ewoketeer 35 Posted February 16, 2011 Report Share Posted February 16, 2011 RE: LEO nervous about armed citizens. Texas is a Castle State... we can legally carry on our own property and in our own vehicles without a permit and are justified with deadly force should it become necessary. I've asked 5 LEO's (police and sherrif) here in San Antonio how they feel about citizens carrying in their automobiles for SD. Every single one of them looked at me like I'm a bad guy. This may only be due to their personal experiences but there you have it. They all responded more positively when I asked if they'd feel better if I had a Cocealed Carry Permit stating, basically, that this assures the carrier is licensed and better trained. I've been told in the past that "...regulated Militia..." means well-trained militia. It makes sense, when you consider the word regulator means something that controls... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
incognito485 26 Posted February 16, 2011 Report Share Posted February 16, 2011 RE: LEO nervous about armed citizens. Texas is a Castle State... we can legally carry on our own property and in our own vehicles without a permit and are justified with deadly force should it become necessary. I've asked 5 LEO's (police and sherrif) here in San Antonio how they feel about citizens carrying in their automobiles for SD. Every single one of them looked at me like I'm a bad guy. This may only be due to their personal experiences but there you have it. They all responded more positively when I asked if they'd feel better if I had a Cocealed Carry Permit stating, basically, that this assures the carrier is licensed and better trained. That is true to an extent. You can carry in your vehicle without a permit due to the legislative update, but, it has to be CONCEALED. If an officer can see it in plain view, it is illegal. People are better off getting CHL's and carrying it on them. But you also cannot carry it on you when you go to a bar, school etc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
incognito485 26 Posted February 16, 2011 Report Share Posted February 16, 2011 (edited) I apologize if this has been said: I don't know how much the ATF values our opinions on this issue, but I was thinking that if the LEO's on here would send letters defending the S12 they may listen a little closer. Just a thought. I think that you have a good point, but I don't think it will work. Lemme tell you why. How many letters, phone call, etc do you think the ATF has recieved regarding the legality of the S12? 100'S 1000'S? I'm willing to be its been prety high. Countless people have been swatting the hornets nest with a stick and running off for awhile now. It's like a little kid that pulls on his dad's shirt a thousand times because he wants something. Eventually he is gonna answer back. So I'm sure that all theses letters, phone call have raised suspicion and "Gee..... I wonder why all these people keep calling about this particular gun, maybe we should check it out". So congratultions to those people, because now they did just what you asked them to do. They are gonna check it out. They wouldn't be during their job if they didn't. You woke the beast and now everyone is pissed? Maybe everyone should have left it alone. Some S12 owners may be forcing them to make a black and white decision on a gray-area problem. Edited February 16, 2011 by incognito485 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
kingjamez 8 Posted February 16, 2011 Report Share Posted February 16, 2011 (edited) I think that you have a good point, but I don't think it will work. Lemme tell you why. How many letters, phone call, etc do you think the ATF has recieved regarding the legality of the S12? 100'S 1000'S? I'm willing to be its been prety high. Countless people have been swatting the hornets nest with a stick and running off for awhile now. It's like a little kid that pulls on his dad's shirt a thousand times because he wants something. Eventually he is gonna answer back. So I'm sure that all theses letters, phone call have raised suspicion and "Gee..... I wonder why all these people keep calling about this particular gun, maybe we should check it out". So congratultions to those people, because now they did just what you asked them to do. They are gonna check it out. They wouldn't be during their job if they didn't. You woke the beast and now everyone is pissed? Maybe everyone should have left it alone. Some S12 owners may be forcing them to make a black and white decision on a gray-area problem. Lol. If you think for a second that the ATF hasn't already "checked out" the S12 and that writing about it will make them aware of it, your kidding yourself. It's likely the entire study was initiated due to the S12. It was even pictured in the study! -Jim Edited February 16, 2011 by kingjamez Quote Link to post Share on other sites
PostsOnPercocet 32 Posted February 17, 2011 Report Share Posted February 17, 2011 Wait, did they make the ruling? Did I miss it somewhere? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
