How is this considered a DD but my Saiga 12 isn't?

http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/cPath/1072_1084/products_id/411548112/USED+INTERORD+USAS+12GA+DESTRUCTIVE+DEVICE

The ATF ruling cited the overall size and weight of the USAS was not suited for sporting purposes, as most "normal" shotguns are lighter and smaller in size. The Saiga is considered sporting because of this.


The fact the USAS used a high-cap drum was not the main reason for the ruling, but a factor combined with the size and weight.


ATF Ruling 94-1 and 94-2 covered the USAS and Streetsweeper reclassification.

Makes sense now. Thanks for the info guys.

The USAS-12, Striker and Streetsweeper are all DDs under the "non-sporting shotgun" definition of Destructive Device. They are classified as Title II by make and model, not by features per se. As long as it meets the definition of a "shotgun" and says "USAS-12" on it, it is a DD. To this end, there are many Striker and Streetsweeper AOWs that did not meet the definition of "shotgun" to begin with and thus remain AOWs rather than DDs.

The Saiga 12 might have similar features, but until the AG officially renders a "non-sporting" opinion on it, it will remain a Title I shotgun.

The Saiga is in a bit of a different situation than the others were. The Saiga is imported in an approved "sporting" configuration and only then are they converted to a more exotic configuration. In declaring the Saiga a "non-sporting shotgun", the AG would necessarily be reclassifying both configurations, imported and converted, as Destructive Devices. This would not pass a legal challenge.

Separately, you cannot neuter these into Title I status unless you actually remove the barrel entirely to shed the "shotgun" definition, then remove the removed barrel entirely from your possession. The result would be a "firearm" but not a DD. This is how many USAS-12 owners legally avoided the registration, though they were probably better off just registering them in the first place.