BATF response to use of hi-cap magazines in Saiga Sporters
- Thread starter BSA1
- Start date
- Status
OP
OP
BSA1
member
What is absurd is that I am one who has no desire to alter my 5.45 Saiga to standard AK format. I have a standard AK. I would like to keep the Saiga as is, with the possible exception of adding an AK74 muzzle brake, and the ability to use military mags.
Crazy that the only feasible way to do that is a full "evil AK" conversion, thanks to the rediculous law.
And I am the only one that has no desire to alter my .223 Saiga to standard AK format. Hey do you think we could form a support group without getting on the governmints domestic terrorism list???
Crazy that the only feasible way to do that is a full "evil AK" conversion, thanks to the rediculous law.
And I am the only one that has no desire to alter my .223 Saiga to standard AK format. Hey do you think we could form a support group without getting on the governmints domestic terrorism list???
meanmrmustard
Member
I'd stay away from 556 AKs altogether. The straight wall cartridge in the AKM design isn't going to prove as reliable as the tapered cartridges that the AKM hosts.
Magazine capacity has nothing to do with 922r. It has to do with rifles defined as being not particularly suited to sporting purposes. Is a Saiga sporter listed as being not particularly suited to sporting purposes? My guess is that it is not because it is 100% Russian made. Also, using an AK pattern standard capacity (it is NOT a high capacity magazine) does not make the Saiga sporter identical to any rifle found to be not particularly suited to sporting purposes
From the law-
(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...
From the law-
(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...
I suppose it is a matter of semantics. The crucial thing is whether it is a gun that passes "the sporting purpose test." However, magazine capacity is the key thing the ATF identified in the '98 study on sporting purposes, as a feature that is determinative of whether a gun meets the sporting purpose test (see the link I posted earlier). Thus to say mag capacity doesn't matter is at best misleading, and as a practical matter is simply incorrect.
fatcat4620
Member
That may be true but it will still be more reliable than an AR.
meanmrmustard
Member
Ha! Probably. You'll have to test that theory for me man!
How many AKs do you own? How many ARs? What makes? How many rounds have you put through each? What is the most rounds you've put through them in a day? a weekend?
I own a number of AKs and few ARs. My go to AR is a Noveske. I have had no failures with my Noveske. I have had 3 failures with my 7.62x39 saiga. Two were failures to fire that may have just been ammo issues. One was a failure to eject where the casing actually lodged behind the bolt. I shot with folks that had ARs that were jamo-matics. Saying AR vs AK is very imprecise. There is a huge ammount of variations in ARs.
As to the reliability of 5.56 AKs. I have not shot mine as much as my 7.62x39, my Noveske does everything better than the 5.56 AK and tends to get more trigger time. However, I have shot about a case of wolf through my 5.56 saiga and have had zero failures.
meanmrmustard
Member
One in a million in gun speak does not tarnish accepted reputation.
fatcat4620
Member
I an saying a polish beryl is more reliable than a US M4. YMMV. By the way you feed your .223 ak junk. What do you feed your AR?
Reliable ARs, particularly from reputable manufactures are hardly one in million guns. Nor are am malfunctions 1 in a million. As to what ammo I shoot, I shoot predominantly wolf in both guns and almost exclusively shoot steel cased Russian ammo it both as well. I know the Internet has told you ARs don't shoot wolf. This is why I asked you what guns you have and have you've used them. Turns out reality is often a far cry from Internet reputation. Guess what, my aks are surprisingly accurate guns as well, despite Internet lore.
By the way the source of malfunctions is generally, in order of frequency, mags, ammo, user error, and then gun related things. So I'm not sure a 5.56 ak with tapco (or similar) mags is likely to be more reliable than a quality ad with say pmags. If I was going to war tomorrow I'd much rather have my no noveske with pmags than my 5.56 am with screwed in bullet guide and tapco mags.
meanmrmustard
Member
I wouldn't take either, but that's me...
Don't recall saying reliable ARs were one in a million, but your concept of AR reliability over AKMs is a bit unfounded.
Go to war with what you use well. No ones taking that from you. What comes home in one piece is entirely different. I've not heard of ARs not shooting Wolf, but rather, not spitting them out is MY experience. I've not had this with any AKM I own. once again, MY experience. Yours, obviously, will vary.
OP
OP
BSA1
member
Girodin and et al;
I think you are overthinking this thing which is not surprising for a intellectual like yourself. As a retired government bureaucrat (and a darn good one at that) allow me to explain how a bureaucrat looks at it.
