Russian SKS bayonet question

[DMK]

Quote:
"Even if you did void the rifle's C&R status, the rifle would still be importable as it does not have enough evil features"

So this is incorrect?

Quote:
"Therefore, since an SKS exibits some of these characteristics, it is banned from importation under section 925(d)(3). However, subsection (e)(1) of the same section allows for its importation because of its current designation as a Curio and Relic (the 20th item down on this list: http://www.atf.treas.gov/firearms/cu...0505update.htm)."

Are you assuming, or do you know for sure? Comparing it to a PSL may make logical sense, but might not be in line with the BATF's views.

Sam, you are correct in that I'm applying logic to the problem and comparing two nearly identical situations to derive a supposition. The BATF does not always apply logic to their decisions so reality and theory may not coincide. I am comfortable that I am in the right as far as the spirit and letter of the law, but that doesn't mean that the BATF would agree with me.

Can you provide the full link to that BATF document? When you cut & pasted it from the other forum, the link got truncated.

 

[jonnyc]

Sam, the C&R status, or lack thereof, of a firearm is really only relevant upon importation or transfer. And unless you turn the parts into an illegal firearm, a non-C&R SKS is not prohibited from possession or sale. I still fail to see where the temporary removal of a bayonet from a C&R SKS is any issue for concern or appeal to the ATF. It is a non-issue. Retain the bayonet and reattach it at transfer, if you are concerned.

 

[Sam1911]

Sam, the C&R status, or lack thereof, of a firearm is really only relevant upon importation or transfer.

EXCEPT that, the ATF seems to have ruled that removing the part changes the status from C&R to non-C&R. Changing the status is seen to be "making" a firearm. And that firearm you've "made" is now subject to 922(r). So it would need no more than 10 foreign "counted' parts, which it wouldn't have. AND...

The law states, "(a) No person shall assemble a semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun using more than 10 of the imported parts listed in paragraph (c) of this section if the assembled firearm is prohibited from importation under section 925(d)(3) as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes."

"No person shall assemble" seems to mean "EVER" or "PERIOD." It doesn't say "make sure you put it back before you sell it." Where did you get the idea about transferring?

See the problem?

 

[unit91]

The BATF does not always apply logic to their decisions

Amen, brother.

 

[Sam1911]

Can you provide the full link to that BATF document? When you cut & pasted it from the other forum, the link got truncated.

Looking...

Unfortunately that exact link has been killed off.

I got it from this page, though, which is still good: http://sailorcurt.blogspot.com/2007/02/sks-legal-issues.html

 

[DMK]

None of the links on that page work any more, and most of the arguments made seem to refer to the Yugo 59/66 SKS which has some additional components (grenade launcher, threaded barrel, night sights).

However, a standard SKS (a Russian SKS for example) with the bayonet removed does not have the evil features that the ATF generally considers to be non-sporting. The fact that non-C&R Norinco SKS were allowed to be imported (sans bayonet) before Clinton banned importation of firearms and ammunition from China makes that case.


If removing a bayonet from a Russian SKS is illegal because it's no longer C&R, then why aren't all the Norinco SKS illegal? They were never C&R.

Currently, the ATF (under delegated authority of the Attorney General) authorizes for importation firearms that meet the "sporting purpose" test. This test is derived from a study conducted in 1989 which resulted in the "1989 Report" http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/atf_1989_report.txt

The criteria chosen by the ATF for the "sporting purpose" test comes directly from this report. If a semi-automatic rifle has ANY of the following features, it is considered to have failed the "sporting purpose" test:

Folding/Telescoping Stocks
Pistol Grips
Bayonet or ability to attach a bayonet (ie lug or mount)
Flash Suppressors
Bipods
Grenade launchers
Night Sights

 

[Sam1911]

DMK, I really don't know the exact answer (of course -- if anyone does!). If Norinco and SKSs aren't imported under C&R rules (925(d)3) then did only the removal of the bayonet make them legal to import under 922(r), then reistallation of that bayonet should make them violate 922(r). Just as the aftermarket stocks & such can do.

That would seem like the argument is, if you have most SKSs, imported complete as C&Rs under 925d(3), you may not remove the bayonet or you'll be violating 922(r). If you have a Norinco, imported without the bayonet and thus avioiding 922(r), you may not ADD a bayonet or violate 922(r).

What a mess.

 

[zhyla]

I don't really see why people worry about 922 so much. Sure, it's good to comply fully with all the various gun laws. But I've never heard of a 922 arrest or conviction and it's really a difficult case to prove.

