Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 10/16/2003 11:11:18 PM EDT
I'm sure this has been debated ad nauseum, but wanted to get the general consensus from folks here (and explanations on why you believe as you do, if you would be so kind as to assist me).

It appears that the parts count issue is part of the 1989 importation ban regarding "sporting features" and what not.

This is where we commonly get "pre-ban" and "post-ban" from. A pre-1989 rifle can have as many foriegn parts in it as you desire, as it's a pre-ban.

A post-1989 rifle must have the requisite number of US parts in it, otherwise it's a rifle assembled or imported in violation of section 922r/1989 ban/whatever.

But what about evil features?

The evil features are listed as:

Folding or telescoping stock
Pistol grip protruding conspicuosly beneath the stock
Bayonet mount
Flash supressor or threaded barrel
Grenade launcher

This is the list that we've gone by to say that the removable magazine plus more than one of the following is bad.

BUT.

These evil features are designated by the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban.

As such, doesn't it hold true that any rifle assembled or imported before the 1994 AWB can have any number of evil features you want on it, provided it has the requisite number of US made parts, pursuant to section 922r?

i.e. If I put a gas piston, FCG, pistol grip and forearm (all US made) on my MAK-90 (imported before the 1994 AWB), I could put a folding stock on it, in addition to the pistol grip and removable magazine? If I so desired, I could attach a flash hider as well?

Expert opinions strongly desired!
Link Posted: 10/17/2003 2:16:50 AM EDT
I belive the "grenade Launcher" feature is only illegal in Kalifornia..How many murders have arrised from grenade launchers being used in this country.....Stupid bbut that could be a whole nother thread...

There is much speculation regarding a "pre 94"-"post 89" rifle...Im not sure.

But if it would be legal, I belive you would have had to of replaced the forgein parts with US parts, and ad the "Evil Features" before the 1994 AW ban...

Stupid laws, You almost need to be a lawyer to know what you are and are not allowed to own here in the "LAnd of the Free, and the Home of the Brave"....

"Shall not be Infringed"...Well maybee just a few times, they'll never notice.....

Link Posted: 10/17/2003 5:08:42 AM EDT
What about a 37mm launcher attached to my AK? Is that considered illegal or evil?

Right now, its not attached to it and works great as a paper weight. :)



Link Posted: 10/17/2003 6:04:19 AM EDT
That's not a grenade launcher - that's a flare launcher that's completely legal...
Link Posted: 10/17/2003 7:39:32 AM EDT

Originally Posted By coltshorty14:
I belive the "grenade Launcher" feature is only illegal in Kalifornia.



You'd be wrong.

If you have a muzzle device that is 22mm in diameter and at least 45mm long, you would be in violation of federal law, no matter how it is attached.

I agree with you about the stupidity of it.
Link Posted: 10/17/2003 8:21:20 AM EDT
If you put enough US parts on it (6 IIRC) then its not covered by 922(r), its now covered by the AWB.

If the AWB goes away THEN you could add all the evil features you want.

BTW that 37mm launcher? In CA it IS considered a grenade launcher IIRC. All other states (and federal) its just a flare launcher.
Link Posted: 10/17/2003 9:13:06 AM EDT
Kythri,
I have gone round and round in my own head as well with others on this board about the scenario you describe. Unlike some, I believe there is a BIG gray area here. I am definitely in the minority, but I have PERSONALLY come to the conclusion that pre-94 complete rifles ARE pre-bans with the requsite number of US parts. Before everyone jumps down my shit and posts the links to the BATF Letter(s) supposedly addressing this issue, I just want to say that I have read them and there is STILL gray IMO.

The gray actually comes from other BATF letters (which are not law BTW, no matter what people say) that covers other weapons such as AR's. They often contradict each other. Take these contradictions together with the actual verbiage of the laws and I think a strong case can be made. Lastly, just so everyone does not think I am just making wild assumptions, I have discussed this issue with a couple of U.S. attys I know and they agree that significant gray area exists.


Link Posted: 10/17/2003 9:18:22 AM EDT
I have flares for it and plenty. But I can also shoot "Bird Busters", "Smoke Grenades" and "Fletchets" which I have plenty of aswell and its still legal?

KOOL!

Link Posted: 10/17/2003 9:54:26 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/17/2003 9:56:16 AM EDT by JTR8541]
I’m curious about this too.

As I had figured it:

1989 921(?) restricts the importation of non “sporting” firearms thus you see things like the mac-90 being sold with no evil features, a butthole stock and a five round mag because it’s now a “sporting” rifle designed to go kill Bambi. 922r gives a parts list to be considered foreign or domestic.


But it’s still 1989 not 1994 yet.