We are dealing with two separate issues with the Saiga series firearms.
The first issue is for a manufacturer to meet mandatory government standards for importation and sale of their product in the United States. These differences in these standards between countries are very common and used for variety of reasons such as consumer protection, environmental protection, protection of domestic manufacturers.
The second issue is if the end user can legally alter the product. If so how much and with what parts/products. For example let’s consider imported automobiles. There is a vast number of aftermarket parts available to allow the owner to modify his vehicle to his individual unique tastes. Legally the main problem facing the owner is ensuring the parts he selects are legal in his state as standards vary greatly.
Now with firearms let’s consider the Tokarev handgun. Although this gun was made and used and used by other countries without a external thumb safety yet the United States requires additional safety devices to meet its import standards. To meet this standard the manufacturers/importers have added a thumb safety which could argued as unnecessary and difficult to use. However there is nothing illegal (at least as far as I know) that prevents the owner from removing the safety after he acquires the gun.
Now to case of the Saiga. As we know to legally import the rifle in must be in a “Sporter” configuration to meet certain government standards. However after the gun is legally imported the owner can legally modify the gun. If he chooses to modify the gun to AK style he is required to substitute certain parts (which are assigned “points”) that were imported on the gun with parts that are made in the United States. Notice the law does not ban use of certain parts only that the imported parts be exchanged for parts made in the United States. Federal law clearly does not ban the ownership of rifles with the AK type of functioning and does not prohibit the owner form modifying his rifle to the AK style provided he exchanges certain imported parts (points) for a like number of US made parts (points).
In the case of the Saiga Sporter since it does not come imported with a high cap magazine we are not substituting a imported part with a U.S. made part. We are merely adding (or using or assembling depending on which word you prefer) a part which has no points assigned to it. Since it has no points we are not exceeding the arbitrary point standards of Federal law.
After a law is enacted the intent does not matter. If I wanted to stay out of trouble and keep my job my only concern is enforcing the law as is written. I can tell you from first hand experiences that while I was called on the carpet to explain why I did not follow the law but I never got in trouble for following the law the way was written to the letter. When I was called on the carpet for not following the law exactly my defense usually was I was trying to follow the intent of the law. This then usually involved a discussion of my decision and a review of the law and department policy by higher management (not a real pleasant experience).
This is the reason why I believe the information I received from the Kansas City Field Office is correct. Of course Rule #2 applies until proven otherwise.
As for “one of the things that people who think you shouldn't write the ATF are worried about. They worry that it would be easy enough to look at a saiga now and say it has the “key feature that makes a gun non-sporting and thus not approve importation” is very naïve’. Are they really foolish enough to believe that Sarah Brady and other anti-gun liberals are to ignorant not to have already made this argument? While we may disagree with those that are anti-gun it is very, very foolish to underestimate them by thinking they are too stupid to figure these things out for themselves. As Patton said "never understimate your enemy".
I think you are overthinking this thing which is not surprising for a intellectual like yourself. As a retired government bureaucrat (and a darn good one at that) allow me to explain how a bureaucrat looks at it.
We are dealing with two separate issues with the Saiga series firearms.
The first issue is for a manufacturer to meet mandatory government standards for importation and sale of their product in the United States. These differences in these standards between countries are very common and used for variety of reasons such as consumer protection, environmental protection, protection of domestic manufacturers.
The second issue is if the end user can legally alter the product. If so how much and with what parts/products. For example let’s consider imported automobiles. There is a vast number of aftermarket parts available to allow the owner to modify his vehicle to his individual unique tastes. Legally the main problem facing the owner is ensuring the parts he selects are legal in his state as standards vary greatly.
Now with firearms let’s consider the Tokarev handgun. Although this gun was made and used and used by other countries without a external thumb safety yet the United States requires additional safety devices to meet its import standards. To meet this standard the manufacturers/importers have added a thumb safety which could argued as unnecessary and difficult to use. However there is nothing illegal (at least as far as I know) that prevents the owner from removing the safety after he acquires the gun.