 

[unit91]

I don't really see why people worry about 922 so much. Sure, it's good to comply fully with all the various gun laws. But I've never heard of a 922 arrest or conviction and it's really a difficult case to prove.

I really do agree with your sentiment here, but I have a family to provide for, and in my line of work a federal conviction would be a career-ender. Yes there are a lot of (likely unnecessary) hoops to jump through, but I can't/won't risk my family's livelihood over a hundred bucks worth of compliance parts. It's a silly law, but it's still the law.

 

[19-3Ben]

Making money on gun sales could theoretically be considered dealing without a license (assuming you don't have an FFL, of course). Not something I'd worry about, but in the same realm as having a bayonet-less M59/66.

Actually, it's perfectly legal and there is no problem. I have bought guns with my C&R license only to end up selling them later and I've even made money on one sale (about $5. Whooohooo!!!).

The thing is, you can't have an FFL 01/03 (C&R license) for a commercial PURPOSE. So if I started buying Mosins by the crate for $45 each and selling them for $90 each, and I did this with 50 rifles, it would land me in jail.
That's because I clearly bought with the intent to sell for profit, and did so on a grand scale. I am in essence, conducting business.

But selling a single rifle, or heck, even a few of your rifles and making $5-10 is not going to raise any eyebrows. Just make sure not to buy with the intent of selling, and conduct any business.

 

[jonnyc]

Sam, your reasoning is saying that the posession of a Russian SKS sans bayonet will be seen by the ATF as a violation of federal law. I don't believe that's the case.

 

[Sam1911]

Sam, your reasoning is saying that the posession of a Russian SKS sans bayonet will be seen by the ATF as a violation of federal law. I don't believe that's the case.

I know -- I understand what you believe about it, but not why, exactly.

If the items I've quoted here are true, then it would be. If they are not true, then perhaps not. I didn't author those pieces of text (and I LIKE the bayonet on my Russian SKS) so you aren't going to offend me by proving my understanding -- or the statements I've quote -- to be wrong.

Please go ahead.

 

[DMK]

That would seem like the argument is, if you have most SKSs, imported complete as C&Rs under 925d(3), you may not remove the bayonet or you'll be violating 922(r). If you have a Norinco, imported without the bayonet and thus avioiding 922(r), you may not ADD a bayonet or violate 922(r).

The last part is right, but not the first part.

If you add the bayonet to a Norinco SKS (imported after late '89) then it would be a violation of the 9.22(r) because it is not excluded as a C&R.

However, removing the bayonet of the example Russian SKS may invalidate it's C&R status (..For sake of argument. I'm not convinced that is even true) but it would not be in violation of the 9.22(r) because you removed the bayonet (it's only evil feature) making it identical to the Norinco SKS which is a legal rifle.

Now the ATF may stamp their feet and threaten their all mighty power, but they can't have it both ways.

They say that modifying a rifle by adding the "evil features" makes it "identical" (or sort of identical) to a rifle that would not be legal to import, therefore the modified rifle is illegal. In our example, we are making a rifle that is exactly identical to a rifle that is legal to import. So then our rifle should be legal. We have the precedence of the ATF allowing this same exact rifle to be imported from China. I can't imagine any federal DA looking at this example and saying "oh yea, I could make a winning case of this in court".

 

[Sam1911]

I don't discount the logic of your argument. I honestly don't know what the ATF would do.

As I'm completely agreeing with your logic and neither of us are employed by the ATF to make such calls, that's about as far as we can probably take it.

 

[Sam1911]

This morning I took a look through (a small bit of) the information available on the SKS forum's FAQ: http://www.victorinc.com/SKS-FAQ.html

While I can't say with any certainly how things are legally interpreted, I did find this list of pertinent legal restrictions somewhat informative:

Here is an overview of six regulations you will likely encounter in your research (more information on each is presented later):

1. Title 18 USC § 925(d)(3): Is a 1968 law that allows ATF to restrict importation of “non-sporting firearms”. ATF published “studies” in 1989 and 1998 defining what it considered “non-sporting”. However, since there is no law or regulation about what “non-sporting” is, all one can do is read the studies for guidance and then ask ATF on a case-by-case basis.