T-WOLF 1 Posted February 17, 2011 Report Share Posted February 17, 2011 Gun enthusiasts are often their own enemy when it comes to certian things. Parts kits in the early 2ks....flying off the shelf people left and right making builds out of them...a whole mini industry rolled out because of it...people posting thier builds everywhere...it was great. BATFE...you folks been having to much fun with this and thanks for pointing it out to us,due to the popularity we have decided to allow parts kits minus the barrel. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
incognito485 26 Posted February 17, 2011 Report Share Posted February 17, 2011 I think that you have a good point, but I don't think it will work. Lemme tell you why. How many letters, phone call, etc do you think the ATF has recieved regarding the legality of the S12? 100'S 1000'S? I'm willing to be its been prety high. Countless people have been swatting the hornets nest with a stick and running off for awhile now. It's like a little kid that pulls on his dad's shirt a thousand times because he wants something. Eventually he is gonna answer back. So I'm sure that all theses letters, phone call have raised suspicion and "Gee..... I wonder why all these people keep calling about this particular gun, maybe we should check it out". So congratultions to those people, because now they did just what you asked them to do. They are gonna check it out. They wouldn't be during their job if they didn't. You woke the beast and now everyone is pissed? Maybe everyone should have left it alone. Some S12 owners may be forcing them to make a black and white decision on a gray-area problem. Lol. If you think for a second that the ATF hasn't already "checked out" the S12 and that writing about it will make them aware of it, your kidding yourself. It's likely the entire study was initiated due to the S12. It was even pictured in the study! -Jim Of course they have already "checked out" the Saiga prior to anyone writing about it. The point I'm trying to make is, they are not going to go out of their way to screw anyone over just because they just want to. Now they can make any ruling they want on any weapon they want on their say so, yes. But I think the constant attention they are getting from the S12 has for the most part has prompted this "study". They could have published a study when the weapon first came out, but they didn't, why now? When you say the study was initiated due to the S12, again why wasn't it prompted when they first learned about the weapon? This isn't something just was just newly imported a year ago. I think you missed the point I was trying to make. I'm not saying the ATF never knew about it until recently, because that's just dumb. I'm saying that the "study" is prompted by something other than the initial import of the weapon. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
PostsOnPercocet 32 Posted February 17, 2011 Report Share Posted February 17, 2011 I think that you have a good point, but I don't think it will work. Lemme tell you why. How many letters, phone call, etc do you think the ATF has recieved regarding the legality of the S12? 100'S 1000'S? I'm willing to be its been prety high. Countless people have been swatting the hornets nest with a stick and running off for awhile now. It's like a little kid that pulls on his dad's shirt a thousand times because he wants something. Eventually he is gonna answer back. So I'm sure that all theses letters, phone call have raised suspicion and "Gee..... I wonder why all these people keep calling about this particular gun, maybe we should check it out". So congratultions to those people, because now they did just what you asked them to do. They are gonna check it out. They wouldn't be during their job if they didn't. You woke the beast and now everyone is pissed? Maybe everyone should have left it alone. Some S12 owners may be forcing them to make a black and white decision on a gray-area problem. Lol. If you think for a second that the ATF hasn't already "checked out" the S12 and that writing about it will make them aware of it, your kidding yourself. It's likely the entire study was initiated due to the S12. It was even pictured in the study! -Jim Of course they have already "checked out" the Saiga prior to anyone writing about it. The point I'm trying to make is, they are not going to go out of their way to screw anyone over just because they just want to. Now they can make any ruling they want on any weapon they want on their say so, yes. But I think the constant attention they are getting from the S12 has for the most part has prompted this "study". They could have published a study when the weapon first came out, but they didn't, why now? When you say the study was initiated due to the S12, again why wasn't it prompted when they first learned about the weapon? This isn't something just was just newly imported a year ago. I think you missed the point I was trying to make. I'm not saying the ATF never knew about it until recently, because that's just dumb. I'm saying that the "study" is prompted by something other than the initial import of the weapon. Of course it was. The conversions, MD20, and youtube. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The Night Armory 0 Posted February 19, 2011 Report Share Posted February 19, 2011 Friked Is right. The ATF is bypassing congress with this study by being able to have the Attorney General sign off on it due to the Patriot Act. This has nothing to with sporting or hunting purposes, it is a ploy to separate law abiding citizens from their weapons and 2nd amendment rights. And once they get this, then they will ban everything. Light rails on handguns will be considered bayonet lugs, hi cap mags gone, more people out of work, the feds are afraid that an uprising like in Egypt will happen here, and they want nothing more than unarmed protestors standing against armed police/military. And we ALL know how badly that will end. Keep in line slave and do not question authority. It's not only Saiga's, but Benelli, Remington's new semi-auto this is there way of getting their foot through the door for an all out assault on firearms period. Tac teams are fearful of doing a breech on someone with a 20 round mag loaded with deer slugs, because even with kevlar it's going to make them stop and have to think. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
frick 3 Posted February 19, 2011 Report Share Posted February 19, 2011 (edited) In researching some other stuff, I came across this from the ATF's pamphlet for NFA dealers and such, I don't know if it has been posted, but, pay attention to the bold, and substitute Saiga 12 for USAS 12, and you will get the point I have made for years. 26 U.S.C. § 5845(f)(2): DESTRUCTIVE DEVICE (Nonsporting shotgun having a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter) The USAS-12 shotgun has a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter and is not generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes. Therefore, it is classified as a destructive device for purposes of the National Firearms Act, 26 U.S.C. Chapter 53. ATF Rul. 94-1 The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) has examined a firearm identified as the USAS-12 shotgun to determine whether it is a destructive device as that term is used in the National Firearms Act (NFA), 26 U.S.C. Chapter 53. The USAS-12 is a 12 gauge, gas-operated, autoloading semiautomatic shotgun which is chambered for 12 gauge 2 ¾-inch ammunition. It has an 18 ¼-inch barrel, is approximately 38 inches long, and weighs 12.4 pounds unloaded and approximately 15 pounds with a loaded magazine, depending on the capacity of the magazine. The USAS-12 is equipped with a 12 round detachable box magazine, but a 28 round detachable drum magazine is also available. The shotgun is approximately 11 inches deep with a box magazine. There is an integral carrying handle on top of the receiver which houses a rifle –type aperture rear and adjustable post-type front sight. The USAS-12 has a separate combat-style pistol grip located on the bottom of the receiver, forward of the buttstock. An optional telescopic sight may be attached to the carrying handle. The barrel is located below the operating mechanism in such fashion that the barrel is in a straight line with the center of the buttstock. Section 5845(f), Title 26 U.S.C., classifies certain weapons as “destructive devices” which are subject to the registration and tax provisions of the NFA. Section 5845(f)(2) provides the following: (f) Destructive Device – The term “destructive device” means* * * (2) any type of weapon by whatever name known which will, or which may be readily converted to, expel a projectile by the action of an explosive or other propellant, the barrel or barrels of which have a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter, except a shotgun or shotgun shell the Secretary or his delegate finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes. A “sporting purpose” test which is almost identical to that in section 5845(f)(2) appears in 18 U.S.C. § 925(d)(3). This provision of the Gun Control Act of 21968 (GCA) provides that the Secretary shall authorize a firearm to be imported into the United States if the firearm is “generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes.” With the exception of the “readily adaptable” language, this provision is identical to the sporting shotgun exception to the destructive device definition. The definition of “destructive device” in the GCA (18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(4)) is identical to that in the NFA. In determining whether shotguns with a bore diameter of more than one-half inch in diameter are “generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes” and thus are not destructive devices under the NFA, we believe it is appropriate to use the same criteria used for evaluating shotguns under the “sporting purposes” test of section 925(d)(3). Congress used virtually identical language in describing the weapons subject to the two statutory schemes, and the language was added to the GCA and the NFA at the same time. In connection with the determination of importability, ATF determined that the USAS-12 shotgun was not eligible for importation under the sporting purposes test in section 925(d)(3). In reaching this determination, ATF evaluated the weight, size, bulk, designed magazine