PDA

View Full Version : Dragunov Legal in CA?


azn_wrx
08-21-2006, 3:28 AM
I was wondering if the Dragunov is banned in caifornia. I know quite a few california companies were importing the Norinco ones in the early 90's.

Is the ROMAK also legal? Many people call these Dragunovs but they arent true Dragunovs. At least according to www.dragunov.net

-thanks

bwiese
08-21-2006, 3:48 AM
There may or may not be such rifles banned by exact make & model on the Roberti-Roos list and subsequent Kasler list of banned firearms, as I dunno the combloc rifle variants that well... but here's the list:

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/chapter40.pdf

Even if you could find an unbanned make/model combo, semiautomatic centerfire rifles with detachable magazines cannot have pistol grips, thumbhole stocks, flash hiders, etc.

To possess an unlisted Drago variant (that was not registered as an assault weapon back in 2000) you'd need to have a regular rifle stock where the web of the hand can't wrap around (i.e., no thumbhole or separate pistol grip) and have no flash hider in order to accept a detachable magazine. Or you could kludge up a fixed 10rd magazine version before having it imported into CA to your FFL.

chris
08-21-2006, 4:20 AM
i have wondered this myself. does'nt the dragunov take a 10 rd magazine? also an AK mag won't work, dragunov uses the 7.62x54. it does have an AK action so to speak. i have never seen a larger magazine than the 10 rd for the dragunov. this is a great rifle to have if we could have it. god that soundsd so bad we have to ask our masters in sacramento what firearms we can have.

i dunno SB23 is such a disaster anyway.

TheMan
08-21-2006, 7:59 AM
I was wondering if the Dragunov is banned in caifornia. I know quite a few california companies were importing the Norinco ones in the early 90's.

Is the ROMAK also legal? Many people call these Dragunovs but they arent true Dragunovs. At least according to www.dragunov.net


Good luck finding a dragunov. Even the chinese version is a few grand. But none of them are listed by name.

The ROMAK is on the list, but not the FPK, SSG-97 or any of the Romanian 7.62x54R variants. The list appears to be referring to a 7.62x39 weapon that had the name ROMAK. The one also called a Dragunov is sometimes called a ROMAK-3. But the receivers are not marked ROMAK, they usually have different markings.

You will have a hard time finding someone to sell you one in CA from out of state, but you can get them in. And for the Romanian versions, bare receivers are under $200, whole guns can be had for around $800. True Dragunovs are much more expensive.

SemiAutoSam
08-21-2006, 8:14 AM
There may or may not be such rifles banned by exact make & model on the Roberti-Roos list and subsequent Kasler list of banned firearms.

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/chapter40.pdf

Even if you could find an unbanned make/model combo, semiautomatic center fire rifles with detachable magazines cannot have pistol grips, thumb-hole stocks, flash hiders, etc.



Does this mean if the list at the link above lists "IMI Galil"
That a IMI Galil is not banned ? as it does not list IMI Galil .223 ar or IMI Galil .308 ARM ?

Isn't the list suppose to list by make and model ?

HK-41 isnt listed but HK-91 is so hk-91 is banned but hk-41 would be legal with a pinned mag and or no PG running detachable mags right.

If this is correct where is the case law to substantiate it ?

Thanks for your help.

blkA4alb
08-21-2006, 9:39 AM
Does this mean if the list at the link above lists "IMI Galil"
That a IMI Galil is not banned ? as it does not list IMI Galil .223 ar or IMI Galil .308 ARM ?

Isn't the list suppose to list by make and model ?

HK-41 isnt listed but HK-91 is so hk-91 is banned but hk-41 would be legal with a pinned mag and or no PG running detachable mags right.

If this is correct where is the case law to substantiate it ?

Thanks for your help.
If the HK-41 is not listed and it does not violate SB23 then yes it is legal. Harrot threw out series weapons, if the rifle is not listed by make and model than it is legal if modified with a fixed magazine or no features.

xenophobe
08-21-2006, 10:33 AM
Does this mean if the list at the link above lists "IMI Galil"
That a IMI Galil is not banned ? as it does not list IMI Galil .223 ar or IMI Galil .308 ARM ?