Now to case of the Saiga. As we know to legally import the rifle in must be in a “Sporter” configuration to meet certain government standards. However after the gun is legally imported the owner can legally modify the gun. If he chooses to modify the gun to AK style he is required to substitute certain parts (which are assigned “points”) that were imported on the gun with parts that are made in the United States. Notice the law does not ban use of certain parts only that the imported parts be exchanged for parts made in the United States. Federal law clearly does not ban the ownership of rifles with the AK type of functioning and does not prohibit the owner form modifying his rifle to the AK style provided he exchanges certain imported parts (points) for a like number of US made parts (points).
In the case of the Saiga Sporter since it does not come imported with a high cap magazine we are not substituting a imported part with a U.S. made part. We are merely adding (or using or assembling depending on which word you prefer) a part which has no points assigned to it. Since it has no points we are not exceeding the arbitrary point standards of Federal law.
After a law is enacted the intent does not matter. If I wanted to stay out of trouble and keep my job my only concern is enforcing the law as is written. I can tell you from first hand experiences that while I was called on the carpet to explain why I did not follow the law but I never got in trouble for following the law the way was written to the letter. When I was called on the carpet for not following the law exactly my defense usually was I was trying to follow the intent of the law. This then usually involved a discussion of my decision and a review of the law and department policy by higher management (not a real pleasant experience).
This is the reason why I believe the information I received from the Kansas City Field Office is correct. Of course Rule #2 applies until proven otherwise.
As for “one of the things that people who think you shouldn't write the ATF are worried about. They worry that it would be easy enough to look at a saiga now and say it has the “key feature that makes a gun non-sporting and thus not approve importation” is very naïve’. Are they really foolish enough to believe that Sarah Brady and other anti-gun liberals are to ignorant not to have already made this argument? While we may disagree with those that are anti-gun it is very, very foolish to underestimate them by thinking they are too stupid to figure these things out for themselves. As Patton said "never understimate your enemy".
Last edited:
Here is a question...just to stir the pot...
Can one put just a bullet guide in a stock Saiga and use 5 round AK mags in it without violating 922r?*
My 7.62x39 Saiga came with a 10 round mag but only 5 round mags are allowed in my state for hunting. Like others, I have other AKs and don't want to convert my Saiga. I also happen to have a bunch of 5 round AK mags.
*understanding that the chance of being caught let alone prosecuted for violating an import regulation is nil.
Can one put just a bullet guide in a stock Saiga and use 5 round AK mags in it without violating 922r?*
My 7.62x39 Saiga came with a 10 round mag but only 5 round mags are allowed in my state for hunting. Like others, I have other AKs and don't want to convert my Saiga. I also happen to have a bunch of 5 round AK mags.
*understanding that the chance of being caught let alone prosecuted for violating an import regulation is nil.
OP
OP
BSA1
member
IMHO as a retired bureaucrat the answer is yes because;
1. Since the bullet guide has no points installing it on your gun does not any points to it.
2. Your Saiga was legally imported with a 10 round magazine. Merely adding (purchasing) another 5 or 10 round which is legal for importation does not change anything. If it does how would you be able to replace the originial magazine if it was lost or damaged beyond use?
Disclaimer; Remember Rule #2.
1. Since the bullet guide has no points installing it on your gun does not any points to it.
2. Your Saiga was legally imported with a 10 round magazine. Merely adding (purchasing) another 5 or 10 round which is legal for importation does not change anything. If it does how would you be able to replace the originial magazine if it was lost or damaged beyond use?
Disclaimer; Remember Rule #2.
I think you are thinking about it in completely the wrong way, which is not surprising for layperson like your self that has no legal education or training.
I think the statutes and regulations say what they say. I also think based on your last post you don't really understand how lawyers (say a prosecutor) and judges read the law. For example you said:
This is a pretty asinine statement really. Courts should and typically do look to the "plain language meaning" of the text. However, when there are legal ambiguities in the what the plain language meaning is and thus you have legal questions about what a law means, and with respect to the laws we are discussing there are number of legal (as opposed to factual) questions that could be outcome determinative, THE QUESTION that the court seeks to answer is what was legislative intent.
Your discussion above misses what the pertinent legal questions even are.
I also think you have missed what the law actually does. I suggest you do a little reading. They law must be read and understood with relation to other laws and what they were trying to accomplish.
Reading the law "as written" I think leads to the most restrictive interpretation. That is to say I think it lends its self to the position that a gun assembled from foreign parts than can accept what the BATF calls LCMMs is illegal. However they fact that the Secretary is allowing sporter saigas in despite there being LCMMS that fit the gun makes it more interesting. I can think of ways to spin and argue that both ways.