capacity, configuration, and other characteristics of the USAS-12. It was determined that the weight of the USAS-12, 12.4 pounds, made it much heavier than traditional 12 gauge sporting shotguns, which made it awkward to carry for extended periods, as in hunting, and cumbersome to fire at multiple small moving targets, as in skeet and trap shooting. The width of the USAS-12 with drum magazine, approximately 6 inches, and the depth with box magazine, in excess of 11 inches, far exceed that of traditional sporting shotguns, which do not exceed 3 inches in width and 4 inches in depth. The large size and bulk of the USAS-12 made it extremely difficult to maneuver quickly enough to engage moving targets as is necessary in hunting, skeet, and trap shooting. The detachable box magazine with 12 cartridge capacity and the detachable drum magazine with 28 cartridge capacity were or a larger capacity than traditional repeating sporting shotguns, which generally contain tubular magazines with a capacity of 3 – 5 cartridges. Additionally, detachable magazines permit more rapid reloading than do tubular magazines. Finally, the combat-style pistol grip, the barrel-to-buttstock configuration, the bayonet lug, and the overall appearance and general shape of the weapon were radically different from traditional sporting shotguns and strikingly similar to shotguns designed specifically for or modified for combat and law enforcement use. Section 7805(, title 26 U.S.C., provides that the Secretary may prescribe the extent, if any, to which any ruling relating to the internal revenue laws shall be applied without retroactive effect. Accordingly, all rulings issued under the Internal Revenue Code are applied retroactively unless they specifically provide otherwise. Pursuant to section 7805(, the Director, as the delegate of the Secretary, may prescribe the extent to which any ruling will apply without retroactive effect. Held: TheUSAS-12 is a shotgun with a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter which is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes. The weight, size, bulk, designed magazine capacity, configuration, and other factors indicate that the USAS-12 is a semiautomatic version of a military type assault shotgun. Accordingly, the USAS-12 is a destructive device as that term is used in 26 U.S.C. § 5845(f)(2). Pursuant to section 7805(, this ruling is applied prospectively effective March 1, 1994, with respect to the making, transfer, and special (occupational) taxes imposed by the NFA. All other provisions of the NFA apply retroactively effective March 1, 1994. 26 U.S.C. § 5845(f)(2): DESTRUCTIVE DEVICE (Non-sporting shotgun Now, as IMPORTED, the Saiga does NOT meet the above criteria, but the minute you put a pistol grip on it, and insert a 12 round stick, or 20 round mag, you have a USAS 12, with two exceptions, a carry handle, and a bayonet lug, neither of which is going to be enough to save it from a non sporting declaration. The ONLY hope, is that they find a sporting use. And, a "Report" is only going to be used for two reasons, to do something, or to not do something, and when you look at the past record of the ATF, how many times have they found in favor of gun owners, and not in favor of the ban, registration or destruction of an item?????? Edited February 19, 2011 by frick 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
danklab 57 Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 I apologize if this has been said: I don't know how much the ATF values our opinions on this issue, but I was thinking that if the LEO's on here would send letters defending the S12 they may listen a little closer. Just a thought. I think that you have a good point, but I don't think it will work. Lemme tell you why. How many letters, phone call, etc do you think the ATF has recieved regarding the legality of the S12? 100'S 1000'S? I'm willing to be its been prety high. Countless people have been swatting the hornets nest with a stick and running off for awhile now. It's like a little kid that pulls on his dad's shirt a thousand times because he wants something. Eventually he is gonna answer back. So I'm sure that all theses letters, phone call have raised suspicion and "Gee..... I wonder why all these people keep calling about this particular gun, maybe we should check it out". So congratultions to those people, because now they did just what you asked them to do. They are gonna check it out. They wouldn't be during their job if they didn't. You woke the beast and now everyone is pissed? Maybe everyone should have left it alone. Some S12 owners may be forcing them to make a black and white decision on a gray-area problem. The letters and calls have been coming in since the study has begun. People calling and sending letters doesn't have anything to do with them deciding to initiate the study. They knew about S-12's for sure before it started. Sending your input to the ATF is the only logical recourse that people have now... even though they will still do whatever they want to do, regardless of our opinions or rights. No one even knows for sure if they are planning to do anything with the S-12's.. although there is a pretty good probability. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