Those aren't Galil models... Galils are designated with numbers, such as Model 323, Model 329, Model 356, Model 392... etc...

50 Freak
08-21-2006, 11:17 AM
My buddy was pissed that he registered his Galil 308 ARM back in 2000. Says it wasn't even necessary as it was not "named".

But oh well, he's glad he did it now otherwise he'd have to go pistol grip less on his favorite rifle.

olegk
08-21-2006, 11:37 AM
This seller will ship to California. This actually genuine Dragunov
Kind of pricy...
http://www.gunsamerica.com/guns/976716078.htm
Just ask him to remove stock. Fix magazine and attach stock back.

mltrading
08-21-2006, 11:41 AM
Just a quick question. In addition to receivers of FPK/SSG-97 (without "ROMAK marked), are there any OLL fits ROMAK3?

My idea is, get a ROMAK-3 compatable OLL. And get a ROMAK-3 parts kit. Then build a SB-23 compliant rifle.

Regards,

50 Freak
08-21-2006, 11:52 AM
What calibers are these "dragonuvs"?

I'm only interested if they are in 7.62x54. In 308, a Super VEPR is king.

TheMan
08-21-2006, 12:13 PM
What calibers are these "dragonuvs"?

I'm only interested if they are in 7.62x54. In 308, a Super VEPR is king.

They are almost all 7.62x54R, although some are supposedly set up for .308 instead.

xenophobe
08-21-2006, 3:14 PM
This seller will ship to California. This actually genuine Dragunov
Kind of pricy...
http://www.gunsamerica.com/guns/976716078.htm
Just ask him to remove stock. Fix magazine and attach stock back.

Not a genuine Dragunov. It's a Tigr carbine. The barrel has been chopped down, the receiver does not have the lightening cuts and there is no flash hider. The gas system is not adjustable, and the stock and handguard are different and the scope not military. This a commercial variant, not a genuine SVD.

azn_wrx
08-21-2006, 3:26 PM
So because of the thumbstock and the detachable magazine the Dragunov violates SB23?

bwiese
08-21-2006, 3:32 PM
So because of the thumbstock and the detachable magazine the Dragunov violates SB23?

And flash hider (if that's what the barrel attachment is).

A semiauto centerfire rifle with detachable magazine cannot have pistol grip, thumbhole, folding or collapsible stock, a flash hider, grenade launcher or forward pistol grip (PC 12276.1).

So either you've gotta get a filled-in stock that's not a thumbhole stock, and you can't have a pistol grip attached to the rifle either. The flash hider must be removed. If this is done you can have a detachable magazine.

This is just CA law. I haven't even begun to look at the Federal 922(r) issues....

xenophobe
08-21-2006, 3:44 PM
Oh, and a real Russian SVD is a C&R.

SemiAutoSam
08-21-2006, 4:10 PM
Those aren't Galil models... Galils are designated with numbers, such as Model 323, Model 329, Model 356, Model 392... etc...


OK so what your saying in essence is since those model # arent listed they are legal pending removal of SB23 features ?

what backs this up law wise?

bwiese
08-21-2006, 4:16 PM
OK so what your saying in essence is since those model # arent listed they are legal pending removal of SB23 features ?

what backs this up law wise?

There are no laws that tell you that what isn't banned is in fact legal. It just is.

SemiAutoSam
08-21-2006, 4:25 PM
There are no laws that tell you that what isn't banned is in fact legal. It just is.

OK I guess I didn't word that correctly was there a court case that made the listing the aw's by make and model not just a blanket list as in COLT AR15 all

Or IMI UZI not calling out each individual model ?

does this make more sense ? Now do you understand what im asking ?

blkA4alb
08-21-2006, 4:30 PM
OK I guess I didn't word that correctly was there a court case that made the listing the aw's by make and model not just a blanket list as in COLT AR15 all

Or IMI UZI not calling out each individual model ?

does this make more sense ? Now do you understand what im asking ?
The Harrot decision is what threw out series weapon and made them list by make and model. That is what allowed the entire OLL situation to occur. Thats how people are building the PTR-91s which are practically identical to the listed HK-91. On RR89 there are listings that include "(All)", I don't believe that those are actually legal, but there has yet to be a court case to challenge them.