2. Title 18 USC § 922(r): Is a 1990 law prohibiting assembly of a Title 18 USC § 925(d)(3) firearm from imported parts. Congress passed this law in because companies imported “kits” and assembled them in the US during 1989 and 1990. Though 922(r) only covers assembly, the possession of a Title 18 USC § 925(d)(3) violating rifle might still cause legal problems should you ever have a run-in with the law, so it is probably prudent to not purchase such a rifle from someone else.

3. 178.39: Is a regulation that defines a list of twenty parts. Any rifle where ten-or-less of these parts are imported is not considered an imported rifle and is not subject to 922(r). Note that the total number of parts in the rifle is not important, so often swapping out just a few imported parts for US-made ones frees your rifle from the provisions of Title 18 USC § 922(r).

4. Title 18 USC § 925(e): A law that allows Curio &Relic firearms to be imported—even those like Yugoslavian Type 59/66 Rifles that might otherwise be in violation of Title 18 USC § 925(d)(3). Despite the fact that the rifle is already here, almost anytime you modify your C&R rifle it loses C&R status and you'll need to comply with 922(r) and the 1994 AWB.

5. Title 18 USC § 921(a)(30)(B): Definition of 1994 Assault Weapon. Applies to both domestic and imported rifles with detachable magazines. However, 922(r) is usually more restrictive with regard to imported rifles.

6. Title 18 USC § 922(v): Prohibits assembly, possession, or transfer of Title 18 USC § 921(a)(30)(B) rifle. Title 18 USC § 922(v) and Title 18 USC § 921(a)(30)(B) are often collectively referred to as the “1994 Assault Weapons Ban” or “1994 AWB” for short. These restrictions are no longer in effect on the Federal level. However, be aware that some states have enacted laws which mirror these restrictions.

Obviously this is a bit dated as the 1994 AWB has been gone for six years now.

Is a Chinese SKS Carbine treated differently than one from a Yugoslavia, Russia, etc?
Yes and no. Yes, SKS carbines from many (primarily eastern European nations) are imported under “Curio and Relic” rules. And no, Title 18 USC § 922(r) still restricts the assembly of those items prohibited under Title 18 USC § 925(d)(3). So if your C&R SKS Carbine loses its’ C&R status, it is treated just like a non-C&R Chinese SKS Carbine.

Which means that the question comes back to "does removing a bayonet from a Russian (or other) SKS void it's status as a C&R?" It doesn't seem to matter if you are removing an "evil" feature. What matters is that the rifle is altered and therefore not C&R eligible, which, it is established constitutes making a new firearm. Just as would dropping it into a Tapco stock or what have you.

Read more:

What happens if I modify a Curio C&R SKS Carbine?
In general, just about any modification you can think of causes a curio C&R rifle to lose its C&R status: Replacing a wooden stock with a synthetic one, adding a muzzle break, removing the bayonet, etc.

Since SKS Carbines would normally be prohibited from importation due to its “non-sporting” features. The ONLY reason they are allowed into the country is because it is C&R eligible, meaning that it has some sort of historical value. Furthermore, ATF has stated repeatedly that in order for a surplus military firearm to retain C&R status, it must be complete and in its “original military configuration”. Otherwise, it is not C&R and may not be importable under Title 18 USC § 925(d)(3).

Should C&R status be lost, the firearm would not be transferable as a C&R firearm. In addition, any remaining “restricted features” will need to be removed. For most SKS Carbines, the bayonet is the only “restricted feature”. For Yugoslavian Type 59/66A1 SKS Carbines, the grenade launcher, and night sights may also be “restricted features”. But as long as the restricted features are removed, there is nothing illegal about modifying a non-C&R SKS rifle.

In the past, ATF has said the bayonet mount (without the bayonet) may remain on a fixed magazine SKS. So you should only really need to remove the night sights in order to get legal. However, it is unclear whether this is still the official ATF position.

And, finally:

Can I remove the bayonet from my C&R SKS Carbine?

Current understanding is that removing the bayonet takes your rifle out from under the protections of its' C&R status. Therefore it would be subject to the requirements of Title 18 USC § 925(d)(3) and § 922(r). This has implications only for the Yugoslavian Type 59/66 Rifles, since for other fixed magazine SKS Carbines the bayonet is the only “restricted feature”

However, ATF has told one member of the Survivor's SKS Boards web site “the bayonet … may be removed for shooting purposes without affecting the C&R classification of the firearm.” But this begs questions such as: “How long a time period can the bayonet be removed for ‘shooting purposes’?”

Again, all this info comes from Survivor's SKS FAQ. Not legal counsel, but highly informed opinion backed up by a lot of study.

