attorneys could not reference most any given specific regulation. When I go to the DMV, I consider myself lucky to even get a person that knows enough to fill out a license renewal program on his or her screen without needing to check with a supervisor for any specific item.

Edited by my762buzz, 29 October 2010 - 08:52 PM.

  • YWHIC likes this

#15 Kliegl

Kliegl

    Executive Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 865 posts

Posted 30 October 2010 - 10:24 PM

Buzz, there's something called ex post facto, after the fact, laws.

If you buy a gun, and it is legal when you buy it, a law cannot be passed in the USA to
make it illegal; it's forbidden in the Constitution. You cannot make a law that makes people
criminals retroactively.

I see no point in actively breaking the 922r statute and bragging about it, since that will
get you in trouble. On the other hand, I see no reason to be a wet-pantied girl about it and be overly
worried, especially if one does not frequent ranges and such where LEO and the like are.

Hopefully, shit like this can get shut down in the next administration.
"I've tasted my own piss. One time, I pissed in a beer bottle and left it among the other beer bottles on my desk. Then, I was drunk the next day and forgot which beer I was drinking and took a huge swig of my own piss, and spit it up everywhere." -Classy Kalashnikov, Saiga-12 Chat, 1/16/11

#16 my762buzz

my762buzz

    Executive Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 835 posts

Posted 31 October 2010 - 01:24 AM

Buzz, there's something called ex post facto, after the fact, laws.

If you buy a gun, and it is legal when you buy it, a law cannot be passed in the USA to
make it illegal; it's forbidden in the Constitution. You cannot make a law that makes people
criminals retroactively.



The problem is not with what is sold in original form. The issue is the government's definition of "assembly" and how it applies to modifications of a gun.
The words "to assemble" according to the atf dept of justice legal opinions implies that parts of a gun are put together and this even includes a magazine insertion because
believe it or not the magazine counts as 3 official parts. So if you buy a legal to purchase product, it is in of itself legal, but to make changes that include new parts that were not
part of the original rifle then presents the possibility of being classified as "re-assembled" as a different product which is no longer covered under the ex post defacto definition.
This is where the 10 parts rule applies hence "...not assemble.....with more than 10 foreign parts..." No one is saying that a new executive order or law will retroactively ban existing guns
but can affect all future guns and any "new assemblies" from existing owned guns or parts.

In reference to the LEO Benelli M4 issue previously mentioned, it does not make them criminals in any way to purchase the dept shotguns. The issue that was called to attention was unoncompliance of the weapon itself. The threat was probably more like confiscation of the weapon rather than any criminal prosecution. The cost of trying to legally fight a confiscation
into a reversal is more than the weapon would be worth to most anyone and said action probably would not go anywhere.


Another way the government got around the ex post facto concept or essentially violated it themselves was with the NFA law over 70 years ago. If you owned a pre NFA law short barrel rifle, machine gun, or whatever, they didn't make it illegal to own on the Federal level. Instead, they required you to register the NFA defined weapon or otherwise lack of compliance made you a criminal. Yep, a weapon bought legally and owned legally was made illegal to own without complying with the new law. I would say that the new law(NFA) in this case did criminalize the owner retroactively. Perhaps we should also debate whether or not it is really necessary to follow all those silly short barrel and full auto laws that were essentially ex post facto from the start and therefore invalid even today.

Edited by my762buzz, 31 October 2010 - 02:32 AM.


#17 Kliegl

Kliegl

    Executive Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 865 posts

Posted 31 October 2010 - 01:33 AM

"Since the topic would even be open to discussion in session, this might inspire a new presidential executive order banning semiauto rifles altogether and this part would not need any new law to pass just a simple presidential order to the treasury."

You pretty much DID say that, and that is to what I was responding.

To wit, one CAN ban the manufacture and sale of guns, but not the possession of pre-ban ones, and avoid running afoul of
that part of the Constitution. (However, it would run afoul of the second amendment)
"I've tasted my own piss. One time, I pissed in a beer bottle and left it among the other beer bottles on my desk. Then, I was drunk the next day and forgot which beer I was drinking and took a huge swig of my own piss, and spit it up everywhere." -Classy Kalashnikov, Saiga-12 Chat, 1/16/11

#18 my762buzz

my762buzz

    Executive Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 835 posts

Posted 31 October 2010 - 02:23 AM

"Since the topic would even be open to discussion in session, this might inspire a new presidential executive order banning semiauto rifles altogether and this part would not need any new law to pass just a simple presidential order to the treasury."

