Imbel FAL from Aimsurplus and 922r.

[Marlin270]

This should be in the FAL File Forum, but I am already registered in too many forums.

Aimsurplus advertises:

"New DSA, Inc. FAL .308 caliber semi-automatic rifle. Manufactured by DSA, Inc. using DSA Type 1 carry handle cut metric pattern receivers, and Imbel parts kits. They feature original Imbel 21" barrels with chrome lined chambers and original Flash hider." (my emphasis)


Brownell says:

"Remember, the law specifically says the rifle cannot have a flash hider. That's any flash hider, not just the original.

That's a quick, basic look at the laws surrounding assembly of FN/FAL rifles."


So who's right?

 

[Moose458]

I've never seen anything that says rifles can't have flash hiders. All of mine do, including my DSA STG-58, H&K-91, M1A, AR-15s, and AKs. Not sure where that came from, Brownells is usually very reliable.

 

[henschman]

Don't even worry about it if you're buying it from AIM -- 922(r) only applies to the manufacturer of the firearm. The only time you have to worry about it is when you are putting together a rifle yourself.

 

[mp510]

If they have enough 922r compliance parts, they can put a muzzle device on the rifle, including a flash hider.

 

[Shadow 7D]

No, 922 Applies to IMPORTED rifles, so, if you have a US receiver, I don't the problem, as that's not a IMPORTED rifle.
But if it's imported and you add prohibited features, you have now committed a crime, and are eligible to visit club FED

So, no, it's important to know, as I don't think the judge is going to take

Don't even worry about it if you're buying it from AIM -- 922(r) only applies to the manufacturer of the firearm. The only time you have to worry about it is when you are putting together a rifle yourself.

Or
'I Don't Know'

as a reasonable defense.

BTW
a US made, High capacity, or a Not Factory mag, counts as a Prohibited feature, so... it's kinda easy to cross that line.

 

[nalioth]

Brownell's needs to get with the program.

They're quoting from the defunct "Assault Weapons Ban", which sunset in 2004.

High capacity <snip> mag

There's no such thing as a "high capacity magazine".

You have the capacity intended by the maker, and you have "legislated capacity" (for those poor folks in ban states).

 

[dogmush]

No, 922 Applies to IMPORTED rifles, so, if you have a US receiver, I don't the problem, as that's not a IMPORTED rifle.

That's not correct. 922(r) says:

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

So it applies anyway. But as long as AIM's FAL has enough US parts, the flash hider is just fine.

ETA: Mags do count as 3 compliance parts, but a US mag of any size won't put you afoul of 922(r). The problem happens if you count on the US mags for parts count, then put an original import mag in the weapon.

 

[WardenWolf]

+1. Flash hiders aren't illegal, except in certain states, but they DO get a rifle automatically banned from import by the ATF (as does having any form of threaded barrel; WASRs and the like are threaded in the States). They're perfectly legal to install on a new-production rifle as long as 922(r) is satisfied.

 

[Girodin]

Don't even worry about it if you're buying it from AIM -- 922(r) only applies to the manufacturer of the firearm. The only time you have to worry about it is when you are putting together a rifle yourself.

First let me start by saying ATF letters are not the law and are not binding. They are some indication of how the ATF is interpreting the law, but that can change at the drop of a hat. There has at certain times been indication that inserting the mag (which is three countable parts) could be manufacturing. There are other letters stating it is not. There is to the best of my knowledge no settled law. I don't want to be a test case and neither do you.

 

[mp510]

First let me start by saying ATF letters are not the law and are not binding. They are some indication of how the ATF is interpreting the law, but that can change at the drop of a hat. There has at certain times been indication that inserting the mag (which is three countable parts) could be manufacturing. There are other letters stating it is not. There is to the best of my knowledge no settled law. I don't want to be a test case and neither do you.

Inserting the mag could be construed as assembling, not manufacturing. There is a difference between the two terms, (in certain cicrumstances) though it does not make a difference here.

AS far as the statement made by the quoted poster goes-- he is correct. You can't get in trouble for simply POSSESSING a non-compliant weapon. You can get screwed for assembling one.

 

[buttrap]

Bit of a sore point but the statute of limitations on 9229(r) is 5 years on assembly. But with the ATF I would not push it.

 

[Shadow 7D]

Yeah, but they would just tell the Judge that you 'assemble' the rifle every time you put the mag in...

 

[Marlin270]

Thanks. These postings make sense.

 

[W.E.G.]

Please post a link to where "Brownell" posts that comment on flash hiders.

 

[Z-Michigan]

You can have some foreign parts on a rifle, including a foreign flash hider, as long as your parts count under 922(r) is low enough that the rifle is not a foreign rifle for 922(r) purposes. That's how most foreign-design rifles are sold here. The IMBEL Rifle from DSA will have a sufficient US parts count (and therefore low enough foreign parts count) that it doesn't violate 922(r). Offhand I expect that its US parts include all furniture, all of the FCG, and of course the receiver. You can run a 922(r) calculator at the site below and make your own conclusions.

http://thegunwiki.com/Gunwiki/BuildFalVerifyCompliance

 

[Marlin270]

Please post a link to where "Brownell" posts that comment on flash hiders.

http://www.brownells.com/.aspx/lid=12569/GunTechdetail/FAL_Rules

Whoops-- I missed the 's' on the original post.

 

[nalioth]

Yep, Brownells is 7 years behind the times with that set of rules. . .

 

[W.E.G.]

Please inundate Brownell's with complaints at http://www.brownells.com/aspx/general/contact_us.aspx

 

[Clark]

There are non 922r compliant rifles all over gun shows, ATF guys walking around and nothing happening.

I have seen no 1934 GCA non compliant guns or parts at guns shows.

My guess is that there is a big difference between felony to manufacture and felony to possess.

 

[Shadow 7D]

Yeah, look up 'constructive possession' or somesuch in legalese
Take the AK, say you got the 'complete' parts kit with the auto trigger group
And you have a three hole receiver, some ATF agent could come along and say, 'with a removable rivet (he has hidden somewhere) this gun is a Fully Automatic Weapon'

Much like having a M-16 auto sear (unregistered) and a AR, the claim is that you 'constructively possess' a machinegun.

The parts aren't Illegal by themselves, but the 'whole' is. Just like 922

 

[Z-Michigan]

Constructive possession is a big issue with NFA. I'm not aware that BATFE has ever applied to 922(r), and in fact I believe they have specifically stated that it does not apply. Otherwise it would seem to be illegal to possess both a parts kit and a receiver, even though you also had the parts to make a compliant build.

 

[Shadow 7D]

I was referring to Clarks comments
No, I don't think they have tried it with 922(r)