Is it "conclusive"? No, and he says so. Take it for what you will.

 

[Sam1911]

Also, going back again to answer jonnyc's earlier point:

Can’t I just modify an SKS Carbine I already own, after all it’s already been imported?

Title 18 USC § 922(r) prohibits “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 Title 18 USC § 925(d)(3).” Put another way, it is illegal for anyone to assemble a semiautomatic rifle or shotgun domestically that would be prohibited from import were import attempted.

Nothing about transfer or point of sale in there.

Since my SKS Carbine is already “imported”, can’t I just do whatever I please to it?

Despite the fact that the rifle is already here, anytime you modify your rifle you'll need to comply with the current requirements of Title 18 USC § 925(d)(3) and § 922(r).

 

[Sam1911]

I also got quite a kick out of this (as before, from "Survivor's" SKS FAQ):

Wait a minute! This rifle is my property, and ATF can’t tell me what I can and cannot do to it.
There is at least one prominent contributor to the various SKS boards who promotes this view. So as to accurately present his view, here’s a quote:

“I argue BATF advisory letters affect licensed persons only, not the general public, and that they do not bear the force of law (they're not law). … Till we see a Federal law banning bayonets on imported ChiCom SKS rifles, I don't think anyone -- other than a Fed or someone licensed by BATFE need worry about it.”
While I respect this individual’s tremendous knowledge of SKS Carbines, I disagree with him on this particular issue. ATF has not just advised FFL holders on this matter, but they have “determined” that adding a bayonet to a non-C&R (i.e.: Chinese) SKS is a 922(r) violation. Download the ATF Brochure from the Simonov.Net web site (253kb). Then take note of two things:

1) The list of prohibited features for an SKS Carbine.

2) ATF claims that these prohibitions apply to “anyone” … not just FFL holders, but “anyone”.

While it could be claimed that ATF doesn't have the Constitutional authority to propagate such restrictions, ATF clearly thinks it does have the authority to tell you what you can and cannot do with your rifle. And they think they got this authority from Congress and the President. Trying to convince them otherwise is going to require more legal resources than 99.999999% of gun owners have access to.

Now your chances of actually being cited for a 922(r) violation are infinitely small (maybe even zero). In fact, a lawyer on one of the SKS boards ran a legal search and found no known 922(r) convictions. Maybe that's because the rules are in fact illegal and ATF knows it. As for me, I’m not looking for a court fight. I view compliance parts as either: a "tax" which goes directly to US manufactures, or cheap legal insurance.

Hey, maybe we're all worrying about nothing. Or maybe not. "Not" sends a few shivers up my spine, though.

 

[zoom6zoom]

“How long a time period can the bayonet be removed for ‘shooting purposes’?”

Well, I took it apart to clean in 1998, I just haven't gotten around to putting it back together yet.

If anyone's ever been tagged with a 922(r) violation, they were already in the frying pan with bigger issues.

 

[DMK]

neither of us are employed by the ATF to make such calls, that's about as far as we can probably take it.

You're absolutely right. This whole conversation is academic.

In fact, I'm not completely convinced that the ATF is qualified to make these calls (they've had some pretty hair brained opinions). But the only real way to prove it right or wrong is to take it to court. It's unfortunate that the average citizen can't afford to do that.

 

[Ignition Override]

A guy at our range supposedly had his AR malfunction and fire a few rounds as if it had been an automatic. It had a problem which can happen to ARs.

Nothing happened as a result and it's difficult to imagine that the ATF would be interested whether a given Norinco SKS had been imported with a bayonet. I suppose that the ATF could have a special, elite "Norinco Bayonet Investigation Squad", like the former East German 'Stasi'.

 

[DMK]

A guy at our range supposedly had his AR malfunction and fire a few rounds as if it had been an automatic. It had a problem which can happen to ARs.

Not just ARs. Almost any semi-auto can have a slam fire or hammer follow-through malfunction for various reasons. My Garand did it a couple times as did one of my 1911s before I got them both rebuilt. Scary stuff.

 

[Sam1911]

A guy at our range supposedly had his AR malfunction and fire a few rounds as if it had been an automatic. It had a problem which can happen to ARs.

Google "David Olofson." "Nothing" isn't what always happens.

Further, we do not condone or seek to violate federal laws in any way.

The discussion at hand is merely to discover what the federal law ACTUALLY is. Not whether we can get away with violating it.