Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 1/28/2006 8:04:04 PM EDT
A few weeks ago I advertised a Romanian folding AK stock over on the AK parts section of this site. As Ialways do, I gave the first responder first crack at the piece.

Turns out he's in the greater Hartford area, but w/o giving the matter any real thought, I went ahead and shipped the thing. Just read thru a thread over on the AR15 forum, bemoaning the nutso regs you Conn. and Mass. folks have to put up with and it dawned on me that I may have helped this guy break the law.

Did I? And if so, should I take any further action? Given comments he e mailed me AFTER I'd shipped the thing make me wonder if he's someone I really want having a folding stock AK. Visions of the piece concealed under a coat when he walks into a shopping center or school keep floating thru my head.

Comments?
Link Posted: 1/29/2006 10:50:14 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/29/2006 10:50:50 AM EDT by racer934]
If he possesses an AK chambered in 7.62 with a certificate of possession, no law was broken.

If he possesses a pre-ban AK chambered in 5.45 or 5.56, no law was broken.

If he possesses an AK chambered in 7.62 that has no certificate of possession, he is already breaking the law.

If he possesses a post-ban AK chambered in 5.45 or 5.56, he is violation of the state AWB by possessing or installing a folding stock.
Link Posted: 1/29/2006 11:08:13 AM EDT
So if thats accurate, I can buy a pre ban AK still even though they made all postban ak types in 7.62 cal. banned? Or do i still have to stay with .223 or 5.45 even if its pre 94? I get a headache when i try to figure these laws out...
Link Posted: 1/29/2006 11:21:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/29/2006 11:26:08 AM EDT by shamayim]
Thanks Racer. Guess I'm going to have to assume that the dude has a preban piece, and he's legal.

I'm still not comfortable w/his behavior, after he sent me a personal check, and then started making very nasty comments when I notified him that I'd have to wait 5 business days to ensure check clearance, before shipping. The piece was shipped on exactly the day I told him it would; but by that time he was accusing me of unethical behavior, leading up to a final note (after I'd shipped) with snotty cracks about my ethnicity.

Guess he figured that if he'd made his comment before I shipped, I'd send him his money back, since I had 6 others on a waiting list for the part. He'd have been right.

I don't know whether to admire or pity you guys who live up there. I left my home town, Springfield , Mass, many years ago, because I couldn't stand the spiralling taxes and lousy job opportunities---and that was well before the gun laws in Mass. and Conn. got so nutty. Guess y'all have good reasons for staying, but I'm sure glad I didn't
Link Posted: 1/29/2006 2:30:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/29/2006 3:46:49 PM EDT by racer934]
Xikar - AK types chambered in 7.62 are banned from transfer, regardless of date of manufacture. Any AK type chambered in 7.62x39 purchased prior to May 8, 2002 had to be registered with the DPS prior to Oct 1, 2003. Ref: 53-202n. You can still possess an AK-type chambered in 5.45 or 5.56. If it was manufactured prior to Sept 94, it can have the evil features, providing it adheres to the import ban and parts count. Ref: 53-202m. If it was manufactured post Sept 94, it cannot have a combination of evil features making it an assault weapon. Ref: 53-202a.

shamayim - I won't speak for anyone else, but it is getting tougher and tougher living here in CT. Outside of the gun laws, I am tiring of the crowded conditions here in suburbia, my perceived lack of services from income and property taxes and the lack of value for your money in real estate. My family is located here and I would find it tough to leave them (again).
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 3:07:34 PM EDT
If I didnt have 8 years till retirement with the state I would be gone gone gone.
Link Posted: 2/2/2006 4:57:34 PM EDT
Did you ship the gun to him, or a FFL to be xfered to him? I'm thinking it's the FFL's responsibility to insure the firearm he is xfering to a resident is in compliance with the law. also he has to get an authorization number from the DPS and send them paperwork backing up the xfer...and if he xfered an illegal gun....well....it would be his butt
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 2:02:16 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/3/2006 2:17:49 AM EDT by steveinct]
Racer: I don't believe it is illegal to possess a folding stock by itself. I believe it is illegal to have it attached to a post ban semi.

Folding stocks are sold at CT Gun Shows. In 2001 I called SLFU to ask about this and was told it was legal to have a folding stock on an M-1 Carbine, for example, as long as the receiver was pre-ban.

e.g., a WWII era carbine with a folding stock

In that light then, the question I would pose is: take a rifle like a Ruger Mini-14, for example.
If someone has a pre-state-ban Mini-14, is it legal to attach an AFTER MARKET folding stock.

I don't mean the factory, model specific banned Mini-14 5/F (the factory folding stock version that was banned in 1993). I mean a 180 or 181 serial prefix Mini-14 with a Choate folder or other after market
folding stock.

By the way, does anyone know if a Mini-14 "5/F" is actually marked on the receiver that way to tell
that the rifle was indeed, originally a "5/F" with factory folding stock?
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 4:42:54 AM EDT

Originally Posted By steveinct:
Racer: I don't believe it is illegal to possess a folding stock by itself. I believe it is illegal to have it attached to a post ban semi.



This part of 53-202a, "(2) A part or combination of parts designed or intended to convert a firearm into an assault weapon, or any combination of parts from which an assault weapon may be rapidly assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person," is the reason for my opinion.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 5:22:22 AM EDT

Folding stocks are sold at CT Gun Shows. In 2001 I called SLFU to ask about this and was told it was legal to have a folding stock on an M-1 Carbine, for example, as long as the receiver was pre-ban.


So SLFU said that a preban rifle that didn't already have a folding /collapsable stock attached could be reconfigured that way? I thought it had to be technically already configured that way? Did they see any problem with owing a folding stock/collapsable stock along with a post ban rifle that is compatible with the stock?

Link Posted: 2/3/2006 4:30:01 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/3/2006 4:32:33 PM EDT by steveinct]
Post ban rifles are an entirely different class of animal. I'm not saying they were 100% correct, I'm just relating what they told me.

Even SLFU cannot decipher the law, the law is too f-ing STUPID to start with
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 4:44:05 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/3/2006 4:45:12 PM EDT by steveinct]
The only thing more stupid than interpreting this UNCONSTITUTIONAL law is enforcing it.

It's getting to a point where it really won't matter anymore. The communist politicians will say "we don't want to ban guns" we want to ban "assault weapons" so, they will continue to blur the distinction THEY CREATED by confusing banned with unbanned guns to the point where no one can tell anymore therefore resulting in ALL guns being banned
Top Top