1stMarDiv 4 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Can anyone look at exhibit 2 regarding Ohio, It looks like converted Saiga's are prohibited. Hope I'm wrong Quote Link to post Share on other sites
PostsOnPercocet 32 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 (edited) In researching some other stuff, I came across this from the ATF's pamphlet for NFA dealers and such, I don't know if it has been posted, but, pay attention to the bold, and substitute Saiga 12 for USAS 12, and you will get the point I have made for years. 26 U.S.C. § 5845(f)(2): DESTRUCTIVE DEVICE (Nonsporting shotgun having a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter) The USAS-12 shotgun has a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter and is not generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes. Therefore, it is classified as a destructive device for purposes of the National Firearms Act, 26 U.S.C. Chapter 53. ATF Rul. 94-1 The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) has examined a firearm identified as the USAS-12 shotgun to determine whether it is a destructive device as that term is used in the National Firearms Act (NFA), 26 U.S.C. Chapter 53. The USAS-12 is a 12 gauge, gas-operated, autoloading semiautomatic shotgun which is chambered for 12 gauge 2 ¾-inch ammunition. It has an 18 ¼-inch barrel, is approximately 38 inches long, and weighs 12.4 pounds unloaded and approximately 15 pounds with a loaded magazine, depending on the capacity of the magazine. The USAS-12 is equipped with a 12 round detachable box magazine, but a 28 round detachable drum magazine is also available. The shotgun is approximately 11 inches deep with a box magazine. There is an integral carrying handle on top of the receiver which houses a rifle –type aperture rear and adjustable post-type front sight. The USAS-12 has a separate combat-style pistol grip located on the bottom of the receiver, forward of the buttstock. An optional telescopic sight may be attached to the carrying handle. The barrel is located below the operating mechanism in such fashion that the barrel is in a straight line with the center of the buttstock. Section 5845(f), Title 26 U.S.C., classifies certain weapons as "destructive devices" which are subject to the registration and tax provisions of the NFA. Section 5845(f)(2) provides the following: (f) Destructive Device – The term "destructive device" means* * * (2) any type of weapon by whatever name known which will, or which may be readily converted to, expel a projectile by the action of an explosive or other propellant, the barrel or barrels of which have a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter, except a shotgun or shotgun shell the Secretary or his delegate finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes. A "sporting purpose" test which is almost identical to that in section 5845(f)(2) appears in 18 U.S.C. § 925(d)(3). This provision of the Gun Control Act of 21968 (GCA) provides that the Secretary shall authorize a firearm to be imported into the United States if the firearm is "generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes." With the exception of the "readily adaptable" language, this provision is identical to the sporting shotgun exception to the destructive device definition. The definition of "destructive device" in the GCA (18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(4)) is identical to that in the NFA. In determining whether shotguns with a bore diameter of more than one-half inch in diameter are "generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes" and thus are not destructive devices under the NFA, we believe it is appropriate to use the same criteria used for evaluating shotguns under the "sporting purposes" test of section 925(d)(3). Congress used virtually identical language in describing the weapons subject to the two statutory schemes, and the language was added to the GCA and the NFA at the same time. In connection with the determination of importability, ATF determined that the USAS-12 shotgun was not eligible for importation under the sporting purposes test in section 925(d)(3). In reaching this determination, ATF evaluated the weight, size, bulk, designed magazine capacity, configuration, and other characteristics of the USAS-12. It was determined that the weight of the USAS-12, 12.4 pounds, made it much heavier than traditional 12 gauge sporting shotguns, which made it awkward to carry for extended periods, as in hunting, and cumbersome to fire at multiple small moving targets, as in skeet and trap shooting. The width of the USAS-12 with drum magazine, approximately 6 inches, and the depth with box magazine, in excess of 11 inches, far exceed that of traditional sporting shotguns, which do not exceed 3 inches in width and 4 inches in depth. The large size and bulk of the USAS-12 made it extremely difficult to maneuver quickly enough to engage moving targets as is necessary in hunting, skeet, and trap shooting. The detachable box magazine with 12 cartridge capacity and the detachable drum magazine with 28 