[firestar]

Can we put folding stocks and bayonet lugs on our "post ban" assult rifles?

I have a post ban SAR-1 AK, can I then put a folding stock on it?

Will there be a difference between pre-ban and post-ban?

Will pre-ban guns go down in price?

Will hi-caps become legal again?

[WonderNine]

Yes, all guns that were effected by the 94' ban will become equal to prebans. However I understand that certain guns, such as the SKS will never be legal with any evil features because of the imporation ban of 89'. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but the way I understand it, if you put a detachable magazine on an SKS it will always be illegal if it has another evil feature such as the bayonet lug.

[Tamara]

I'd assume imported rifles will still be no-gos for flash-hiders, bayonet lugs, and folding stocks.

Remember: the MAK90 showed up long before '94.

PS: The Bush Ban of '89 was a mere executive order, and could be overturned with the stroke of a pen by a pro-gun president.

[WonderNine]

PS: The Bush Ban of '89 was a mere executive order, and could be overturned with the stroke of a pen by a pro-gun president.

You think we're ever gonna have one of those again? :scrutiny:

[Mark Tyson]

I thought that the '89 ban was only about what you could import, and did not concern itself with what happened to the gun once it's in your hands. Am I wrong?

[c_yeager]

I kinda thought so too mark. It is a rather common practice to convert the PC importable rifles (saigas in particular) to something more akin to their true form. The only consideration is to avoid manufacturing an "assault rifle" under the '94 ban. Without those rules it would be perfectly legal to manufacture a new "assault rifle" so i hardly see how it would be illegal to make a PC rifle into one.

[bfason]

The only consideration is to avoid manufacturing an "assault rifle" under the '94 ban.... manufacture a new "assault rifle" ...

Forgive me, but it's "assault weapon." No assault rifle is an "assault weapon," and the Clinton-Feinstein Ban of 1994 affected "assault weapons," not assault rifles.

[Hkmp5sd]

I thought that the '89 ban was only about what you could import, and did not concern itself with what happened to the gun once it's in your hands. Am I wrong?

The '89 ban is actually the definition ATF uses to determine if a firearm is a "Sporting" or "Non-Sporting" firearm. Only "Sporting" firearms can be imported.

The problem arises due to the fact you can not modify an imported firearm into a firearm that would not be legal for importation. That means no folding stocks on SKSs. No folding stocks on imported AKs and clones, yet US made clones can have one. No converting your SKS to accept detachable 30 round magazines.
Forgive me, but it's "assault weapon."
True, but a little clarification. The '94 AW ban defines "semiautomatic assault weapons" and then provides a list of firearms by name that are considered AWs. It then provides a list of features that when placed on a semiautomatic rifle, semiautomatic pistol or semiautomatic shotgun, causes them to fall under the definition of assault weapon.

[Combat-wombat]

Yes, but we still have to worry about the '03 ban.

[Justin]

C-w-

The 2003/04 ban is a proposed renewal and expansion of the current ban all rolled up into one delightful ball of statist oppression. If we can stop it from happening, we will get a reprieve. At that point, we go on the offensive, working to dismantle other gun control laws before more can be proposed.

[Cactus]

In some ways the new proposed renewal/expansion is a good thing. There are many fence riding congress members who would most likely support a simple renewal. They would justify it by saying that they are just extending the present law and no one has been effected by the current law, yada, yada.

With an extreme expansion of the current law, it will be easier for these fence sitters to vote against it. Majority leader Tom DeLay is already against a simple renewal, what do you think he will feel about an expansion?

Of course, the anti's may just be proposing this expansion to later "compromise" on a simple renewal and make themselves look "reasonable".:uhoh:

[c_yeager]

The problem arises due to the fact you can not modify an imported firearm into a firearm that would not be legal for importation. That means no folding stocks on SKSs. No folding stocks on imported AKs and clones, yet US made clones can have one. No converting your SKS to accept detachable 30 round magazines.

Wouldnt this make the VEPR with a pistol grip and ALL of the ak103s on the market (converted saigas) illegal? And lots of people have done the mag converson on SKS's after the 89 ban.

[BTR]

With a certain number of usa made parts, an imported rifle can be "unsporting" (pistol grip, large capacity magazine)... The SAR series of aks is made of mostly imported parts, with enough usa made parts to qualify as a "domestically made" gun. So, presumably, it would be legal to add a folding stock to a SAR or similar gun after the ban sunsets, as long as it retained the same number of USA made parts.