At then end of the day it turns on what passes or fails the "sporting purpose test" (see above) as to whether 922r applies. If it does then you have meet the parts count (subject to the ambiguities of what "assemble" means, again see above) i.e. fewer than 10 countable parts. As a matter of nomenclature there are not "points" to speak of, only parts. It is simply a 1:1 count of parts. Points are used for other importation rules. To speak of points here is to use non standard nomenclature and to potentially confuse the issue for others. It is just a parts count, not a points count.
The bottom line is that there are a number of unsettled legal issues when it comes to 922r and the other code sections and regulations which inform it. Until these are definitively resolved (and ATF letters or opinions are very far from definitive) it is impossible to say with certainty how things would play out.
As such the best solution IMHO is to assume that everything will be construed against you and make sure you are legal given the very most unfavorable interpretations to the law. It is so comparatively cheap and easy to do so that I'm not sure why one would want to take even the slightest risk of being on the wrong side of it.
Long and short of it is, we don't know. There is a reasonable argument, based on the plain language of the text of the stautes and what ATF is saying makes a gun fail the sporting purpose test that one cannot. Read the ATF study I linked to in an earlier post and that post. In short it is a question of whether the ability alone to take what ATF calls large capacity military magazines (LCMM) makes a gun "non sporting" or do you need to actually have an LCMM in it. The fact that Izamash modified the rifles to not take standard mags rather than just shipping them with a 10 rounder suggests that the ATF required them to do so in order for the secretary to approve importation. This idea is bolstered by the romanian guns having modified mag wells rather than simply being shipped with 10 round mags. That would mean that a gun modified to take standard mags would violate the sporting purposes test. Thus, we would then have to ask whether installing a bullet guide, and filing the mag catch down falls within the definition of "assemble from parts." We don't know. As such, I would rather just buy some more 10 round saiga mags. They are cheap.
As I have stated previously the real interesting question then is what is the affect of there now being 30 round magazines that fit unmodified saigas? I can come up with arguments to suggest it means the secretary should stop allowing them for import. However, I can also come up with a number of ways to say it doesn't make saigas fail the sporting purposes clause.
Even more interesting is the report of 5.45 rifles that can use standard mags without modification. There are fewer ways to argue they meet the sporting purposes clause.
I really need to do more research on what the most current understanding of the sporting purposes test is. The ATF recently re-examined that issue with respect to shotguns. There was some movement in their findings. So much turns on that test that it is the key stone to many 922r questions. What is tough for folks is that you have to read through a number of other things to even get to that test affecting 922r.
Again you totally miss the relevant questions. Buying another 5 or 10 round mag does not change anything. However, modifying the gun so that it can accept 20, 30, etc, round mags arguably does. And that is true irrespective of whether one actually has or uses those magazines.
Buy more saiga specific 10 round magazines.
Considering their technical expertise of barrel shrouds . . .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSPrHl_6bO4
I'm not saying I agree or disagree with people saying don't write. However, the ATF could start to interpret things much more strictly if they were so inclined. They could also suddenly seek to enforce a lot more things too, and use those stricter interpretations. My guess is that 922r and other issues in this thread are not real high on the ATFs radar right now, or that of anti gun folks. Some feel it is simply better to let sleeping dogs lie. It wasn't until I really started going through the statutes, regs, and BATF publications that I came to believe just a bullet guide and mag latch shave might violate 922r. Folks worry that making some ATF agent do the same might lead them to the same conclusion. They then might take an interest in testing their legal theory, impressing a superior by taking to them, who knows where it could go from there. Again I'm not saying I agree or disagree with their position, but its not like they are absolutely crazy or stupid or naive for having it.
I think I'll bow out of this discussion (at least until there is a written response from the ATF, at which point I will likely have to explain to people the legal significance of such a response as most people get that wildly wrong) as there just isn't much more to say. People, myself included, can have whatever interpretation of the laws and regulations linked to in this thread. However, that does not mean they are right or that they will be accepted by those that really matter.
Rob G
Member
I would have to disagree with this statement. The BATFE has been of the opinion (and still is from what I've heard) that having a detachable magazine in a rifle holding more than 10 rounds means the rifle fails the "sporting purposes" test. Other modifications that also fail the test are things like pistol grips, barrel shrouds, etc. So once you decide to use a magazine greater than 10 rounds you have to start counting foreign made parts on the rifle utilizing the BATFE's list of parts that are considered. In that specific situation a US made magazine would count as 3 US made parts dropping the foreign made parts count to 14. Since the limit is 10 the rifle is NOT 922r compliant simply by the addition of a hi cap US mag.
