finishman2000 2 Posted December 13, 2010 Report Share Posted December 13, 2010 (edited) I have a 2001 saiga/ EAA imported RPK. Several interested people have commented that it had to be alted/converted here. I have talked to EAA this morning and was told that they do not alter any guns they have sold and that it was imported as I received it. Anyone know the history of the EAA saiga and why they weren't imported this way for very long? I asked how many were brought in this way but she didn't know. The bullet guide is welded in place and the 4 holes that are used in the now saiga sporter are there but have steel rivets in them not plastic covers. here is a pic of the rifle Please read the forum guiselines, in particular, 1.B NO FISHING FOR VALUES OR PRICE QUOTES IF YOU ARE NOT A CONTRIBUTOR... Please do not mention or start threads saying that you "thinking about selling" unless you are a member of he ”Contributors” group as DOING THIS IN A PUBLIC FORUM WELL BE CONSIDERED AS ADVERTISING OR POSTING AN AD. Edited December 13, 2010 by tritium No fishing for prices by noncontributor. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Shandlanos 1,470 Posted December 13, 2010 Report Share Posted December 13, 2010 Interesting rifle. Read the forum rules before posting... You must be a contributor to fish for prices. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
beefcakeb99 572 Posted December 13, 2010 Report Share Posted December 13, 2010 I once got banned for asking how much something was worth on a forum and mentioning i wanted to sell in the same post....so do not do that... Also i am not a lawyer, but i think you cannot be held liable if you bought the gun like that, only if you modify it to be uncompliant, someone correct me on that please... 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JK-47 33 Posted December 13, 2010 Report Share Posted December 13, 2010 ah, just because EAA didn't alter it doesn't preclude the possibility that somone else did. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
finishman2000 2 Posted December 14, 2010 Author Report Share Posted December 14, 2010 ah, just because EAA didn't alter it doesn't preclude the possibility that somone else did. Eaa sold it as shown. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
toshbar 36 Posted December 14, 2010 Report Share Posted December 14, 2010 I am going to bet that you did not buy that gun new. I bet one of the previous owners bought it, converted it, and put metal rivets in the holes, and that stock set on it. What kind of trigger does it have in it? does it say 'Tapco USA' anywhere on it? How about that plastic pistol grip? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
my762buzz 141 Posted December 14, 2010 Report Share Posted December 14, 2010 I have a 2001 saiga/ EAA imported RPK. Several interested people have commented that it had to be alted/converted here. I have talked to EAA this morning and was told that they do not alter any guns they have sold and that it was imported as I received it. Anyone know the history of the EAA saiga and why they weren't imported this way for very long? I asked how many were brought in this way but she didn't know. The bullet guide is welded in place and the 4 holes that are used in the now saiga sporter are there but have steel rivets in them not plastic covers. It was not imported that way. Someone modified it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
my762buzz 141 Posted December 14, 2010 Report Share Posted December 14, 2010 ah, just because EAA didn't alter it doesn't preclude the possibility that somone else did. Eaa sold it as shown. There is no way that it was approved by the government for import with a pistol grip and high capacity mag ready if sold to regular civilians. Either EAA or someone changed it once it showed up in the USA. Otherwise, prove it. Good luck. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
finishman2000 2 Posted December 14, 2010 Author Report Share Posted December 14, 2010 (edited) I am going to bet that you did not buy that gun new. I bet one of the previous owners bought it, converted it, and put metal rivets in the holes, and that stock set on it. What kind of trigger does it have in it? does it say 'Tapco USA' anywhere on it? How about that plastic pistol grip? nope. no names or usa on any parts. it has sold though i'm still curious about the eaa ak's. i have one of the .22lr russian target handguns that also went the way of the dodo. i am starting to get the bug to convert the 5.45 and 7.62 sporting saiga i have. i swore i wouldn't since i do shoot them both very well. lots of good info here on how to do it and what/where to get the parts. thanks cwk Edited December 14, 2010 by finishman2000 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