You pretty much DID say that, and that is to what I was responding.

To wit, one CAN ban the manufacture and sale of guns, but not the possession of pre-ban ones, and avoid running afoul of
that part of the Constitution. (However, it would run afoul of the second amendment)


OK
Yes, banning import of. I would imagine that no one wants to be part of the cause of new gun laws or executive orders that will
strip more gun rights or gun access.


Anyhow, this topic is just way to depressing to spend any more energy staying involved in trying to help others understand the pitfalls of ignoring gun regulations in the hope of avoiding any possible trouble they might find themselves in ahead. I hope it helps but it gets real old having to constantly
rehash the same old facts and concepts. If anyone wants to ignore the advice, that is your business and I could care less.

Edited by my762buzz, 31 October 2010 - 02:32 AM.

  • Caspian Sea Monster likes this

#19 K.T.

K.T.

    Apex bottom feeder.

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,252 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:York,Pa

Posted 02 November 2010 - 09:34 PM

Complying with federal law just seems like common sense to me. My biggest worry is not a field check or anything like that. It's what if I have to lethally defend myself or family? You will be investigated, and it doesn't even have to be my S-12, it could be my 1911 or something else. Bad guys are generally scum and their families are poor and looking to make a quick buck. So who do they cal? the A.C.L.U. What kind of lawyers do they have? Very tricky liberal ones that specialize on pissing on the working class and constitution.
Why do we always hurt the ones we hit?

#20 RecycledElectrons

RecycledElectrons

    Member

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 42 posts

Posted 03 November 2010 - 05:33 PM

922r is the law!!!! Dumb law, but it's a law!!!!
Just like speed limits, building permits and the requirement to have a driver's license to operate a vehicle are the law. So yeah parts counts matter, you never know when something will happen that will cause the authorities to look at you. Last thing you need is for them to pile up a bunch of un-related charges because you where one part short of being legal.

Just follow the law and you don't have to worry about a trip to club fed where Buba and the rest of the gang in there takes turns helping you do the colan stretch standing. :cryss:


I did not say I was breaking the "law." I did say that compliance was easy.

What you are saying is like continually screaming at someone about the speed limits, when the person you are screaming at is doing 18 MPH in a school zone, where the speed limit is 20 MPH.

I was very clear in my post that I was following 922R. My question was: since it's so easy to follow, why all the technical garbage that makes it seem intimidating?

Now, I will sin by getting into intimidating looking nonsense about something that seems very easy with a Saiga-12.



Asinine as it is, 922r is part of a federal law, not an urban legend. Your tone is unnecessarily rude and your ignorance evident.


Please show me where in federal law the list of parts is.

I see at http://frwebgate3.ac...action=retrieve that 18USC922( r ) says :

"( r ) It shall be unlawful for any person to assemble from imported
parts any semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun which is identical to any
rifle or shotgun prohibited from importation under section 925(d)(3) of
this chapter as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable
to sporting purposes except that this subsection shall not apply to--
(1) the assembly of any such rifle or shotgun for sale or
distribution by a licensed manufacturer to the United States or any
department or agency thereof or to any State or any department,
agency, or political subdivision thereof; or
(2) the assembly of any such rifle or shotgun for the purposes
of testing or experimentation authorized by the Attorney General."



18USC925(d)(3) is at: http://codes.lp.find...ode/18/I/44/925

"(3) is of a type that does not fall within the definition of a
firearm as defined in section 5845(a) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 and is generally recognized as particularly suitable
for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes, excluding surplus
military firearms, except in any case where the Attorney General
has not authorized the importation of the firearm pursuant to
this paragraph, it shall be unlawful to import any frame,
receiver, or barrel of such firearm which would be prohibited if
assembled; or"



Section 5845(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is available at: http://www.law.corne...45----000-.html

"For the purpose of this chapter—
(a) Firearm
The term “firearm” means
(1) a shotgun having a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length;
(2) a weapon made from a shotgun if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length;
(3) a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length;
(4) a weapon made from a rifle if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length;
(5) any other weapon, as defined in subsection (e);
(6) a machinegun;
(7) any silencer (as defined in section 921 of title 18, United States Code); and
(8) a destructive device. The term “firearm” shall not include an antique firearm or any device (other than a machinegun or destructive device) which, although designed as a weapon, the Secretary finds by reason of the date of its manufacture, value, design, and other characteristics is primarily a collector’s item and is not likely to be used as a weapon. "



I hope all of this is up to date. The @#$% federal government refuses to PUBLISH their own laws.