Your whole confusing statement about "arbitrary points" is pretty much irrelevant. The parts aren't arbitrary, there's a very specific list of which ones they are and how many you may have. The magazine is included on that list and in fully assembled form actually constitutes 3 of the parts in question.
As Girodin said, we don't know exactly. By putting in a 5 round (low cap) magazine you're not changing the rifle from it's non-sporting configuration and so 922r shouldn't come in to play at all. Whether or not the BATFE agrees with that statement is a different question. I would recommend you write them and ask. If they come back and say that it's okay (which I suspect they would) I would stick that letter someplace very secure in case you ever need it.
OP
OP
BSA1
member
I think you are thinking about it in completely the wrong way, which is not surprising for layperson like your self that has no legal education or training.
I am not a layperson. I am a retired government bureaucrat and proud of the service I provided to the citizens of my state and the victims of crime.
A baseless assumption on your part. You have not asked for and I have not provided my academic credentials. However you have refused to do so.
I think the statutes and regulations say what they say. I also think based on your last post you don't really understand how lawyers (say a prosecutor) and judges read the law. For example you said:
Quote:
After a law is enacted the intent does not matter.
This is a pretty asinine statement really. Courts should and typically do look to the "plain language meaning" of the text. THE QUESTION that the court seeks to answer is what was legislative intent.
This is NOT A CRIMINAL CASE. My post is about how a government bureaucracy enforces the law after it has been passed.
This is one of things people fail to understand about how and why government agencies function the way they do. In Texas the Feds shut down a major highway construction project because workers discovered a rare species of sightless spiders. The Federal Agency that shut down the highway don’t care about the intent of the project or if the law really means that the spider should be protected regardless of the cost to the public. Their only concern is what do they do based on how the law is written.
Your discussion above misses what the pertinent legal questions even are.
As a Government employee I don’t care. That is a issue for Congress and the Courts.
Reading the law "as written" I think leads to the most restrictive interpretation.
Exactly. And that is not necessarily bad. It depends on what side of the fence you are on.
As a matter of nomenclature there are not "points" to speak of, only parts. It is simply 1:1 count of parts. Points are used for other importation rules. To speak of points here is to use non standard nomenclature and to potentially confuse the issue for others. It is just a parts count, not a points count.
Everyone by now understands that the imported parts have points assigned to them for the purposes of converting a Saiga Sporter.
The bottom line is that there are a number of unsettled legal issues when it comes to 922r and the other code sections and regulations which inform it.
It does not matter in a Government Agency. They only follow written policy and laws. They only change enforcement of these policies and laws after the law is changed in by Congress or a binding legal ruling by a Court. In fact they may not choose to change their procedures until after all appeals have been exhausted which may not be for years.
As such the best solution IMHO is to assume that everything will be construed against you and make sure you are legal given the very most unfavorable interpretations to the law. It is so comparatively cheap and easy to do so that I'm not sure why one would want to take even the slightest risk of being on the wrong side of it.
It is easiest to fear what you don’t understand.
Quote:
Can one put just a bullet guide in a stock Saiga and use 5 round AK mags in it without violating 922r?*
As I have stated previously the real interesting question then is what is the affect of there now being 30 round magazines that fit unmodified saigas.
I have posted the name of field office, their address, telephone number and the name of the employee I talked to. You are free to call this person and ask the same questions I did. In fact I encourage everyone to call their respective BATF field offices so we can compare answers. Could be very interesting.
Quote:
Merely adding (purchasing) another 5 or 10 round which is legal for importation does not change anything.
Again you totally miss the relevant questions. Buying another 5 or 10 round mag does not change anything. However, modifying the gun so that it can accept 20, 30, etc, round mags arguably does. And that is true irrespective of whether one actually has or uses those magazines.
You are off topic. The O.P. was only asking about using a 5 round AK magazine so he could comply with the hunting regs of his state.
Quote:
Are they really foolish enough to believe that Sarah Brady and other anti-gun liberals are to ignorant not to have already made this argument?
I'm not saying I agree or disagree with people saying don't write. My guess is that 922r and other issues in this thread are not real high on the ATFs radar right now, or that of anti gun folks. Some feel it is simply better to let sleeping dogs lie.