[Hkmp5sd]

the VEPR with a pistol grip

The presence of a pistol grip alone doesn't make a rifle illegal from importation, just as it doesn't make a firearm an AW. As long as it meets ATF's "sporting" criteria, it can come into the US.

And lots of people have done the mag converson on SKS's after the 89 ban.

And lots of people have bayonets on post '89 SKSs and you can still find ads selling folding stocks for SKSs in Shotgun News. Just because ATF isn't running around, actively prosecuting SKS violations doesn't make them legal.

[c_yeager]

The presence of a pistol grip alone doesn't make a rifle illegal from importation, just as it doesn't make a firearm an AW. As long as it meets ATF's "sporting" criteria, it can come into the US.

Firearms from Russia have their own set of rules.

With a certain number of usa made parts, an imported rifle can be "unsporting" (pistol grip, large capacity magazine)... The SAR series of aks is made of mostly imported parts, with enough usa made parts to qualify as a "domestically made" gun. So, presumably, it would be legal to add a folding stock to a SAR or similar gun after the ban sunsets, as long as it retained the same number of USA made parts.

I totally forgot about this. It would seem that with no more than 10 foreign parts in a rifle it is considered to be of domestic manufacture. At that point it is no longer effected by the sporting clause. Now that i think about it all the pistol gripped VEPRs and AK103 clones and kit guns have to requisite quantity of us parts intalled. Since they are then considered US MADE WEAPONS they should be ok for brakes and lugs.

And lots of people have bayonets on post '89 SKSs and you can still find ads selling folding stocks for SKSs in Shotgun News.

Be careful before you tell someone that the bayonet on their SKS is ilelgal. The Yugoslavian and Albanian rifles (recently imported) are specifically permitted to retain their bayonets.

[Hkmp5sd]

Firearms from Russia have their own set of rules.

The Russian, Yugo, Albanian and other imports are classified CURIO AND RELIC. That permits them to be imported with the bayonet. That is the only difference between C&R and "modern manufactured" SKS rifles. No folding stocks or other modifications for EITHER group that would make them illegal for importation. Only those "modern manufactured" SKS rifles IN the country PRIOR to the '89 re-designation and WITH the bayonet INSTALLED may retain the bayonet.

[jimpeel]

I have an SKS and have been under the impression that it is covered under the AWB. I have a polymer Fiberforce stock that I rarely put on it as it is uncomfortable to shoot.

Since the rifle has a bayonet lug, when I attach the Fiberforce stock I have to use the non-detachable magazines. A detachable would be disallowed under the two ugly features clause. When I have the original wooden stock on it, I can use the detachables because the only ugly feature is the bayonet.

From what I have been able to glean from this thread, I am in danger of being ensnared by competing laws in the form of regulations interpreted by unaccountable, unelectable bureaucrats. Is this true?

[Hkmp5sd]

I am in danger of being ensnared by competing laws in the form of regulations interpreted by unaccountable, unelectable bureaucrats. Is this true?

Sorta, kinda, maybe, maybe not. If your SKS was in the US prior to 1989 and configured as you described it, it is grandfathered. If not, you are in possession of an illegal firearm.

Here is what ATF says about it. They are talking about a Russian SKS, but other than it being allowed to have a bayonet due to it's C&R status, there is no difference between it and a post-'89 "modern" SKS.

Title 18, United States Code, section 922(r) provides that it shall be unlawful for anyone to assemble from imported parts any semiautomatic rifle or 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 or readily adaptable to sporting purposes ....

A Russian SKS rifle in original military configuration, having a bayonet lug and bayonet, fixed stock, and non-detachable 10 round magazine, which was modified by threading the barrel for a firearm silencer, would not be in violation of section 922(r). Assembly of certain other components such as a folding stock or detachable magazine, which would prohibit the firearm from importation, would be in violation of section 922(r).

SKS rifles which do not have an ability to accept a detachable magazine are not semiautomatic assault weapons as defined in 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(30) and they are not subject to the provisions of 18 U.S.C. section 922(v).


http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/atf_letter4.txt

One other thing you may want to know. ATF considers possession of the parts to make an illegal firearm, even when not actually installed, to be the same as if you possessed the fully assembled illegal weapon.