308SAIGA 55 Posted December 14, 2010 Report Share Posted December 14, 2010 I once got banned for asking how much something was worth on a forum and mentioning i wanted to sell in the same post....so do not do that... Also i am not a lawyer, but i think you cannot be held liable if you bought the gun like that, only if you modify it to be uncompliant, someone correct me on that please... This is correct, in a letter from ATF it states that possession is not illegal only the alteration.... The letter can be found on this forum under the legal section.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Shandlanos 1,470 Posted December 23, 2010 Report Share Posted December 23, 2010 If it was imported before certain treaties with Russia, despite what the naysayers above have said, I could believe it was brought in that way. It doesn't have a bayo lug or folding stock, so if my "evil assault death machine" count is right, a pistol grip and even a threaded barrel are ok. We can still import AK folders without bayo lugs or threaded barrels, so it stands to reason that, without that silly treaty with Russia, there'd be nothing preventing the import of that rifle as it is. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
308SAIGA 55 Posted December 23, 2010 Report Share Posted December 23, 2010 If it was imported before certain treaties with Russia, despite what the naysayers above have said, I could believe it was brought in that way. It doesn't have a bayo lug or folding stock, so if my "evil assault death machine" count is right, a pistol grip and even a threaded barrel are ok. We can still import AK folders without bayo lugs or threaded barrels, so it stands to reason that, without that silly treaty with Russia, there'd be nothing preventing the import of that rifle as it is. This is impossible, as stated in the original post it is a 2001, and the laws that prohibit(s) the importation of PG rifles was put in place in 1996. So there is absolutely no way it was imported in this configuration...... But again if he bought it like that you are good to go...... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
toshbar 36 Posted December 23, 2010 Report Share Posted December 23, 2010 But again if he bought it like that you are good to go...... Wouldn't he have to have bought it new, from a dealer? I'm not trying to nit pick for no sake, but nit picking here is needed. If a private seller sells a converted rifle that is not in compliance with the 922r law, isn't the buyer responsible for making the gun comply? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
308SAIGA 55 Posted December 24, 2010 Report Share Posted December 24, 2010 (edited) But again if he bought it like that you are good to go...... Wouldn't he have to have bought it new, from a dealer? I'm not trying to nit pick for no sake, but nit picking here is needed. If a private seller sells a converted rifle that is not in compliance with the 922r law, isn't the buyer responsible for making the gun comply? Then the seller is committing the Felony..... ETA: Open and read the attachment under the dead horse.... http://forum.saiga-12.com/index.php?showtopic=54843&view=findpost&p=559327 Edited December 24, 2010 by 308saiga Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bob_L 0 Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 (edited) This does not look like an RPK, but a Saiga with a 20 inch barrel that has been modified to look like an RPK. The receiver and trunion appear to be the usual AK and Saiga trunion rather than the heavier receiver and trunion of the RPK. Finally, Molot, and not Izhmash, has been the manufacturer of RPKs. Edited January 9, 2011 by bob_L Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GregM1 241 Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 I once got banned for asking how much something was worth on a forum and mentioning i wanted to sell in the same post....so do not do that... Also i am not a lawyer, but i think you cannot be held liable if you bought the gun like that, only if you modify it to be uncompliant, someone correct me on that please... This is correct, in a letter from ATF it states that possession is not illegal only the alteration.... The letter can be found on this forum under the legal section.... i wonder, if the ATF wanted to be jerks, could they say that removing, reloading, and reinserting the mag, would be the violation by assembling the rifle illegally? Since to modify a short barrel rifle, the only thing you need to do to when cutting off a muzzle attachment for a new one is to remove the mag to make it an unassembled rifle. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Zambidis 90 Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 As to ATF letters, I am just astonished how many people do not seem to understand the legal value/implication of those letters. People citing letters giving interpretation of the law to third parties and acting like that makes something settled law shows an extreme ignorance of how administrative agencies work, and of administrative law generally. One often can find conflicting letters on issues. Waiving an ATF interpretive response letter around and citing it like it is law is silly, and could result in you getting yourself in legal hot water if you rely on it. Those letters are not the law. They are the ATF's opinion, at the moment they wrote it, about what the law means and they can change that opinion the next day (or sooner) if they so like. That is part of the reason one can find conflicting letters on issues. If you want to cite a court decision, or an actual regulation or a statute that is another matter. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
VaiFanatic90 360 Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 The ATF is a massive contradiction in itself, and it needs to be done away with, along with the IRS. 3 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.