PDA

View Full Version : Saiga 7.62x39 Pros/Cons


Mister BLASTEE
03-22-2011, 7:43 PM
I was looking at one as my next rifle purchase. Price seems like a "pro". What else should I look for?
Also no need for a bullet button right?
I want to hear from owners here!!!

iskra31
03-22-2011, 7:56 PM
Pro-Its an AK and ammo is cheap. If it is completely stock, then no need for a bullet button
Cons...
Still thinking :rolleyes:

Mister BLASTEE
03-22-2011, 8:05 PM
Do they take pre ban AK mags?

iskra31
03-22-2011, 8:08 PM
Not from the factory, but for $20 i think and a little DIY knowledge, that can easily be fixed.
http://www.dinzagarms.com/saiga_762x39/x39rtk.html

Mister BLASTEE
03-22-2011, 8:19 PM
^ Would that be CA legal? Also would a +10 round mag be okay without a bullet button?

Blade
03-22-2011, 8:22 PM
No need for a bullet button and you can use normal cap AK mags with a bit of modification, if you don't convert it to AK pattern. Ammo is cheap and plentiful and its a breeze to clean. Accuracy is good enough at 100yards and is a fun gun to shoot.

iskra31
03-22-2011, 8:23 PM
*Not legal opinion*
I do not think there is anything in any of the CA gun laws saying that a "Round trunnion for a Saiga rifle is illegal"
Yes as long as you owned if before the 2000 ban. However if you have ANY evil features on the rifle then it would be considered an AW even with a bullet button by California law.

Mister BLASTEE
03-22-2011, 8:28 PM
I would like to know the easiest way to legally keep the sporterized configuration with no bullet button & use pre ban +10 mags...Is this legal???

iskra31
03-22-2011, 8:29 PM
I would wait to get some advice from some more experienced people! :yes:

vintagedude88
03-23-2011, 5:38 PM
I would like to know the easiest way to legally keep the sporterized configuration with no bullet button & use pre ban +10 mags...Is this legal???

That may be difficult. You can change the FCG to an American made trigger from Dinzag for the sporterized version. The handguard can be changed. However I don't thnk that is enough to pass the 922r requirement. They don't make U.S. made preban mags which would count as three parts towards your parts count and they don't make U.S. made sporter stocks for the Saiga.

Your best bet is to convert and use an MMG or a Solar Tactical kydex grip wrap.

AlliedArmory
03-23-2011, 5:40 PM
Do they take pre ban AK mags?

Not from the factory, but for $20 i think and a little DIY knowledge, that can easily be fixed.
http://www.dinzagarms.com/saiga_762x39/x39rtk.html

I would like to know the easiest way to legally keep the sporterized configuration with no bullet button & use pre ban +10 mags...Is this legal???

If you go this route, you will NEED to have a bullet button installed to be legal.

vintagedude88
03-23-2011, 5:44 PM
I was looking at one as my next rifle purchase. Price seems like a "pro". What else should I look for?
Also no need for a bullet button right?
I want to hear from owners here!!!

Pro - Low cost
Quality built direct from the Russian factory

Con - Does not take AK mags without the addition of a bullet guide
Requires additional tooling to mount a muzzle break
Needs a special handguard retainer to use AK handguards

zfields
03-23-2011, 5:47 PM
If you go this route, you will NEED to have a bullet button installed to be legal.

Nope.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/_L9wuEAD0zJM/TP21HbHg_kI/AAAAAAAAACI/g19ghGrojfM/s800/copfill.jpg

If you want to keep it sporterized:

Tapco Gas piston
2 peices of the tapco trigger kit
front handguard

922 Legal sporter config. Check this link for a easy way to figure it out for part complience http://jobson.us/922r/
Also, if you have a round trunion, save yourself the money and make your own bullet guide. takes 30 minutes and about 1" of 1/2 iron pipe.

metalliman545
03-23-2011, 6:02 PM
It'll work without the bullet guide. Maybe not as reliable as the stock saiga mags. Get a few failure to feeds cuz they'll jam up on the flat part right before the chamber. Mysaiga 5.45 works about 95% without a bullet guide and ak 74 mags. The only difference is the saiga mags have a "built in" bullet guide to help out

metalliman545
03-23-2011, 6:03 PM
Mine is usually one or 2 rounds per mag

zfields
03-23-2011, 6:05 PM
It'll work without the bullet guide. Maybe not as reliable as the stock saiga mags. Get a few failure to feeds cuz they'll jam up on the flat part right before the chamber. Mysaiga 5.45 works about 95% without a bullet guide and ak 74 mags. The only difference is the saiga mags have a "built in" bullet guide to help out

the 5.45s are known to feed decently with the normal mags, the 47/7.62s will not feed even remotely well.

