Dinger, you are the one who is thick headed.

I quoted and linked to authoritative sources making my case.

All you have done is call me names.  Well, two can play at  that game.

You're a fucking idiot who shouldn't be trusted with a firearm in the first place.

I suggest you go commit multiple felonies and then go take them by the police station to show them how cool your folding stock, just assembled, AK is.

Now, either you have an ATF letter backign your position, or you don't.  I've posted numerous ATF letters.

Put up, or shut up, idiot.

This was a angry reply, but I decided to edit the post. I figured out this moron ain't worth the trouble!

Don,

I don’t think you’re understanding these letters you posted.

You remarks about each one indicate you missed the point and caught something else.

They’re not easy letters to understand; you might want to print them out and go through them with a highlighter and a pen, I had to.

Best regards, J

What DonGalt is missing is that all these folding stock AK's are not NEWLY manufactured assault weapons, but simply a repair of an already existing assault weapon.

That is what makes it legal Don.

Take for example you have a 1986 Kassnar Hungarian full stock. One day you drop it and the stock breaks off, along with the barrel bending in half. You decide you have always liked a folder more and 5.45mm over 7.62mm.
So you send the rifle along with the new parts to a gunsmith to REPAIR the rifle. It does not matter that the parts are not the originals, it only matters that the rifle the parts are going onto was a complete pre-89 assembled AK prior to breaking.

The Kassnar full stock is a pre-89 AK with evil features. Adding a side or underfolding stock does not make it more evil, it just provides another evil feature onto a rifle that was fully allowed to have them all to begin with.

Don,

You are in error.

Quoted: According to this letter, you cannot assemble an AK type with imported parts: http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/atf_letter24.txt Even if it complies with the AWB.  Thus taking a pre-ban rifle, disassembling it and reassembling it with imported parts would violate the imported parts rule.

This letter is based on CFR 178.39, see below.

Quoted: This letter shows that the reciever is not a rifle: http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/atf_letter49.txt

That is correct, but the subject matter is modification of existing rifles. So that point is mute.

Quoted: This letter makes the case-- modifications are considered "assembly" and thus are banned after 1989 (using imported parts. To use US parts, you have to comply with the AWB because changing the status of the rifle from "imported" to "US made" requires actually making the rifle: eg: assembly, and thus the 1994 ban applies.) http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/atf_letter68.txt

You seem some what confused about this letter.  The letter pertains to a post 89 imported rifle.  And again, the letter is based on CFR 178.39  SEE Below.

Quoted: The above explicitly states that modifying a pre-ban rifle into a form banned by the AWB would be inviolation of the AWB.

The letter suggests that about a rifle imported post 1989.  Maybe this is were you are confused.

Quoted: 2) Modifying a pre-ban rifle into another configuration that is banned by the AWB removes the protection provided by the grandfather clause of the AWB.

NOT TRUE see below.

Quoted: If someone has an AFT letter saying otherwise, I'd like to see it.

Not a letter, law.  See Below.

Quoted: what I have talked about is the generally held view.

From the responses, it doesn't appear the "generally held view".  

Quoted: There MAY be an exception for ARs because in putting an AR together you aren' remanufacturing it to make it US parts complaint, but for AKs, modifications are verboten.

The subject is pre 1989 imported rifles, they do not require imported parts.

Now what you've been waiting for.  The letters you reference are based on CFR 178.39.  Here it is, read away.  Note the exclusion of firearms imported before 11/30/1990

Sec. 178.39  Assembly of semiautomatic rifles or shotguns.    (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. (b) The provisions of this section shall not apply to: (3) The repair of any rifle or shotgun which had been imported into or assembled in the United States prior to November 30, 1990, or the replacement of any part of such firearm.

Righteous Kill



Sorry Typo,

"preban receivers" at that price what would you expect from FGW ?  i as of yet have never seen a 'deal' from that place, although i sure do hear alot of bitching about them an their service.

as for Don, guys why even bother, you are arguing with someone who doesn't want to listen to you, he's right you are wrong (in his head) you aren't going to convince him otherwise.  you'd be further ahead trying to convince france iraq had WMD's

So that point is mute.

moot...the point is moot.

Mute is deaf.

Mute is pronounced like lute, a U sound.

Moot is pronounced like shoot, long O sound

Quoted: So that point is mute. moot...the point is moot. Mute is deaf. Mute is pronounced like lute, a U sound. Moot is pronounced like shoot, long O sound

My English sucks and I was tired.
Thanks for the correction, now if I could just remember it for next time.

R/K

I asked this question in another thread, and INRANGE will not do this kind of work.

I have made my case, and all your protestations do not counteract it.