The details of how the above legalese is enforced are not in the law. The claim that 10 or less foreign parts being legal is merely a rumor. The claim of what "parts" count is a legend. Why isn't a screw holding an action to a stock a "part?" Why isn't a gun with ONE US-made part legal? Why isn't a gun with ONE foreign-made part illegal?



And for anyone that wants to argue technicalities, the law reads "No person shall assemble a semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun using more than 10 of the imported parts." Any shotgun includes pump action ones.


Can you cite that?

Edited by RecycledElectrons, 03 November 2010 - 05:50 PM.


#21 my762buzz

my762buzz

    Executive Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 835 posts

Posted 03 November 2010 - 07:05 PM

And for anyone that wants to argue technicalities, the law reads "No person shall assemble a semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun using more than 10 of the imported parts." Any shotgun includes pump action ones.


Can you cite that?


There you go. After going through this same topic for 15 years and seeing various government legal positions laid out, nothing has really changed and it gets old and tiresome to argue
over the same thing that has been well established several times over. I guess we might as well argue the earth might not be round or man never landed on the moon.

http://www.law.corne...22----000-.html
® It shall be unlawful for any person to assemble from imported parts any semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun which is identical to any rifle or shotgun prohibited from importation under section 925 (d)(3) of this chapter as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes except that this subsection shall not apply to—
(1) the assembly of any such rifle or shotgun for sale or distribution by a licensed manufacturer to the United States or any department or agency thereof or to any State or any department, agency, or political subdivision thereof; or
(2) the assembly of any such rifle or shotgun for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Attorney General.

#22 RecycledElectrons

RecycledElectrons

    Member

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 42 posts

Posted 06 November 2010 - 10:59 PM

My original sentence that seems to have outraged so many people was:

I will ignore the constitutionality, and take the urban legends from this board as truth.


I'm sorry to make so many people angry. I thought it was commonly accepted that the law was not to "assemble from imported parts" but that the interpretation was only from an ATF letter, which is not much of a defense in court if the ATF decides to harass you.


And for anyone that wants to argue technicalities, the law reads "No person shall assemble a semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun using more than 10 of the imported parts." Any shotgun includes pump action ones.


Can you cite that?


There you go. After going through this same topic for 15 years and seeing various government legal positions laid out, nothing has really changed and it gets old and tiresome to argue
over the same thing that has been well established several times over. I guess we might as well argue the earth might not be round or man never landed on the moon.

http://www.law.corne...22----000-.html
® It shall be unlawful for any person to assemble from imported parts any semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun which is identical to any rifle or shotgun prohibited from importation under section 925 (d)(3) of this chapter as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes except that this subsection shall not apply to—
(1) the assembly of any such rifle or shotgun for sale or distribution by a licensed manufacturer to the United States or any department or agency thereof or to any State or any department, agency, or political subdivision thereof; or
(2) the assembly of any such rifle or shotgun for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Attorney General.


I was asking you to cite the 10 part rule. Yes, federal law says you can not "assemble from imported parts," but the 10 or less foreign parts rule came from an ATF letter, many years ago.

The ATF is known for not following their own rules. I can not cite the case off the top of my head, but I heard rumors of a case where the ATF prosecuted someone for doing something that was legal according to an ATF letter he downloaded off the web.



So, back to my original point ... Accepting the 10 part rule as gospel, the second you put a Saiga-12 into non-sporting configuration with a flash hider or new stock, it's legal with US Made mags. That doesn't seem to hard to me.

Maybe I'm just dense, but I spent several hours fretting over 922r before realizing how easy it was.

RecycledElectrons

#23 leadsled

leadsled

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 198 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ATX

Posted 07 November 2010 - 06:39 AM

My original sentence that seems to have outraged so many people was:

I will ignore the constitutionality, and take the urban legends from this board as truth.