HBrebel
03-23-2011, 8:14 PM
the saiga 7.62 is a great rifle as is, in my opinion. shoots good, hits the target, ammo is cheap and easy to get. it's not a sniper rifle so I don't worry about tight groups, it does what it was built to do. The only thing I changed on mine is the stock. At home I keep a dragunov style stock on it. when I take it out to target shoot, I use the factory stock. I figure, if I need to bring it out in a "situation", legal issues are the least of my worries.

pyro3k2
03-23-2011, 8:25 PM
This is the only CON to having an AK platform...you can't own just one. Evenutally you will find yourself buying parts kits and watching the build party schedules.

Mister BLASTEE
03-23-2011, 8:28 PM
Information overload!!!!! LOL
Seems like I would keep it stock for a while while I do my homework on 922.

gun505
03-23-2011, 8:28 PM
I am on the fence on an ak arsenal sgl21. The amo is cheap my buddy got one, I am going to shoot it see how it feels never shot one. I have an ar. And dont feel the need to have 2 ar so ak, or a mini 30??

pyro3k2
03-23-2011, 8:41 PM
I am on the fence on an ak arsenal sgl21. The amo is cheap my buddy got one, I am going to shoot it see how it feels never shot one. I have an ar. And dont feel the need to have 2 ar so ak, or a mini 30??

Go with one of these for your first one, you can beat this up and not care. Also if it turns out that you are not an AK guy you haven't spent all that money on an Arsenal. You could spend the money you save on 4-5 spam cans worth of ammo, some new furniture, or even some other stuff for your AR.
http://www.hendersondefense.com/store/pc/Century-Certified-AK47-with-bayonet-and-pouch-50p10.htm

zfields
03-24-2011, 8:49 AM
I am on the fence on an ak arsenal sgl21. The amo is cheap my buddy got one, I am going to shoot it see how it feels never shot one. I have an ar. And dont feel the need to have 2 ar so ak, or a mini 30??

convert your own....thats all arsenal does, but then marks it up a huge ammount.

iskra31
03-24-2011, 9:12 AM
cheap kit with everything you need for 922 compliance. http://store.carolinashooterssupply.com/servlet/-strse-449/TAPCO-SAIGA-RIFLE-CONVERSION/Detail
Also need a bullet button & CANNOT use more than a 10 round magazine.

Super Spy
03-24-2011, 9:52 AM
The only Con I come up with is mounting any kind of optics...I got an aftermarket rail that mounts to the stock rail and put a red dot on top of it and it was way to high for any kind of cheek weld, maybe a chin weld. If you get a different cover with a rail on it that should work better but it will be in a slightly different spot when you remove and replace the cover. This would affect your zero a bit. I haven't tried this yet so I don't know how much. I just use the irons and I get OK accuracy our of it. The best option would probably be a Russian Kobra Red Dot....but these cost almost as much as the Saiga and are a PITA to find. If you find one for cheap it's a Chinese knock-off and they are crap like most knock-off red dots.

Bug Splat
03-24-2011, 9:55 AM
I am simply going to make an observation here.... I have never ever heard of someone being questioned on 922r by an officer, Park Ranger, or even DOJ. I have never ever met one officer who even knew what 922r was and I know a lot of them. I have never met an officer that gave a rats-bum about the law once I told them about it.

Its an unenforceable law just like owning 30rd mags. Makes the lawmakers all warm and fuzzy inside and gives them something to do but its unenforceable. If you are at the point where your gear is being questioned for 922r compliance, my guess is you have done something MUCH worse and have bigger problems if thats what they are trying to charge you with. Its like charging a serial murderer for j-walking.

