PDA

View Full Version : Saigas...


CalGunsNoob
04-17-2006, 12:35 PM
Some people here are of the opinion that Saigas are in too much of a gray area...

Here is my take...

Kasler lists the banned Saiga as

Kalishnikov USA, Saiga

Now, Kalishikov USA was the importer, not the manufacturer. Izmash (Russia) is the manufacturer.

Kalishnikov USA no longer imports there (hasn't for some time). There are two more recent other importers...EAA and RAAC.

Now, the argument I have heard is that the DOJ 'meant' Izmash rather than the importer. Here is my question...isn't 'meant' not good enough? When it comes to listing these banned rifles isn't it necessary to list them accurately in order for it to be valid? They list Kalishnikov USA. So they don't mention Izmash. Therefore it seems to me they can't 'go back' and say we meant to say this Izmash.

Taking the argument to the other side I'd say one could actually make a case that even Kalishinikov USA Saigas are legal (I am not recommending buying one.) How? Well, if Izmash is the maker then Kalishnikov USA Saiga is also mislabeled.

I am not saying I am correct...just offering my opinion. And, my opinion is that Raac and EAA Saigas should be legal. Thoughts?

bwiese
04-17-2006, 12:43 PM
What you've outlined is a good defense. But if/when you have to make these points you're already in trouble.

DOJ has already proven they don't really know mfgr vs importer issues in various letters.

Harrott did demand clear identification. But the fact that an Izhmash gun was banned by slightly different terminology and that you got the same gun under different terminology is a bit different situation than the Harrott "series" broad brush.

And this IS a case where one of the 58 DAs could have a different opinion than DOJ.

I would be uncomfortable with any Ishmash Saiga no matter the importer, unless "Saiga" was the trade name for the style and there was a specific new model # on the rifle.

If RAAC starts calling - and marking them "Tundra 47", instead of Saiga, then it'd be OK. (May need Izhmash's help too to deal with US importation issues w/new name, dunno.) Also, these "Tundra 47" rifles would need to be not custom marked for individuals but sold broadly to CA and 49-state markets for best protection.

ohsmily
04-17-2006, 12:47 PM
Sure, go for it, buy one...

The whole point is you won't have answers to your questions until you get a final judgement in court.

So, people are right when they say it is in too much a of a gray area for their taste. If it isn't too gray for you, then get one.

Feel to free to push the limits, you could come out on top (or perhaps not)...I for one will stick with clearly off-list AK types.

Charliegone
04-17-2006, 3:07 PM
Dammit, why won't they just rename some for the sake of us lowly subjects in California!:(

blacklisted
04-17-2006, 3:10 PM
How hard is it to modify an AK type receiver (move trigger group back, and whatever else is necessary)?

glen avon
04-17-2006, 3:23 PM
does not look tough, I had all the parts, only a matter of drilling 2 holes and fabbing a trigger guard

bwiese
04-17-2006, 4:08 PM
does not look tough, I had all the parts, only a matter of drilling 2 holes and fabbing a trigger guard

Glen, Glen, this post is worthless without pictures!!! :D
(and further description).

glen avon
04-17-2006, 4:59 PM
reverse engineer from this: http://www.cross-conn.com/Saiga_Conversion/Step_1.htm

once you have the parts in hand - only a transfer bar and a trigger and 2 pins - you will see how simple it is.

kenc9
04-17-2006, 5:35 PM
http://home.earthlink.net/~mwsjb/AKbuild.htm

Chaingun
04-17-2006, 7:31 PM
Maybe they can start importing the new Saigaa model, and once it's listed, the even newer Saigaaa model;)

shopkeep
04-17-2006, 8:10 PM
I wouldn't touch anything that could potentially result in a verdict hinging on Russia or Izmash. Just get an American Made AK reciever. Besides you need it for the US Parts count to make your AK fully evil.

PonyFiveO
04-17-2006, 8:45 PM
So... What would happen?

If someone sent a Saiga to a CA FFL to DROS, and the DOJ deemed that it was not legal, would the DOJ just tell them that it cannot be DROSed and force them to send it back? Or would they go to the FFL and shut them down and send you up to Folsom for importing an AW to California? Didnt they just contact the FFL and tell them they were not legal with the Eagle Arms AR-10 .308 lowers situation?

What would happen? :confused:

gidddy169
04-17-2006, 9:09 PM
Another way to do it without the transfer bar would be to use the saiga 308 trigger and take a little off the back of the pistol grip hole. This would allow you to have the trigger closer to the stock with no additional holes.

bwiese
04-18-2006, 1:25 AM
So... What would happen?

If someone sent a Saiga to a CA FFL to DROS, and the DOJ deemed that it was not legal, would the DOJ just tell them that it cannot be DROSed and force them to send it back? Or would they go to the FFL and shut them down and send you up to Folsom for importing an AW to California? Didnt they just contact the FFL and tell them they were not legal with the Eagle Arms AR-10 .308 lowers situation?