I'm sorry to make so many people angry. I thought it was commonly accepted that the law was not to "assemble from imported parts" but that the interpretation was only from an ATF letter, which is not much of a defense in court if the ATF decides to harass you.


And for anyone that wants to argue technicalities, the law reads "No person shall assemble a semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun using more than 10 of the imported parts." Any shotgun includes pump action ones.


Can you cite that?


There you go. After going through this same topic for 15 years and seeing various government legal positions laid out, nothing has really changed and it gets old and tiresome to argue
over the same thing that has been well established several times over. I guess we might as well argue the earth might not be round or man never landed on the moon.

http://www.law.corne...22----000-.html
® It shall be unlawful for any person to assemble from imported parts any semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun which is identical to any rifle or shotgun prohibited from importation under section 925 (d)(3) of this chapter as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes except that this subsection shall not apply to—
(1) the assembly of any such rifle or shotgun for sale or distribution by a licensed manufacturer to the United States or any department or agency thereof or to any State or any department, agency, or political subdivision thereof; or
(2) the assembly of any such rifle or shotgun for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Attorney General.


I was asking you to cite the 10 part rule. Yes, federal law says you can not "assemble from imported parts," but the 10 or less foreign parts rule came from an ATF letter, many years ago.

The ATF is known for not following their own rules. I can not cite the case off the top of my head, but I heard rumors of a case where the ATF prosecuted someone for doing something that was legal according to an ATF letter he downloaded off the web.



So, back to my original point ... Accepting the 10 part rule as gospel, the second you put a Saiga-12 into non-sporting configuration with a flash hider or new stock, it's legal with US Made mags. That doesn't seem to hard to me.

Maybe I'm just dense, but I spent several hours fretting over 922r before realizing how easy it was.

RecycledElectrons


Sec. 178.39 Assembly of semiautomatic rifles or shotguns.

(a) No person shall assemble a semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun using more than 10 of the imported parts listed in paragraph © 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.

(B) The provisions of this section shall not apply to:

(1) The assembly of such rifle or shotgun for sale or distribution by a licensed manufacturer to the United States or any department or agency thereof or to any State or any department, agency, or political subdivision thereof; or

(2) The assembly of such rifle or shotgun for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Director under the provisions of Sec. 178.151; or

(3) The repair of any rifle or shotgun which had been imported into or assembled in the United States prior to November 30, 1990, or the replacement of any part of such firearm.

© For purposes of this section, the term imported parts are:

(1) Frames, receivers, receiver castings, forgings or stampings
(2) Barrels
(3) Barrel extensions
(4) Mounting blocks (trunions)
(5) Muzzle attachments
(6) Bolts
(7) Bolt carriers
(8) Operating rods
(9) Gas pistons
(10) Trigger housings
(11) Triggers
(12) Hammers
(13) Sears
(14) Disconnectors
(15) Buttstocks
(16) Pistol grips
(17) Forearms, handguards
(18) Magazine bodies
(19) Followers
(20) Floorplates



Is this clear now that it is written and not just some urban legend????????????????

http://www.922r.com/






Edited by leadsled, 07 November 2010 - 06:47 AM.

Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity!

#24 Ben Vampatella

Ben Vampatella

    Top Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,865 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Citrus County, Florida

Posted 07 November 2010 - 11:15 AM

it also states this in importation tax stamps. buried in some treasury department PDF, but its there. that tax stamp also defines configurations that are not legally importable, such as pistol gripped semi auto shotguns, or shotguns holding in excess of 5 rounds, rifles in excess of ten, blah blah.

so it isnt just a law, its also a tax revenue regulation.
Rockin the Saiga world since 2003

#25 RecycledElectrons

RecycledElectrons

    Member

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 42 posts

Posted 07 November 2010 - 07:23 PM

Sec. 178.39 Assembly of semiautomatic rifles or shotguns.

(a) 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.

( B ) The provisions of this section shall not apply to:

(1) The assembly of such rifle or shotgun for sale or distribution by a licensed manufacturer to the United States or any department or agency thereof or to any State or any department, agency, or political subdivision thereof; or

(2) The assembly of such rifle or shotgun for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Director under the provisions of Sec. 178.151; or

(3) The repair of any rifle or shotgun which had been imported into or assembled in the United States prior to November 30, 1990, or the replacement of any part of such firearm.