I do not condone braking any laws, I'm just making an observation. I'm still not convinced that it even applies to rifles that you own. I don't think you can sell them but if its your rifle I feel you are exempt. I'm no lawyer so don't take my advice on the matter but the more you read about it the better opinion you will have.

RealBarber
03-24-2011, 10:22 AM
there are no cons when it comes to Izhmash AK's

RealBarber
03-24-2011, 10:24 AM
I am on the fence on an ak arsenal sgl21. The amo is cheap my buddy got one, I am going to shoot it see how it feels never shot one. I have an ar. And dont feel the need to have 2 ar so ak, or a mini 30??

get off the fence and buy the SGL

sarabellum
03-24-2011, 11:02 AM
The Saiga is perfect just the way it is. As a non-practicing attorney, I am concerned anytime folks give out information related to a law but fail to cite the law or worse mis-cite the law. California Penal Code section 12276.1 provides:
(a) Notwithstanding Section 12276, "assault weapon" shall
also mean any of the following:
(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to
accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action
of the weapon.
(B) A thumbhole stock.
(C) A folding or telescoping stock.
(D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(E) A flash suppressor.
(F) A forward pistol grip.
(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine
with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length
of less than 30 inches.

Applied to your case, a Saiga 7.62 as OEM does not have any of the features in subsections (a)(1)(A)-(F). Therefore, the rifle in its present form is exempt from any control under Cal. Penal Code section 12276.1. Or stated differently, you are not subject to liability under section 12276.1.

All of the prior advice from folks here is working backwards into creating a firearm that for all practical purposes you cannot effectively use. Why? The Saiga can accept a detachable magazine. Therefore, as a threshold matter upon "converting" the Saiga by adding a pistol grip it becomes a prohibited assault weapon by definition under subsection (a)(1)(A) since it would have both a detachable magazine and a pistol grip.

Some members suggested that he install a "bullet button." That must mean making the magazine fixed (at 10 rounds and non-detachable) so the rifle no longer "has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine" and is no longer subject to subsection (a)(1)(A). Since a Saiga 7.62 is not designed like an SKS he cannot load it with stripper clips, leaving him with a rifle he cannot use.

Next, what is all of this talk of "922r?" That is not even a proper citation to a statute or a regulation. There are plenty of articles online citing to the law, and whether or not the addition of any component means anything and whether or not the law is void due to ambiguity. I suggest people, in particular the original poster, read those articles.

Let's be more responsible. There are reliable sources for information on firearms in California or any other state in the form of firearms law practice guides and Westlaw/Lexis (simply go to a public law library to search for the annotated Cal. Penal Code section 12276.1 for cases on a variety of issues).

Maybe, I'll get hate mail. I don't care. Anyone who fails to take heed of readily available statutes, regulations, practice guides, and articles does so at his own peril.

MasterBlastee, if you would like more guidance, please send me a PM as I do not want to take this thread further off course than it already is. Enjoy your original Saiga!

bigthaiboy
03-24-2011, 11:29 AM
Information overload!!!!! LOL
Seems like I would keep it stock for a while while I do my homework on 922.

http://home.comcast.net/~navy87guy/home/922r.html

CHS
03-24-2011, 11:40 AM
The only thing I changed on mine is the stock. At home I keep a dragunov style stock on it. when I take it out to target shoot, I use the factory stock. I figure, if I need to bring it out in a "situation", legal issues are the least of my worries.

So when you're at home you commit felonies by manufacturing and possessing assault weapons? Or do you also install a bullet button before that Dragunov stock gets tossed on there?

bigthaiboy
03-24-2011, 12:24 PM
The Saiga is perfect just the way it is. As a non-practicing attorney, I am concerned anytime folks give out information related to a law but fail to cite the law or worse mis-cite the law. California Penal Code section 12276.1 provides:
(a) Notwithstanding Section 12276, "assault weapon" shall
also mean any of the following:
(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to
accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action
of the weapon.
(B) A thumbhole stock.
(C) A folding or telescoping stock.
(D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(E) A flash suppressor.
(F) A forward pistol grip.
(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine
with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length
of less than 30 inches.

Applied to your case, a Saiga 7.62 as OEM does not have any of the features in subsections (a)(1)(A)-(F). Therefore, the rifle in its present form is exempt from any control under Cal. Penal Code section 12276.1. Or stated differently, you are not subject to liability under section 12276.1.

