1989/1994 Ban Questions

[Kramer Krazy]

I've read about the 1994 ban, but I have to admit, sometimes I get a little confused between the 1989 and 1994 bans. What exactly went on during this period? I know that several foreign-made rifles were offered between 1990-1994 with thumbhole stocks (like my Norinco MAK-90).

I quit keeping up with the laws and shooting in general after 1994 when I lost my range when my parents relocated, and then I relocated. The passing of the 1994 ban left a sour taste in my mouth, too, which may have contributed a little to me backing out of the hobby. I started to get back into firearms, about a year ago, and to stump me a bit further when I started checking on things, I discovered this trend of using US-made receivers to assemble rifles (AK, G3, FN-FAL) and kept hearing about a "10 foreign parts" law.

Anyway, a buddy of mine was asking me about the 1994 ban, and I started to get my facts confused, as I started throwing in 1989 ban stuff into the mix (openly telling him I was unsure of which ban did what). Is there an outline available, that defines the differences between these two bans?

Thanks.

 

[kfranz]

The simple version, with minor technical issues....

There is no more 94 ban. Imported rifles in certain configurations are still disallowed, ala the 89 ban. A work around(which allows flash hiders/folding stocks/etc) is to make domestically produced rifles. These are in the style of the banned rifle, and often consist of parts from the banned rifle, but which also contain less than 10 imported "parts". ATF has a list of what constitutes a "part."

 

[Nitram68]

So can I add anything to my post 89 SKS-S? (folding stock or flash hider?)

 

[Kramer Krazy]

kfranz,

So, what you are saying is that to get an actual, import AK-47 (imported receiver), we would still need to import it in the form of a MAK-90, but, would need a 10-parts or less inventory of imported parts to construct one in an original AK-47 configuration, which can only be constructed of a domestic receiver? In other words, to actually import ANY foreign rifle, now, we must continue to obey the 89 ban, which would result in the 1990-1994 configurations. To have any other configuration, such as ones to resemble that of the pre-1989 ban, the firearm must be constructed domestically with a US-receiver, and less then 10 foreign-made parts.......This correct?

Is it true that for the M1 Garand and M1 Carbines (despite being manufactured domestically), they needed to be assembled on new receivers when being imported from other countries after 1994 (qualifying them as "imports"), but, now, they can be imported as they were prior to 1994? I ask this, because, looking through the Shotgun News, it looked like the only ones you could get recently were built on new receivers, whereas, the two I bought in 1991/92 were imported, but all components were US-made (this was when they were $139 and Garands were $199).....or, is it just that there weren't any more receivers, but enough parts to make complete rifles, so people started manufacturing the rifles with new receivers?

*It's just amazing how laws, such as these, are passed based simply on cosmetics and not function.

 

[El Tejon]

Bush Ban, '89: reinterpretation of the SSA of '68. Certain features were considered "non-sporting" and thus would no longer be eligible for importation (the March '89 ban listed only a few models that were "non-sporting").

Clinton Ban, '94: certain features were deemed eeevil and could no longer be produced domestically.

That's a thumbnail. I can go on and on and on and on and . . . [All together now] "Shut up, Kirk!"

 

[pezo]

I'll tell you what both the 89 and 94 ban have in common. they both dont or didnt have any ability to limit crime at all. both are or were "smoke and mirror" campains to further the political careers of the endorsers, targeted to a portion of the public that is ignorant on the gun, gun control issue altogether. See they seem like they're doing a good thing by restricting guns. however it isnt to the criminal but rather to the lawabiding. Criminals are the least affected by gun control legislation. Its the courts inability to properly control or detain criminals so lets just "restrict guns" attitude, like as if that works. Its the fact that no matter how hard law and law inforcment tries it cannot gaurantee us total safty from bad people, this only endorses the right of one to keep firearms in theyre defense. your life is ultimately your responsibility not the governments. Please note that the highest crime areas tend also to be the most "gun restrictive" . enough said.

 

[yesterdaysyouth]

So, what you are saying is that to get an actual, import AK-47 (imported receiver), we would still need to import it in the form of a MAK-90, but, would need a 10-parts or less inventory of imported parts to construct one in an original AK-47 configuration, which can only be constructed of a domestic receiver? In other words, to actually import ANY foreign rifle, now, we must continue to obey the 89 ban, which would result in the 1990-1994 configurations. To have any other configuration, such as ones to resemble that of the pre-1989 ban, the firearm must be constructed domestically with a US-receiver, and less then 10 foreign-made parts.......This correct?

per 922r the parts count game as i like to call it, no more than 10 imported parts on an imported EBR... the parts are specific, not just any part counts toward the total... the receiver can be imported as long as you have enough other parts on the list... all these sar-1 and wasr-10 are imported as sporterized AK's, then the importer switches out the parts, mills the magwells, add other evil features... you can do the same thing with a saiga, for about $60.. you can search the aft website for "GCA" and you'll find the 922r list..


the imported garands were lease/lent and don't count as imports...

bottom line is it's a worthless law but thankfully there are ways around it...

 

[benEzra]

FWIW, 922r is more fully 18 USC 922(r), or Title 18, paragraph 922(r) of the U.S. Code. It references some other paragraphs in 18 USC that I don't recall off the top of my head.

As far as a post-'89 SKS, you pretty much can't do anything to it that would change it to a configuration the ATF deems "unimportable"; doing so would be a felony. These would include changing the fixed mag for a detachable, adding a bayonet if it didn't have one, adding a flash suppressor, adding a pistol grip stock (I think) or a folder, and so on.

If you want an SKS with a bayonet, the best approach would be to buy a new Yugoslavian SKS for $169 (exempted from the bayonet ban since it is officially a Curio and Relic, e.g. historically interesting and collectible). If you want a tactical-looking rifle that you can accessorize, buy a Romanian SAR-1 or WASR double-stack (both classified by BATFE as domestic since they have only 10 imported parts) for $380 or so and configure it all you want.

 

[BerettaNut92]

But John Kerry said that everyone on the street can have an AK-47 and UZI now, legally!