What would happen? :confused:

Nothing would likely be detected. There's no approved list for rifles, unlike handguns. The DROS would go thru - system doesn't care, I don't think.

You'd end up with a questionable firearm in your possession that, if you encounter cops during travels, or LEOs come to your house (it can happen for a variety of the most innocent reasons), you have some big "'splainin' to do". Both you and the FFL could be in trouble if it turns out bad.

The Eagle AR10 situation was result of a question asked to DOJ. I am not sure he ever had the Eagle AR10 receivers in his actual possession.

glen avon
04-18-2006, 8:19 AM
Another way to do it without the transfer bar would be to use the saiga 308 trigger and take a little off the back of the pistol grip hole. This would allow you to have the trigger closer to the stock with no additional holes.

still need a transfer bar of some sort.

gidddy169
04-18-2006, 7:24 PM
The trigger is the transfer bar I could send you a pic of the trigger if you want.PM

kenc9
04-18-2006, 7:46 PM
Nothing would likely be detected. There's no approved list for rifles, unlike handguns. The DROS would go thru - system doesn't care, I don't think.

You'd end up with a questionable firearm in your possession that, if you encounter cops during travels, or LEOs come to your house (it can happen for a variety of the most innocent reasons), you have some big "'splainin' to do". Both you and the FFL could be in trouble if it turns out bad.

The Eagle AR10 situation was result of a question asked to DOJ. I am not sure he ever had the Eagle AR10 receivers in his actual possession.

The DROS on longarms... only ok's you for a firearm, not a weapon check. No make or model is comunicated to the DROS system only if you may have a firearm. The only record stays with the FFL so if a trace is in order they trace from the importer/maker down the trail till the last known transfer FFL to FFL. If a particular gun hadn't been registered since a law covering the transfer then it may check out ok, like my first pistol when I was 18, they would most likely not find any record.

-ken

glen avon
04-19-2006, 8:27 AM
The trigger is the transfer bar I could send you a pic of the trigger if you want.PM

please do send a pic

Chaingun
04-19-2006, 1:19 PM
Not to push this off on someone else:D

Has anyone attempted to contact Izmash (Russia), EAA or RAAC to have them create a new CA model for import here. They should only have to stamp some extra characters to the name along with the official name registration of some type.

The nice thing about these is we don't need them registered since they would be similar to the mini-14, no evil parts.

Charliegone
04-19-2006, 5:11 PM
Not to push this off on someone else:D

Has anyone attempted to contact Izmash (Russia), EAA or RAAC to have them create a new CA model for import here. They should only have to stamp some extra characters to the name along with the official name registration of some type.

The nice thing about these is we don't need them registered since they would be similar to the mini-14, no evil parts.

Tried to contact importer who is RAA, but no response from them.:confused:

PonyFiveO
04-19-2006, 5:47 PM
(PUSHING THIS ON SOMEONE ELSE!)

Maybe if we can possibly get a large commitment of buyers (200-300 or more?) for a direct purchase from RAA, maybe they will be willing to do a Model CALGUNS 001 - CALGUNS 300 stamp?

Put me down for 4 please! :D

gidddy169
04-19-2006, 5:56 PM
Here is a pic the bottom is from a 308 saiga I think and the top is a normal saiga trigger group.
http://img2.freeimagehosting.net/image.php?bebb796c9c.jpg
http://img2.freeimagehosting.net/image.php?593904d477.jpg

Let me know what you guys think.

Prince50
04-19-2006, 10:13 PM
To clairify,

Yes DOJ contacted the FFL in question regarding th Eagle Arms issue.

Yes receivers were in his posession at the time.

DOJ contacted Armalite to determine the FFL who had taken them into inventory.

DOJ did not appropriate the lowers, because the dealer is a California Licenced Assault Weapons Dealer.

Had he been a regular FFL, there would have been big problems. Had the receivers gotten to their owners (Me first), there would have been more problems.

Armalite was wise to send these Eagle Arms units only to AW dealers. It saved alot of grief.

Darin

bwiese
04-20-2006, 12:02 PM
(PUSHING THIS ON SOMEONE ELSE!)

Maybe if we can possibly get a large commitment of buyers (200-300 or more?) for a direct purchase from RAA, maybe they will be willing to do a Model CALGUNS 001 - CALGUNS 300 stamp?


No!!

These make/model combinations should not be custom/semicustom, and these make/models should be generally available for sale inside & outside CA for best Harrott protection.

PonyFiveO
04-20-2006, 5:55 PM
No!!

These make/model combinations should not be custom/semicustom, and these make/models should be generally available for sale inside & outside CA for best Harrott protection.

Gotcha! Thanks Bwiese :)