Yep. The Internet is a wonderful source of information. All to often it is unfortunately wrong or when it is challenged by facts it is dismissed.
I think I'll bow out of this discussion (at least until there is a written response from the ATF, at which point I will likely have to explain to people the legal significance of such a response as most people get that wildly wrong) as there just isn't much more to say.
Really?
I am not a layperson. I am a retired government bureaucrat and proud of the service I provided to the citizens of my state and the victims of crime.
A baseless assumption on your part. You have not asked for and I have not provided my academic credentials. However you have refused to do so.
I think the statutes and regulations say what they say. I also think based on your last post you don't really understand how lawyers (say a prosecutor) and judges read the law. For example you said:
Quote:
After a law is enacted the intent does not matter.
This is a pretty asinine statement really. Courts should and typically do look to the "plain language meaning" of the text. THE QUESTION that the court seeks to answer is what was legislative intent.
This is NOT A CRIMINAL CASE. My post is about how a government bureaucracy enforces the law after it has been passed.
This is one of things people fail to understand about how and why government agencies function the way they do. In Texas the Feds shut down a major highway construction project because workers discovered a rare species of sightless spiders. The Federal Agency that shut down the highway don’t care about the intent of the project or if the law really means that the spider should be protected regardless of the cost to the public. Their only concern is what do they do based on how the law is written.
Your discussion above misses what the pertinent legal questions even are.
As a Government employee I don’t care. That is a issue for Congress and the Courts.
Reading the law "as written" I think leads to the most restrictive interpretation.
Exactly. And that is not necessarily bad. It depends on what side of the fence you are on.
As a matter of nomenclature there are not "points" to speak of, only parts. It is simply 1:1 count of parts. Points are used for other importation rules. To speak of points here is to use non standard nomenclature and to potentially confuse the issue for others. It is just a parts count, not a points count.
Everyone by now understands that the imported parts have points assigned to them for the purposes of converting a Saiga Sporter.
The bottom line is that there are a number of unsettled legal issues when it comes to 922r and the other code sections and regulations which inform it.
It does not matter in a Government Agency. They only follow written policy and laws. They only change enforcement of these policies and laws after the law is changed in by Congress or a binding legal ruling by a Court. In fact they may not choose to change their procedures until after all appeals have been exhausted which may not be for years.
As such the best solution IMHO is to assume that everything will be construed against you and make sure you are legal given the very most unfavorable interpretations to the law. It is so comparatively cheap and easy to do so that I'm not sure why one would want to take even the slightest risk of being on the wrong side of it.
It is easiest to fear what you don’t understand.
Quote:
Can one put just a bullet guide in a stock Saiga and use 5 round AK mags in it without violating 922r?*
As I have stated previously the real interesting question then is what is the affect of there now being 30 round magazines that fit unmodified saigas.
I have posted the name of field office, their address, telephone number and the name of the employee I talked to. You are free to call this person and ask the same questions I did. In fact I encourage everyone to call their respective BATF field offices so we can compare answers. Could be very interesting.
Quote:
Merely adding (purchasing) another 5 or 10 round which is legal for importation does not change anything.
Again you totally miss the relevant questions. Buying another 5 or 10 round mag does not change anything. However, modifying the gun so that it can accept 20, 30, etc, round mags arguably does. And that is true irrespective of whether one actually has or uses those magazines.
You are off topic. The O.P. was only asking about using a 5 round AK magazine so he could comply with the hunting regs of his state.
Quote:
Are they really foolish enough to believe that Sarah Brady and other anti-gun liberals are to ignorant not to have already made this argument?
I'm not saying I agree or disagree with people saying don't write. My guess is that 922r and other issues in this thread are not real high on the ATFs radar right now, or that of anti gun folks. Some feel it is simply better to let sleeping dogs lie.
Yep. The Internet is a wonderful source of information. All to often it is unfortunately wrong or when it is challenged by facts it is dismissed.
I think I'll bow out of this discussion (at least until there is a written response from the ATF, at which point I will likely have to explain to people the legal significance of such a response as most people get that wildly wrong) as there just isn't much more to say.
Really?
OP
OP
BSA1
member
Your whole confusing statement about "arbitrary points" is pretty much irrelevant. The parts aren't arbitrary, there's a very specific list of which ones they are and how many you may have.