You can creatively read the letters as you like, but taking the gun down to the reciever and putting new parts on it-- not the pre-ban folding stock, etc, is considered "Assembling" by the ATF, and 922.  It is illegal.

But to hear from a gunsmith who won't do this:
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=4&f=64&t=58471

If taking a reciever and putting new parts on it isn't "assembling" I don't know what is.  In this case, the law is VERY clear.  You make a "new pre-ban" AK and you are violating the law... it doesn't matter what the history of the reciever is.

Righteous Kill--

The law you quoted provided an exclusion for REPAIR, but still bans assembly.  Making all your "not true, see below" comments in error.

The letters I posted showed that the ATF would consider the kind of work we're talking about to be assembly of a new prohibited weapon.

If your folding buttstock on a pre-ban RIFLE (not Reciever, RIFLE) breaks, and you fix it, that's not assembly.  If another part breaks and you fix it, that's not assembly.

But if you take off all those parts and put on a new barral, new folding buttstock, new pistolgrip, new trigger parts and all that, then that is assembly of a new firearm.  

It shoudl be obvious that for repair there needs to be a worn or broken part.  If you never were in posession of the pre-ban parts and you bought a stripped reciever like we are discussing in these threads, you are not reparing a rifle!  You are assembling a new rifle from a reciever.

REmember, the reciever  is not a rifle.  I quoted the ATF saying literally that.

Since anyoen who buys these recievers has no proof that they ever were pre-ban rifles, and such proof would be irrelevant anyway because they just bought a reciever, not a pre-ban rifle, then assembling into a pre-ban configuration would be assembling a new assault rifle under the AWB.

There is no such thing as a magical reciever.  Thank you for quoting the law-- I appreciate that-- but it is talking about reparing rifles, not recievers keeping magical properties that allow them to be grandfathered.

Quoted: I asked this question in another thread, and INRANGE will not do this kind of work. I have made my case, and all your protestations do not counteract it. But to hear from a gunsmith who won't do this: http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=4&f=64&t=58471

OK, Don, this really isn't meant to be a personal attack, but I've got to ask a question.

Obviously you can read and write.  Can you comprehend either?

Read the reply Troy (of InRange) left.

He did NOT say he wouldn't convert something like a Norinco 84S to pre-ban-form Krinkov.

He said he hated B-West receivers, and that he follows the 1989 import restrictions.

Basically, what I'm getting from Troy's statement is, if you ship him something that's not a pre-89 ban rifle or receiver, he's not going to build it, because he has no way of verifying what config it was in.

The pre-89 stuff is all pre-ban, so it's all good.

I do believe that there are people here, on this very board, who own an InRange converted 84S.

Troy also said he wouldn't move factory trunions (as this is where foriegn manufacturers put their serials).

This is VERY different from saying "I will not take a pre-89 ban weapon and turn it into a pre-ban configuration Krinkov."

In fact, it's not even freakin' close!

InRange WILL take an 84S (they're all pre-ban, as far as I know), and turn it into a Krink with a threaded, un-pinned barrel, a folding stock, a pistol grip, etc, etc.

This is not illegal, and virtually every AK builder that I know of will do this (specifically, Ohio Rapid Fire, InRange, Investment Grade Firearms, AK-USA, etc.)

AK Builders, I know you're here.  Can you confirm this?

Please let this post die. It is a complete waste of time. The rest of us know how it works, let DonGalt live in his own world.

Don,

Quoted: I have made my case,

"Your case"??

Inrange (Troy's) comments were ambiguous at best.  In response to your rather poorly written question.  

What Troy will or will not do does make law.  Silly Rabbit.  However, Troy did say he's not sure on some points of the law, and doesn't wish to cross those.  Here again, his prerogative, not federal law.

Can't speak for Inrange, however I believe he does in fact build krink kits, and other kits on pre-89 rifles.  As do numerous other builders.  

Quoted: and all your protestations do not counteract it.

Sorry, my protestations? No, just the CFR (the law).

What didn't you understand about:

". . . replacement. . ."


R/K

Holy Kalashnikov Batman!

Troy (InRange) built an AK-74 on a preban receiver!

Now where's your "case" Don ?????

www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=4&f=64&t=58603

Hey Don!

Here's an ATF letter for you!

www.falfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=63465

Now, the ATF is saying that a stripped pre-ban receiver is a non-existant item, that once it's sold without the parts, it's not pre-ban anymore.

OK, fine - that's not the issue we're talking about.  We're talking about putting different nasty parts on a pre-ban rifle.

The guy from the ATF explicitly says that assembly of the rifle is NOT manufacture.

So.

Yeah, I'm a turd.  I can't let this thread die.  If you don't like it, don't read it.  I just wanted to post the link to the letter I found over there at FALfiles...