User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/30/2004 1:22:06 AM EDT
[#1]
HM,thats been one of the gray areas of the ban since day 1.I remember discussions 10 years ago where some Guys stated that any domestic work performed to an imported part would make it US made,others dis-agreed.It all comes down to interpretation of the law,if you ask 10 different Federal employees,you'd get 10 different answers.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2004 3:10:35 AM EDT
[#2]
the short answer?
(imo) no. it was originally an imported part. there is nothing you can do to it will turn it into an 'un-imported' part. anybody wanna bet on whether k-var's domestic buttstocks use imported buttplates/swivels, though? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2004 3:15:35 AM EDT
[#3]
What is the country of origin for the raw materails for their stocks? They are not mfring a part, just "converting" it. Most poly/resins are coming from grey markets in Europe. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2004 6:15:40 AM EDT
[#4]
Well, Global announces it uses "Russian Steel" in their new US recievers so is it Russian or is it a US part?
What difference does it make where the raw materials came from if I give the part it's form? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2004 6:51:38 AM EDT
[#5]
Stamp "U.S." on it and refinish. You now have a U.S. part.
Edited to add: <ATF agent>"Hey there son, where did you get that fine looking stock at?" <HeavyMetal> "Uhhhh, I got it from the old boy down the road there. What a fine woodworker he was, duplicated a foreign buttstock to the "T". Old boy passed away about 2 years ago, damn shame." 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2004 3:35:37 PM EDT
[#6]
REMEMBER - you will still need other US parts
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2004 3:45:37 PM EDT
[#7]
Well aware of that. Actually, the rifle needs fewer of the specified listed imported parts if you want to be technical/picky. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2004 3:59:42 PM EDT
[#8]
I've seen some US made laminated stock sets advertised as made from the original Imported laminated blanks.I'm curious to know at what point does imported raw materials become a US manufactured part.BTW,Maadi laminated wood is imported from Finland.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2004 5:36:09 PM EDT
[#9]
What if I manufacture a buttstock in Mexico using US wood then bring it to the US?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2004 4:09:15 AM EDT
[#10]
Johno, I think that you "know" the answer to a question that I have looking for an answer to.
I have been trying to determine how many parts that I would be requird to replace in order to use non U.S. 30 rounders in a MAK 90, and also a Maadi MISR. I have also been trying to track down whether the Maadi used Chinese made parts internally. I am fairly certain that if I replace the trigger group for the Maadi I would have sufficient U.S. content to consider this a U.S. gun. Your E-mail implies that the laminated wood on the Maadi is possibly U.S. made. It appears that I would need to place the trigger group and furniture for the MAK. Can you help? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2004 5:51:05 AM EDT
[#11]
Rain,you need 5 US parts to be compliant.Is your Maadi the Chineese/Egyptian version?Check your trigger to see if its a single hook or double hook with single being the Maadi and double being Chineese.
The FCG will count as 3, A US piston will count as 1 and a US pistol grip can be your 5th.Unless you determine that some of your other stock parts are US,buttstock and handguards count as 1 each.Hope this helps. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2004 2:13:51 PM EDT
[#12]
It's a single hook version. But it does appear that I could use a double hook aftermarket H/T/S set if wanted.
When purchased it came with a thumbhole stock, and a notice stating that it was Egyptian with some U.S. parts, and that if I used magazines other than what it came with I would no longer be in compliance. If I ASSUME that the floorplate and the follower are U.S. , it needed 3 other parts to make this work. Or somehow, the rules did not apply to this gun when it was sold. Based on the quality of the wood (non-existant) and the cheap pistol grip I would bet on these parts if I had to pick a set of parts that wer just slapped on to make the count. But I don't want to guess, and I am trying to narrow the field to see what minimally I can do to get away with using any mag. Hence my quest to find someone who does know what these AK's consist of, and more importantly how little that I would have to change to bring my U.S. parts count to the right quantity to use foreign made 3 round magazines. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2004 7:55:12 PM EDT
[#13]
Rain, It sounds like you have one of the converted MISR Maadi's,single stack converted to take hi-caps.Century used US FCG with US follower and floor plate,the cheap looking black plastic pistol grip is imported.You can change the gas piston and add a US black plastic pistol grip and be OK for any imported hi-cap mag.
That said,you may want to replace the Century FCG with one of the higher quality US parts that are avaliable on the market now.You may also want to consider one of K-VARs polymer stock sets,they're tough as nails and US made. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2004 2:29:15 AM EDT
[#14]
Johno, thanks. I knew someone would have the answer, and I appreciate the help.