( c ) For purposes of this section, the term imported parts are:

(1) Frames, receivers, receiver castings, forgings or stampings
(2) Barrels
(3) Barrel extensions
(4) Mounting blocks (trunions)
(5) Muzzle attachments
(6) Bolts
(7) Bolt carriers
(8) Operating rods
(9) Gas pistons
(10) Trigger housings
(11) Triggers
(12) Hammers
(13) Sears
(14) Disconnectors
(15) Buttstocks
(16) Pistol grips
(17) Forearms, handguards
(18) Magazine bodies
(19) Followers
(20) Floorplates


First, thanks for clarifying.

As I see it, the claim that section 922r (of any law) contains the 10 parts rule is an incorrect urban legend.

The actual citation may have been 27CFR178.39. That's Title 27 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 178.39. (The problem is that I also need a "part" to cite the current CFR.) For example, Title 27 CFR, Part 1 (or 2, or 199,) Section 178.39.

At http://thegunwiki.co...RefFedCFR178_39 it says:

Code of Federal Regulations Title 27, Volume 1, Section 178.39, as mirrored from http://edocket.acces...27cfr178.39.htm on 2/26/2010"

Which means that is a copy of the CFR as was in 2002, as it appeared in a government archive that was accessed in 2010.

I don't seem to be able to find a 27CFR178 in the current version of Title 27 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which is here: http://www.access.gp...gi?title=201027

It seems it is now CFR27, Part 478 Section 478.39. (Section 478, not 178.)
http://frwebgate1.ac...action=retrieve

[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 27, Volume 3]
[Revised as of April 1, 2010]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 27CFR478.39]

[Page 36-37]

TITLE 27--ALCOHOL, TOBACCO PRODUCTS, AND FIREARMS

CHAPTER II--BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS, AND EXPLOSIVES,
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

PART 478_COMMERCE IN FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION--Table of Contents

Subpart C_Administrative and Miscellaneous Provisions

Sec. 478.39 Assembly of semiautomatic rifles or shotguns.

(a) 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.
( B ) The provisions of this section shall not apply to:
(1) The assembly of such rifle or shotgun for sale or distribution
by a licensed manufacturer to the United States or any department or
agency thereof or to any State or any department, agency, or political
subdivision thereof; or
(2) The assembly of such rifle or shotgun for the purposes of
testing or experimentation authorized by the Director under the
provisions of Sec. 478.151; or
(3) The repair of any rifle or shotgun which had been imported into
or assembled in the United States prior to November 30, 1990, or the
replacement of any part of such firearm.
( c ) For purposes of this section, the term imported parts are:
(1) Frames, receivers, receiver castings, forgings or stampings
(2) Barrels
(3) Barrel extensions
(4) Mounting blocks (trunions)
(5) Muzzle attachments
(6) Bolts
(7) Bolt carriers

[[Page 37]]

(8) Operating rods
(9) Gas pistons
(10) Trigger housings
(11) Triggers
(12) Hammers
(13) Sears
(14) Disconnectors
(15) Buttstocks
(16) Pistol grips
(17) Forearms, handguards
(18) Magazine bodies
(19) Followers
(20) Floorplates

[T.D. ATF-346, 58 FR 40589, July 29, 1993]


Thanks!

Edited by RecycledElectrons, 07 November 2010 - 08:07 PM.

  • Salmonking likes this

#26 Zambidis

Zambidis

    Executive Member

  • Banned
  • 574 posts

Posted 08 November 2010 - 08:51 PM

Regardless, every single one of them have told me that there is absolutely no reason they or anyone else they know would ever consider stopping someone at a range to break a firearm down to check compliance. The only time it would be an issue is if you were already under investigation for something and they wanted to nail you on federal charges.


One thing to remember about administrative agencies is that they can make drastic changes in course almost over night. If tomorrow there was some event to trigger it or someone sitting behind the right desk just got an itch to do it they could start placing a lot more emphasis on enforcement. Will they probably not but there is nothing stopping them.

To the OP,

You may want to do some back ground reading on how agencies work, how they relate to their organic statutes, how rule making works, and how agency interpretations work. You seem to be conflating things or simply not understanding where things came from and the force of law that they carry.