If a person were able to change some of those foreign parts to US parts to make the said mac-90 922r compliant before the 1994 crime billy they would be able to have any and all the evil features they wanted as they would now have in their possession a pre 1994 ban 922r compliant “assault weapon.”

Yes, no?
Link Posted: 10/17/2003 10:29:34 AM EDT
Yes

Link Posted: 10/17/2003 10:41:41 AM EDT
Very interesting. I never actually thought about it. Why then don't we see post '89/pre '94 AK's being converted into pre-94-ban configurations with addition of the required U.S.-made parts?

rickinvegas, if it's not too much trouble, could you direct me to the regs and interpative letters related to this issue? I'm not being lazy, but you would save me some time getting up to speed. thanks
Link Posted: 10/17/2003 11:35:06 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/17/2003 11:36:54 AM EDT by coltshorty14]

Originally Posted By FALPhil:

Originally Posted By coltshorty14:
I belive the "grenade Launcher" feature is only illegal in Kalifornia.



You'd be wrong.

If you have a muzzle device that is 22mm in diameter and at least 45mm long, you would be in violation of federal law, no matter how it is attached.

I agree with you about the stupidity of it.



What about all those poor unfurtinate folks who own those SKSs that have a grenade launcher...Better tell them that it its illegal..

Listen folks, the fact of the matter is to put "EVIL FEATURES" on a post 89 pre 94 AK here in the year 2003 would be constucting a illegal semi automatic assult weapon...no ifs and or buts....Remember your rifle had to be in assult weapon configuration BEFORE hte AW BAN...Discusion over!!!!
Link Posted: 10/17/2003 11:41:59 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/17/2003 11:44:50 AM EDT by rickinvegas]

Originally Posted By kalibr:
rickinvegas, if it's not too much trouble, could you direct me to the regs and interpative letters related to this issue? I'm not being lazy, but you would save me some time getting up to speed. thanks




The 94 ban "grandfather" loophole reads as follows:

(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer
of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed
under Federal law on the date of the enactment of this subsection.


Now, the argument is made that a typical factory built MAK 90 is not a "semiautomatic assault weapon" as described in the previous paragraph and thus is not eligible for grandfathering BUT.......If this is indeed the case, then that AR-15 you bought new as a complete rife in 1988 is not eligible either since it has a fixed stock and a 24" target barrel with a floating foregrip and has never been otherwise configured. We all know that such a rifle IS a pre-ban and you can pimp it out all you want with all the evil features your heart desires. GRAY, GRAY, GRAY

Here is one of the ATF letters that specifically addresses parts question. While this may seem to close the case, there are other letters that address AR's that say the exact opposite!

www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/atf_letter24.txt

Read this letter carefully, this guy is all over the place legally........for instance, he has added arbitrarily Bi-pod to the list of "Evil Features"!! (to all you guys who use a bipod on your MAK, YOU ARE NOW A FELON!)

He then goes on to say:
However such rifle many [sic]
not be in a configuration that meets the definition of
semiautomatic assault weapon as that term is defined in 18 U.S.C.,
Chapter 44, Section 921(a)(30).


Why, because he says so?? He cites chapter law everywhere but here. He just made this up.

THIS is what we are calling the "Law"? Give me a break!

Have fun, hope your head doesn't explode!

Link Posted: 10/17/2003 11:44:13 AM EDT

Originally Posted By coltshorty14:
What about all those poor unfurtinate folks who own those SKSs that have a grenade launcher...Better tell them that it its illegal..



The "launcher" is a barrel launcher, and the SKS doesn't have what is considered a removable magazine. Hence, evil features law does not apply to it.


Listen folks, the fact of the matter is to put "EVIL FEATURES" on a post 89 pre 94 AK here in the year 2003 would be constucting a illegal semi automatic assult weapon...no ifs and or buts....Remember your rifle had to be in assult weapon configuration BEFORE hte AW BAN...Discusion over!!!!


Please cite this in applicable law/code/whatever. Like I said, I don't know everything about this, and this is the confusion I'm having about the issue.

Discussion NOT over.
Link Posted: 10/17/2003 11:48:59 AM EDT

Originally Posted By rickinvegas:
www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/atf_letter24.txt

Read this letter carefully, this guy is all over the place legally........for instance, he has added arbitrarily Bi-pod to the list of "Evil Features"!! (to all you guys who use a bipod on your MAK, YOU ARE NOW A FELON!)



NIGHT SIGHTS?!

What the hell?! Bipods/bipod mounts and night sights are mentioned NOWHERE in any law/code/anything.