And that list is decided by whom, a law passed by Congress or a policy by policitial appointees and bureaucrats in Washington , D.C.? I think this definition fits;
ar·bi·trar·y
[ahr-bi-trer-ee] Show IPA adjective, noun, plural ar·bi·trar·ies.
adjective
1.
subject to individual will or judgment without restriction; contingent solely upon one's discretion: an arbitrary decision.
2.
decided by a judge or arbiter rather than by a law or statute.
3.
having unlimited power; uncontrolled or unrestricted by law; despotic; tyrannical: an arbitrary government.
4.
capricious; unreasonable; unsupported: an arbitrary demand for payment.
5.
Mathematics . undetermined; not assigned a specific value: an arbitrary constant.
And that list is decided by whom, a law passed by Congress or a policy by policitial appointees and bureaucrats in Washington , D.C.? I think this definition fits;
ar·bi·trar·y
[ahr-bi-trer-ee] Show IPA adjective, noun, plural ar·bi·trar·ies.
adjective
1.
subject to individual will or judgment without restriction; contingent solely upon one's discretion: an arbitrary decision.
2.
decided by a judge or arbiter rather than by a law or statute.
3.
having unlimited power; uncontrolled or unrestricted by law; despotic; tyrannical: an arbitrary government.
4.
capricious; unreasonable; unsupported: an arbitrary demand for payment.
5.
Mathematics . undetermined; not assigned a specific value: an arbitrary constant.
Last edited:
fatcat4620
Member
I think the problem is that the courts have not heard a stand alone 922r case to give use any interpretation of the law.
jimmyraythomason
Member
So why not just buy an AK 5rd magzine and modify IT to fit the Saiga(pretty easy to do). A bullet guide may or may not need to be installed. The gun will still not accept any large capacity AK mags thus not violating 922(r).
SSN Vet
Member
wow... I thought all this 922r stuff was settled years ago.
I know I've seen written ATF letters in reply to the "how to legally convert a Saiga to high caps" posted in the past and I'm pretty sure I've got one printed out in my Saiga folder.
922r and the count isn't rocket science...
Perhaps the question is "do you feel lucky" and want to gamble with the ATF should the unforeseen circumstance happen and your rifle attract the scrutiny of law enforcement.
There have been well published cases where the ATF sent people to jail for doing trigger jobs that resulted in a gun "accidentally" going full auto. The one that comes to mind was the college professor in IL. I personally don't want to be that person, so I'll make every effort to make darn sure I'm on the right side of the law.
As for sporter Saiga's... I thought I'd keep mine in the sporter config. But then I realized that...
1. front heavy guns aren't very handy
and
2. creepy trigger mechanisms with transfer bars are frustrating to shoot.
YMMV...
Hope I don't read about you in the papers...
I know I've seen written ATF letters in reply to the "how to legally convert a Saiga to high caps" posted in the past and I'm pretty sure I've got one printed out in my Saiga folder.
922r and the count isn't rocket science...
Perhaps the question is "do you feel lucky" and want to gamble with the ATF should the unforeseen circumstance happen and your rifle attract the scrutiny of law enforcement.
There have been well published cases where the ATF sent people to jail for doing trigger jobs that resulted in a gun "accidentally" going full auto. The one that comes to mind was the college professor in IL. I personally don't want to be that person, so I'll make every effort to make darn sure I'm on the right side of the law.
As for sporter Saiga's... I thought I'd keep mine in the sporter config. But then I realized that...
1. front heavy guns aren't very handy
and
2. creepy trigger mechanisms with transfer bars are frustrating to shoot.
YMMV...
Hope I don't read about you in the papers...
Have you been to law school, are you a lawyer, are you a judge? If not you are a lay person when it comes to interpreting the law. That is not a term of derision it is a fact.
922r is part of the criminal code. You do realize that. The one case where I have seen it come up, a case out on IN, was a criminal case. The full citation is 18 USC 922(r). That is title 18. The Title 18 is "crimes and criminal procedure." If you can't figure out that violation of 922r is a criminal act I'm very skeptical of what every else you might think you have figured out about it.
You are the only person I've ever heard or seen use that terminology.
Actually he is talking about using a five round AK mag like this:
View attachment 634403
Using this in a saiga requires the same mods as using a standard AK mag. Those mods alone arguably make the gun subject to 922r. I'm not sure if you think I'm off topic because you don't understand the legalities or you don't understand AKs/saigas.
I guess not, you drug me back in.
- Status