cartridge capacity were or a larger capacity than traditional repeating sporting shotguns, which generally contain tubular magazines with a capacity of 3 – 5 cartridges. Additionally, detachable magazines permit more rapid reloading than do tubular magazines. Finally, the combat-style pistol grip, the barrel-to-buttstock configuration, the bayonet lug, and the overall appearance and general shape of the weapon were radically different from traditional sporting shotguns and strikingly similar to shotguns designed specifically for or modified for combat and law enforcement use. Section 7805(, title 26 U.S.C., provides that the Secretary may prescribe the extent, if any, to which any ruling relating to the internal revenue laws shall be applied without retroactive effect. Accordingly, all rulings issued under the Internal Revenue Code are applied retroactively unless they specifically provide otherwise. Pursuant to section 7805(, the Director, as the delegate of the Secretary, may prescribe the extent to which any ruling will apply without retroactive effect. Held: TheUSAS-12 is a shotgun with a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter which is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes. The weight, size, bulk, designed magazine capacity, configuration, and other factors indicate that the USAS-12 is a semiautomatic version of a military type assault shotgun. Accordingly, the USAS-12 is a destructive device as that term is used in 26 U.S.C. § 5845(f)(2). Pursuant to section 7805(, this ruling is applied prospectively effective March 1, 1994, with respect to the making, transfer, and special (occupational) taxes imposed by the NFA. All other provisions of the NFA apply retroactively effective March 1, 1994. 26 U.S.C. § 5845(f)(2): DESTRUCTIVE DEVICE (Non-sporting shotgun Now, as IMPORTED, the Saiga does NOT meet the above criteria, but the minute you put a pistol grip on it, and insert a 12 round stick, or 20 round mag, you have a USAS 12, with two exceptions, a carry handle, and a bayonet lug, neither of which is going to be enough to save it from a non sporting declaration. The ONLY hope, is that they find a sporting use. And, a "Report" is only going to be used for two reasons, to do something, or to not do something, and when you look at the past record of the ATF, how many times have they found in favor of gun owners, and not in favor of the ban, registration or destruction of an item?????? I really don't understand why people think they are going to leave these alone. They are way more "worse" in the eyes of the ATF than any other shotgun out there. Look at what they did with the sweeper and stryker. The gov does not want citizens having major firepower. As they take away more and more of our rights, and get more worried about people getting pissed like in Eygyt, they will try to take our guns away at a faster rate. Naysayers don[t believe me? Go study history. Don't get me wrong, I'd love for them to leave teh S12 alone, but that just isn't going to happen. Actually, maybe it will, but you can bet your ass they will make it illegal to convert them. Edited February 21, 2011 by PostsOnPercocet Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sasha 10 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
shalamov 9 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
unearthlyevil 2 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 (edited) Honestly it is pretty clear to see that the S-12 is the primary target of the study just by looking at the exhibits presented within...we have a page picturing four or five of grandpa's duck guns and at the bottom the S-12 in all its savage glory, then a few pages later a nice close up of the 20 round drum. I certainly do not welcome this as a Saiga owner, however it is clearly obvious that bad times are coming for those of us with S-12's. The best we can probably wish for is an NFA classification requiring us to pay and register rather than a total ban and seizure of our shotguns. One thing in the S-12's favor is the fact that it does not exceed the four inch high, by three inch wide receiver measurements, but I believe that will be a moot point in the brutal end. Edited February 21, 2011 by unearthlyevil Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Crusader 64 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 (edited) I am beginning to think that the BATF will not ban the importation or reclass the Saiga 12 to DD. If they do, the Constitutionality of the 68 act will be challenged in court. In light of Heller vs DC it could be found unConstitutional and if that happens it would undo the 89 import ban. Does BATF really want to loose the ground that they have already gained? The NRA has made it clear, if they implement the ban they will challenge them in court. For all those who don't think that the NRA has grown in significant power should ask themselves these questions: How is the ATF Director Nomination congressional confirmation going? The NRA opposes the nominee therefore congress will not confirm him. To this day they still do not have a director. Next question: How is the funding Appropriations comming alone for the FFL