As I see it, the claim that section 922r (of any law) contains the 10 parts rule is an incorrect urban legend.


If all you are trying to say is that the 10 parts rule is not written explicitly into the text of the statute then you are correct. It is a regulation that relates to that statute. The statute says you cannot assemble. The regulations defines assembling. So 922r really does contain rule in the sense that if you do not abide by it you are in fact violating 922r. The definition of assemble just is not expressly written out there, but the word assemble which stands for its definition is in the statute.


The ATF is known for not following their own rules. I can not cite the case off the top of my head, but I heard rumors of a case where the ATF prosecuted someone for doing something that was legal according to an ATF letter he downloaded off the web



Again you need to bone up on agency law. An ATF letter is typically going to be an interpretation. Interpretive letters are NOT binding law. Agency interpretations of rules are not binding law. To download some old letter and then think you can really rely on it is a demonstration of ignorance. That gent getting prosecuted is also in no way the agency violating their own "rules". You need to familiarize yourself with the differences between, statutes, rules, and interpretations.

Alternately, you replace the nut over the threads with a US made choke or flash hider, [in conjunction with a US mag] and you are legal.


So, back to my original point ... Accepting the 10 part rule as gospel, the second you put a Saiga-12 into non-sporting configuration with a flash hider or new stock, it's legal with US Made mags. That doesn't seem to hard to me.



Are you trying to say you can add a US mag and a US flash hider and be compliant?

That is not the case. If you don't have the factory mag you are down to either 11 or 12 countable parts depending on how you want to count the thread protector. If you then add a US flash hider you are at 11 parts either way you count the thread protector. 11 parts is not compliant. Remember what you really need to do for compliance is subtract foreign parts not add US parts per se (although subtracting foreign parts from a practical stand point typically means replacing them with US parts).

* edit for typos

Edited by Zambidis, 08 November 2010 - 08:56 PM.


#27 Vintovka Dragunova

Vintovka Dragunova

    its the end of the world as we know it. and i feel fine.

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,994 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:new mexico

Posted 08 November 2010 - 11:49 PM

922r is the law!!!! Dumb law, but it's a law!!!!
Just like speed limits, building permits and the requirement to have a driver's license to operate a vehicle are the law. So yeah parts counts matter, you never know when something will happen that will cause the authorities to look at you. Last thing you need is for them to pile up a bunch of un-related charges because you where one part short of being legal.

Just follow the law and you don't have to worry about a trip to club fed where Buba and the rest of the gang in there takes turns helping you do the colan stretch standing. :cryss:

ya know its funny, but not on of the 1,300 I/Ms we have housed here, are in for failure to comply with 922r. :lolol:
  • turkeyhawk likes this

#28 Zambidis

Zambidis

    Executive Member

  • Banned
  • 574 posts

Posted 09 November 2010 - 12:16 AM

ya know its funny, but not on of the 1,300 I/Ms we have housed here, are in for failure to comply with 922r.


A few moths back I very briefly and quickly searched lexis nexis and was able to find one case where the defendant was convicted of a 922r violation it involved some SKSs IIRC. So it can happen.

To me the potential costs even after accounting for the very low odds of prosecution outweigh the relative ease and low cost of compliance. Your going to pay a lawyer more to look up the statute and regs and give them a careful reading then it costs to make a gun compliant in most cases.

#29 S-12 Pauly

S-12 Pauly

    Top Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,865 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Salem Oregon

Posted 10 November 2010 - 11:38 AM

Why the panic over Saiga-12 922r?


Because some of us actually like the idea of using the mil-spec Russian 8 round mags, you know... The best & most reliable mags out there for the gun.

And if we should be forced to actually use the gun for SD, we don't want a leftist, overzealous D.A. to seek 5 years federal time for federal firearms charges when we would have otherwise been off scott-free due to the fact that we acted in self defense.
  • Kevin in Texas likes this

Not molesting children, since 1978.


#30 Zambidis

Zambidis

    Executive Member

  • Banned
  • 574 posts

Posted 10 November 2010 - 12:17 PM

I think the most likely way an issue would come up would be something else gets you one the radar of the authorities then they start looking at everything more closely. One member here had his rifle confiscated and was charged on a separate offense. I could see it becoming an issue in a case like that if the gun was non compliant.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users