You're right about him just making stuff up. That bit about night sights and bipods/bipod mounts is an entirely untenable position.
Link Posted: 10/17/2003 11:50:18 AM EDT

Originally Posted By coltshorty14:
Listen folks, the fact of the matter is to put "EVIL FEATURES" on a post 89 pre 94 AK here in the year 2003 would be constucting a illegal semi automatic assult weapon...no ifs and or buts....Remember your rifle had to be in assult weapon configuration BEFORE hte AW BAN...Discusion over!!!!



See my above example of the target AR with NO evil features prior to 9/13/94.

The law say "lawfully possessed". If they meant in "AW config" they would have said it.

Link Posted: 10/17/2003 12:05:56 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/17/2003 12:07:15 PM EDT by rickinvegas]
Let me throw one more legal "Monkey wrench" into the "Lawfully possessed" bowl.......

The 89 law says IMPORTATION or MANUFACTURE of an AW is illegal.......it does not say possession is illegal. Lets say you purchased a MAK90 in 1993 at a gunshow that had illegally been converted by someone with a pistol grip, threaded barrel etc. The guy who did it broke the law but nowhere does it say you could not possess it in 1993.........Is such a rifle "lawfully possessed" on 9/13/94 and thus eligible to be grandfathered?

I am not saying yes or no but I'll bet your head is hurting a little more

Link Posted: 10/17/2003 1:29:17 PM EDT
Rick the law refers to AW configured weapons posessed before the ban...

And the Ar-15 in which you refer in the configuration you refer to it as would not be considered a pre-ban assult weapon...This is the same as a mini-14 made b-4 the ban...if it did'nt have evil features then you can not under the law put them on now...
Link Posted: 10/17/2003 1:32:21 PM EDT
Though it WOULD be illegal, the chances of gettin busted are slim to none...
Link Posted: 10/17/2003 2:51:03 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/17/2003 2:53:53 PM EDT by rickinvegas]

Originally Posted By coltshorty14:
And the Ar-15 in which you refer in the configuration you refer to it as would not be considered a pre-ban assault weapon...



Everyone I have ever heard here will disagree with you.......the same people on this board that cry foul at the mere mention of a "pre-ban" MAK 90 have no problem with an AR that is a "complete rifle" prior to 9/94. You NEVER hear them question what config it was in prior to the 94 ban.

I am not trying to say anyone is right or wrong here. In my first post here I stated that I had made a PERSONAL decision. I am just pointing out that there are major holes in everyone's interpretations. We all have to remember that these laws were created as purely political window dressing and were never intended to be enforced thus, they are un-enforceable.

Link Posted: 10/17/2003 4:32:15 PM EDT
Regardless of when the weapon was built or imported it would have had to be in “assault weapon configuration” before 9/13/94 to be “pre-ban”

rickinvegas had an example of a 1988 vintage target arf with no evil features, thus it is not considered a semi-automatic assault weapon and can not now be configured as such. The hypothetical rifle in question existed before the ban but was NOT in pre-ban semi-automatic assault weapon configuration before the ban thus it is NOT a pre-ban semi-automatic assault weapon; there is NO gray to it.

The weapon in question may have indeed been lawfully possessed but if it was not in a semi-automatic assault weapon configuration it was not considered a semi-automatic assault weapon thus it was not a lawfully possessed semi-automatic assault weapon. Again NO gray area.

Adding “evil features” to such a weapon is against the law, regardless of how stupid and unenforceable the law is.
Link Posted: 10/17/2003 9:12:16 PM EDT
You also have to remember in this discussion, that in these cases the burden of proof lies not on the prosecution but on the defense. THe prosecution only has to show that you were in posesion of an AW. You have to prove that the AW is legal. You better have witnessses or other proof that you bought the MAK, and before 94 got it assembled as an AW. Same with the AR's, and mini-14's. This is a VERY common mistake even among dealers. I have heard over a dozen examples of people selling illegally configuring rifles at gunshows, they fully admit to it because they don't realize it's wrong.

Ignorance of the law by gunowners is no excuse. But don't ask the average ATFE agent whats illegal because they don't know.
Link Posted: 10/19/2003 10:09:33 AM EDT
Let me summarize my understanding:

1. You can indeed have a post-89/pre-94 AK that has the evil features, but only if that AK was converted into a U.S.-made assault rifle prior to the '94 ban. You'd better have some proof to back up your claim in that case. Being able to trace it to the owner who had it prior to '94 in the U.S.-made/assault rifle configuration who would be willing to certify that it indeed was converted into such rifle prior to '94 would be the least what you'd have to have to feel comfortable enough that you're not in violation of the '94 ban.

2. It wouldn't be good enough to have a post-89 rifle simply converted into an "assault weapon" prior to the '94 ban, unless it also qualified as being U.S.-made, because if it didn't have enough U.S.-made parts prior to the ’94 ban, then you were in violation of the '89 ban and wouldn't be in "LEGAL possession" of an assault weapon prior to the ’94 ban and, thus, wouldn't be grandfathered.