report to ATF of people who purchase a certain number of semi-auto rifles greater than .22 cal in the four boarder states under project gun runner? The House has removed this from the House budget bill yesterday. They may indeed ban the Saiga 12, but if they do there will be consequences. Do they really want to loose power? Edited February 21, 2011 by Crusader Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bridis 319 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 (edited) I say no one is "Banning" the current S-12. Anyone want to bet? Come on. One of you SCARETASTIC nimrods must feel strongly enough about your convictions to assign a dollar value. ANYONE?!?! I'm guessing no. Edited February 21, 2011 by Bridis Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The_Caged_Bird 474 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I highly doubt that anything will happen to Saigas as far as the BATF is concerned, BUT, they are the government, they can do whatever they want... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
kevin.rose0@gmail.com 62 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 An import ban is well within the constitution, as it is foreign commerce. The USG can use whatever basis they want to to regulate foreign commerce in guns, even "sporting use" idiocy. That doesn't mean that it's not worth fighting this, but you need to plan on fighting it by getting your congresscritters to act. The awful "sporting use" stuff in the 1968 GCA that allows the ATF/DoJ to classify it as a NFA weapon is another matter entirely. That seems a lot more questionable under the constitution. That also might well not be a battle that the current admin wants to fight, as it implies that a Mossberg 590 is a DD, as well as every shotgun that can have a tube longer than 5 rounds installed. Send a well though out, non-inflammatory reply to the ATF, but also write your Senators and Congresscritter. If I was a democratic Senator I'd be really nervous about allowing the DoJ under Holder to classify every pump and semi-auto shotgun in the US as a NFA weapon in an election year, so it can't hurt to point that that this is what the ATF "study" says. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bigmegina 3 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 (edited) Bridis your on.if you will we all win.if i win we all lose.i will bet you 1 6 pack of bud that the batfags ban sagia 12s.you will have to turn them in to be derstroyed.no register and pay tax.you will comply or be a felon.WELCOME TO THE NEW WORLD ORDER!i really like the way you guys still believe you live in america.what you do not understand it they couldn"t care less about the guns,they want YOU!!!you are the problem,not the guns.you think like a free man and that will not be tolerated in the empire.watch the movie Red Dawn.they did not come for the guns,they came for the gunowners.it will not be a foreign opresser,it will be wareing a us flag and they will say as they round you up,I AM ONLY DOING MY JOB.read history my friend.and do not tell me it can't happen here,it aready has,Katrina.Bridis,you should not call anyone names,makes you look foolish and childish.make you argument factual and professional and you will get more respect.you are already wrong,you guessed nobody would bet you,and i did. Edited February 21, 2011 by bigmegina Quote Link to post Share on other sites
physicsnerd 139 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 An import ban is well within the constitution, as it is foreign commerce. The USG can use whatever basis they want to to regulate foreign commerce in guns, even "sporting use" idiocy. That doesn't mean that it's not worth fighting this, but you need to plan on fighting it by getting your congresscritters to act. The awful "sporting use" stuff in the 1968 GCA that allows the ATF/DoJ to classify it as a NFA weapon is another matter entirely. That seems a lot more questionable under the constitution. That also might well not be a battle that the current admin wants to fight, as it implies that a Mossberg 590 is a DD, as well as every shotgun that can have a tube longer than 5 rounds installed. Send a well though out, non-inflammatory reply to the ATF, but also write your Senators and Congresscritter. If I was a democratic Senator I'd be really nervous about allowing the DoJ under Holder to classify every pump and semi-auto shotgun in the US as a NFA weapon in an election year, so it can't hurt to point that that this is what the ATF "study" says. Already sent my response and emailed my representative and senator. Sucks feeling helpless. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