I've been searching all, over and just could not pin it down. I am trying to obtain matching FCG sets for my guns to see if I can match "feels" beteen them. The Maadi currently has a sigle hook set, though it does appear that a double hook would fit/work. I'm surprised that the furniture is not U.S., it s pretty ugly and it appeared cobbled up and addd on. The funny thing is that I got attached to it. It gave the Maadi a rough crude look that I kind of liked. Now I'm torn between matching furniture also, or going to a new grip and piston addition to make the parts count. Thanks again for the help, going through the guessing game sucked, and I was getting nowhere in my research. There is a ot of knowledge on this board, if you can catch the right people at the right time, and if they catch your thread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2004 3:11:43 AM EDT
[#15]
I would also say that the converted T-hole is not a US part.
It has nothing to do with where you got the raw material from. If the item had been manufactured as a part, then it no longer is raw material, but a manufactured part. Since you're taking a stock, that has already been manufactured as a stock, and changing it's shape, it hasn't changed the fact that it was a stock already made as such in another country. It doesn't matter where the raw materials came from. As long as the part still performs it's original funciton, I don't think you've manufactured anything. Ross |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2004 3:08:34 PM EDT
[#16]
But it no longer functions as a t-hole stock, it has had 40% of its original mass removed. It is not as it once was.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2004 4:56:21 PM EDT
[#17]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2004 6:05:26 PM EDT
[#18]
Which is exactly why it would be illegal. It is no longer a T-hole, and all you did was remove 40% of it's mass. You did not manufacture anything. It is not a US part. Was it a stock before you "re-worked it"? Is it still a stock? If you somehow turned the T-hole stock into a handguard, or gas piston or something, then you might have manufactured something. The idea of it being raw material would be valid in this case. If the part was already a funcitoning part, and now it still functions as that part, then it's still that original part. Just because you've changed the look, you haven't changed it's function in reality. It is as it always has been, an imported part.
Also quite true. Ross |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2004 5:41:52 AM EDT
[#19]
It no longer functions as a T-Hole, it now requires a seperate domestic pistol grip to perform the same function. The basic function has been significantly altered due to the repoval of the grip. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2004 5:50:34 AM EDT
[#20]
Not the atf guy but... if it counted as a pistol grip and butt stock in t-hole form, and now only counts as one part regardless of the area of manufacture, I would consider it remanufactured.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2004 8:03:38 AM EDT
[#21]
You're a reasonable man (i.e. a man with reason) which is what most interpretation of the law is based on. Look at your own words; "re-work", "re-finishing". You didn't make anything. You simply "re-worked" and "re-finished" an imported part. You said it yourself. If you, as a reasonable man, think that way, what do you think a jury would think as well? Yup, re-worked and re-finished, not manufactured. You did put a hell of alot of work into it, but again: Was it a stock? Yes. Is it a stock now? Yes. You did not manufacture anything. You "re-worked and refinished" it. Your own words. You can certainly use it. There are plenty of US parts to off-set it and you can be 99.9% sure no one's really gonna care anyway. Ross |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2004 8:09:56 AM EDT
[#22]
Yes, it now only counts as one part, but it counts as a foreign one. He gained a US part by being able to use the USA PG, so the effort is well worth it, but it's still a stock. He didn't remanufacture anything. He simply removed one foregin part, so now it counts as only one foregin part instead of two. You have a foregin Stock and a foregin PG You take away the pistol grip. What do you have left? A foregin stock. Ross |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2004 8:22:01 AM EDT
[#23]
But it was manufactured as a thumbhole stock. I re-manufactured it as a buttstock. It was not manufactured in a buttstock only configuration. It is as if I took a Ford Expedition and turned it into a pick-up truck.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2004 10:53:46 AM EDT
[#24]
And how would that Expedition be registered by the government? Yup, as an Expedition, because you didn't manufacture or remanufacture anything. You just converted an SUV. In the end what do you have? A converted SUV. What will the VIN say? Yup, that the vehicle is an Expedition, not an F-150. Changing the shape or color, or look is not manufacture. Now if you turned the Expedition into a trailer, then you did make something. It would be registered as a trailer. Just like if you took the stock and made a handguard out of the wood. That would be making something. Was it a stock? yes Is it still a stock? yes You have not manufactured anything. You've just changed the shape of an imported part. By removing the pistol grip portion, you've eliminated the imported pistol grip, as RS39 says. You still have an imported stock though. Ross |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2004 4:19:47 PM EDT
[#25]
Ross has made some good points,so you need to mount it to your coffee table as a leg for a couple hours then put it back on your AK.This way you can say you made a leg for your table but it works great on your AK.
 Technically,Ross is correct.But in reality the wording of the law is very vague and can easily be interpreted in many ways. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