3. If and when the '94 ban goes away, you would be able to have the "evil features" on all post-89 AK's as long as they also qualify as U.S.-made.

Does everyone agree? Am I missing something?
Link Posted: 10/19/2003 10:36:06 AM EDT
That’s the way I understand it.
Link Posted: 10/21/2003 9:09:23 PM EDT
you see how confusing it is. you defintitely need an nra certified lawyer to know where you stand. it will cost more to have a lawyer than to get just a few pre-ban ak47 and keep your mak90 as is.

ok, i got question now. my mak90 has a 94 stamp on it. this mean it is made in 94, but when??? if it is made in september 1 of 1994, can i do the part count bs and put a folder on it. i know, i know, i'll be "a good guy" if i use the usa parts, but i'll be "the devil gun owner" if i keep the chinese part. it is the same as if i drive chevy i am american and if i drive a mercedes i am nazi.

"land of the free" is a myth. "home of the brave" is not modified to "home of the brave, who have to share space with liberasl"
Link Posted: 10/21/2003 9:10:11 PM EDT
you see how confusing it is. you defintitely need an nra certified lawyer to know where you stand. it will cost more to have a lawyer than to get just a few pre-ban ak47 and keep your mak90 as is.

ok, i got question now. my mak90 has a 94 stamp on it. this mean it is made in 94, but when??? if it is made in september 1 of 1994, can i do the part count bs and put a folder on it. i know, i know, i'll be "a good guy" if i use the usa parts, but i'll be "the devil gun owner" if i keep the chinese part. it is the same as if i drive chevy i am american and if i drive a mercedes i am nazi.

"land of the free" is a myth. "home of the brave" is not modified to "home of the brave, who have to share space with liberasl"

just my 1 cent cuz i ain't going to leave tip for this bs.
Link Posted: 10/21/2003 9:17:08 PM EDT
i think the mak90 can't get a folder and pistol grip because those would be 2 evil feature. adding the mag, you'll get 3 evil features. the ar15 only has 2 evil features and they're pistol and mag.

that should clear up things. so i am waiting for the ban to die. in the meantime, i curse those assholes selling a rusted folders for 75 bucks. fuck you anti-gun liberals dressing up as pro-gun. i curse that you die on your way way from the gun show and all your products get picked up by real gun lovers.
Link Posted: 10/21/2003 9:19:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By asianthug47:
you see how confusing it is. you defintitely need an nra certified lawyer to know where you stand. it will cost more to have a lawyer than to get just a few pre-ban ak47 and keep your mak90 as is.

ok, i got question now. my mak90 has a 94 stamp on it. this mean it is made in 94, but when??? if it is made in september 1 of 1994, can i do the part count bs and put a folder on it. i know, i know, i'll be "a good guy" if i use the usa parts, but i'll be "the devil gun owner" if i keep the chinese part. it is the same as if i drive chevy i am american and if i drive a mercedes i am nazi.

just my 1 cent cuz i ain't going to leave tip for this bs.




It is NOT confusing, But IT IS SIMPLE...If your rifle was NOT AW configuration, With the proper amount of US parts(I DOUBT YOU COULD FIND ENOUGH US PARTS IN 94 FOR THE AK), prior to 9-14-94 It IS NOT a PRE-BAN...


SO to answer your question, NO you can NOT do the US parts thing and put a folder on it...ALL that will tell you that you can ARE BLIND or DUMB, DO NOT FOLLOW THEM!!!!!

Once again it MUST have been a AW prior to 9-14-94 to legally have a folder!!!!!
Link Posted: 10/23/2003 3:59:26 PM EDT

Originally Posted By rickinvegas:
Let me throw one more legal "Monkey wrench" into the "Lawfully possessed" bowl.......

The 89 law says IMPORTATION or MANUFACTURE of an AW is illegal.......it does not say possession is illegal. Lets say you purchased a MAK90 in 1993 at a gunshow that had illegally been converted by someone with a pistol grip, threaded barrel etc. The guy who did it broke the law but nowhere does it say you could not possess it in 1993.........Is such a rifle "lawfully possessed" on 9/13/94 and thus eligible to be grandfathered?

I am not saying yes or no but I'll bet your head is hurting a little more




Just a follow-up to clarify the posession bit.

I just found a BATF letter that touches on that subject:


It is unlawful to manufacture, transfer or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon as provided in 18 U.S.C. section 922 (v) . However, a semiautomatic assault weapon, which was lawfully possessed under Federal law on September 13, 1994, may still be lawfully possessed and transferred.


URL is:

www.simonov.net/letters.htm

Found when looking for info about SKS stuffs. My Yugo rifles just showed up Tuesday =)
Top Top