All of the prior advice from folks here is working backwards into creating a firearm that for all practical purposes you cannot effectively use. Why? The Saiga can accept a detachable magazine. Therefore, as a threshold matter upon "converting" the Saiga by adding a pistol grip it becomes a prohibited assault weapon by definition under subsection (a)(1)(A) since it would have both a detachable magazine and a pistol grip.

Some members suggested that he install a "bullet button." That must mean making the magazine fixed (at 10 rounds and non-detachable) so the rifle no longer "has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine" and is no longer subject to subsection (a)(1)(A). Since a Saiga 7.62 is not designed like an SKS he cannot load it with stripper clips, leaving him with a rifle he cannot use.

Next, what is all of this talk of "922r?" That is not even a proper citation to a statute or a regulation. There are plenty of articles online citing to the law, and whether or not the addition of any component means anything and whether or not the law is void due to ambiguity. I suggest people, in particular the original poster, read those articles.

Let's be more responsible. There are reliable sources for information on firearms in California or any other state in the form of firearms law practice guides and Westlaw/Lexis (simply go to a public law library to search for the annotated Cal. Penal Code section 12276.1 for cases on a variety of issues).

Maybe, I'll get hate mail. I don't care. Anyone who fails to take heed of readily available statutes, regulations, practice guides, and articles does so at his own peril.

MasterBlastee, if you would like more guidance, please send me a PM as I do not want to take this thread further off course than it already is. Enjoy your original Saiga!

Welcome to 2011, Mr. Chin.

Your opinion of PC 12276.1 may have been the accepted interpretation of the CA AW ban, back in the early 2000's, but things have moved on, and hard battles have been fought since then. Please go in to any Turners Outdoors store or gun store that stocks AR, AK or FAL type rifles and tell them they are going to jail for what they are selling. The bullet button is now commonly accepted as method to configure a centerfire semi-auto rifle with a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept of 10 rounds, or less.

USC 18 Chapter 44, Section 922(r) is real. It applies to the assembly of non sporting imported semi-auto rifles ban from importation under 925(d). Since the emphasis of the language is on "assembly", not "manufacture", therefore it has to be seen as applying to both individuals, and not just manufacturers.

(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.

orangeusa
03-24-2011, 12:44 PM
I think it's awesome just as is. I added a sling, side mount UTG (?) scope mount and a Barska scope. Yeah - inexpensive, but it's MY gun. :)

That thing BOOMS at the range.. Gotta get out and shoot some LONGER distances...
As to mags, I've had no problems getting SAIGA mags and not doing the mod for AK mags.. Most guys do an AK conversion on them and can no longer use the SAIGA mags, so they sell them.... Shop around, you can get them for $10-20 each... 10 rounds...

Never jams, ammo cheap as 9mm. I MIGHT do the forward conversion - for looks only, and no bullet button required...

But man, for the price and the bad-*** looks, it can't be beat. :)

CSACANNONEER
03-24-2011, 12:57 PM
Saiga pros: Cheap and almost as reliable as a standard AK (I don't trust the stock Saiga FCG as much as I do a standard AK FCG).

Saiga cons: They are not precision rifles. You can expect to get 6-10moa out of them with cheap ammo. Also, they have a funky chamber that deforms the case mouth a bit. This is only an issue if you reload and are worried about brass life.

If you are looking for a blaster, a Saiga is not a bad choice. If you want a rifle that shoots <3moa, look into a different type of rifle.

There are ways to easily modify +10 round standard AK mags to work flawlessly on stock Saigas without a bullet guide or any other modifications to the rifle. However, you sould still need to modify the rifle to comply with 922(r) by making sure it has no more than 10 imported parts which are recognized by the ATF as "parts".

The Saiga is perfect just the way it is. As a non-practicing attorney, I am concerned anytime folks give out information related to a law but fail to cite the law or worse mis-cite the law. California Penal Code section 12276.1 provides:
(a) Notwithstanding Section 12276, "assault weapon" shall
also mean any of the following:
(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to
accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action
of the weapon.
(B) A thumbhole stock.
(C) A folding or telescoping stock.
(D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(E) A flash suppressor.
(F) A forward pistol grip.
(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine
with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length
of less than 30 inches.