paintwagon 18 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 (edited) I think they will choose the two things that set a Saiga apart: detachable mag and semi auto, to say that it is a non-sporting weapon when both are present. I think there will be retroactive aciton to make people get California type modifications to the mags (at best). Id like to hear more of what others think, and a little less political talk and arguing, not to offend anyone. Edited February 21, 2011 by paintwagon Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tktm 13 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 paintwagon, Its hard to keep politics out of it because it is a political description. Based on the ATF study they could shut down all saiga imports immediately. How much and how fast they infringe depends on politics. The saiga is a copy of a military weapon, it has a rail on the side of its receiver, etc etc etc..... Here are the scenarios as i see them unfolding from worst case to best case. They will declare all Saiga's destructive devices. They will declare 5+ capacity magazines destructive devices in and of them selves They will declare all converted Saigas destructive devices. (post conversion will be a felony) They will declare the possession of a saiga and any mag greater than 5 rounds a destructive device (an uncoverted saiga +drum or 5+ mag equals destructive device) The will ban import of all Saigas and associated parts Here is what I would expect to happen in the near to mid term, a panic run on conversion parts so that people can make conversions before it becomes a felony to do so. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bridis 319 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 WOW... The only action I can get on all of this speculation and conjecture is a 6 pack of beer? This speaks volumes about one's faith in their beliefs. All they're worth is a 6 pack of beer. Quite fitting if you ask me. @ tktm: You've lost your bananas.. . Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tktm 13 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 (edited) WOW... The only action I can get on all of this speculation and conjecture is a 6 pack of beer? This speaks volumes about one's faith in their beliefs. All they're worth is a 6 pack of beer. Quite fitting if you ask me. @ tktm: You've lost your bananas.. . Those who don't know their history are doomed to repeat it, and they will be SHOCKED (shocked I say) and unprepared when it happens to them. I mean, after all, its not like they have done any of that stuff before, right? Or are you thinking that because they have done it before, that they surely wont do it again this time? Edited February 21, 2011 by tktm Quote Link to post Share on other sites
paintwagon 18 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 (edited) TKTM at least your talking about outcomes, I am guessing the same. The bottom line is that they can and will do whatever they want. They are likely under pressure from Holder, and the initial study itself already explained the minimum of what they are going to do. I dont think its rocket science. I just want to be able to keep the one I have, without needing to register it as a DD or sell it for 1/4 of what it is worth to a class III dealer. Edited February 21, 2011 by paintwagon Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ewoketeer 35 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 This is why it pays to keep your rep's 'feet to the fire'. It isn't about gun control, it's about people control. It's been said,"The Golden Rule of History is those with the weapons make the rules." Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tktm 13 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 TKTM at least your talking about outcomes, and not posturing about the politics of it, and those are what I am guessing. The bottom line is that they can and will do whatever they deem appropriate. They are likely under pressure from holder, and the initial study itself already explained the minimum of what they are going to do. I dont think its rocket science. I just want to be able to keep the one I have, without needing to register it as a DD or sell it for 1/4 of what it is worth to a class III dealer. Before the letter even came out, I had heard of a class III dealer who had 200 S12s that he was holding because he expected them to be declared destructive devices. He expected to eventually make $10k off of each gun. If you aren't willing to go the DD route there will be a time period where the guns maybe worth 1/4 of what they are now. I expect the ATF will attempt to minimize the number of DD's so they will probably require them to be in a converted configuration (hence the potential run on conversion parts). There is a high probability that all of this will eventually happen, the question is it will happen soon or take some time; again politics will control that. The other thing they will eventually do is make having a DD much harder, just like it used to be easy and quick to be an FFL, not so anymore. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
PostsOnPercocet 32 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 WOW... The only action I can get on all of this speculation and conjecture is a 6 pack of beer? This speaks volumes about one's faith in their beliefs. All they're worth is a 6 pack of beer. Quite fitting if you ask me. @ tktm: You've lost your bananas.. . LOL @ you. You honestly don't think they won't ban these? When they are way more "destructive" in the eyes of the ATF than the sweeper and stryker? You're either VERY ignorant or a troll. 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.