Applied to your case, a Saiga 7.62 as OEM does not have any of the features in subsections (a)(1)(A)-(F). Therefore, the rifle in its present form is exempt from any control under Cal. Penal Code section 12276.1. Or stated differently, you are not subject to liability under section 12276.1.

All of the prior advice from folks here is working backwards into creating a firearm that for all practical purposes you cannot effectively use. Why? The Saiga can accept a detachable magazine. Therefore, as a threshold matter upon "converting" the Saiga by adding a pistol grip it becomes a prohibited assault weapon by definition under subsection (a)(1)(A) since it would have both a detachable magazine and a pistol grip.

Some members suggested that he install a "bullet button." That must mean making the magazine fixed (at 10 rounds and non-detachable) so the rifle no longer "has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine" and is no longer subject to subsection (a)(1)(A). Since a Saiga 7.62 is not designed like an SKS he cannot load it with stripper clips, leaving him with a rifle he cannot use.

Next, what is all of this talk of "922r?" That is not even a proper citation to a statute or a regulation. There are plenty of articles online citing to the law, and whether or not the addition of any component means anything and whether or not the law is void due to ambiguity. I suggest people, in particular the original poster, read those articles.

Let's be more responsible. There are reliable sources for information on firearms in California or any other state in the form of firearms law practice guides and Westlaw/Lexis (simply go to a public law library to search for the annotated Cal. Penal Code section 12276.1 for cases on a variety of issues).

Maybe, I'll get hate mail. I don't care. Anyone who fails to take heed of readily available statutes, regulations, practice guides, and articles does so at his own peril.

MasterBlastee, if you would like more guidance, please send me a PM as I do not want to take this thread further off course than it already is. Enjoy your original Saiga!

I don't think you understand that "bullet button" type mag locks allow one to remove a mag with the aid of a tool. So, if you use one, you can have a fixed mag centerfire rifle which you can still remove the mag to load it and reinsert it into the rifle. You need to learn a little more about the law and how we stay within the law before you try to give legal advise on the subject.

As bigthaiboy already pointed out 922(r) is common slang for "USC 18 Chapter 44, Section 922(r)". It is a real federal law and ATF does take it seriously.

sarabellum
03-24-2011, 2:28 PM
Welcome to 2011, Mr. Chin.

Your opinion of PC 12276.1 may have been the accepted interpretation of the CA AW ban, back in the early 2000's, but things have moved on, and hard battles have been fought since then. Please go in to any Turners Outdoors store or gun store that stocks AR, AK or FAL type rifles and tell them they are going to jail for what they are selling. The bullet button is now commonly accepted as method to configure a centerfire semi-auto rifle with a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept of 10 rounds, or less.

USC 18 Chapter 44, Section 922(r) is real. It applies to the assembly of non sporting imported semi-auto rifles ban from importation under 925(d). Since the emphasis of the language is on "assembly", not "manufacture", therefore it has to be seen as applying to both individuals, and not just manufacturers.

Indeed, I quoted the law and explained precisely the same thing: having a fixed magazine will allow the use of for example a pistol grip. Re- read what I wrote. The reference to "USC 18 Chapter 44, Section 922(r)" is incorrectly cited.

sarabellum
03-24-2011, 2:31 PM
I don't think you understand that "bullet button" type mag locks allow one to remove a mag with the aid of a tool. So, if you use one, you can have a fixed mag centerfire rifle which you can still remove the mag to load it and reinsert it into the rifle. You need to learn a little more about the law and how we stay within the law before you try to give legal advise on the subject.

As bigthaiboy already pointed out 922(r) is common slang for "USC 18 Chapter 44, Section 922(r)". It is a real federal law and ATF does take it seriously.

The use of the tool means the magazine is fixed. So, what is your point? The rest of your comment is off the mark since you do not know how to cite a statute.

When you state "[y]ou need to learn a little more about the law and how we stay within the law before you try to give legal advise on the subject," by advise [sic] you mean that the rest of the mis-information you provided is preferable to reading the law carefully.

I shared with the OP that for example a centerfire rifle with a detachable magazine and pistol grip is an assault rifle. Penal Code section 12276.1(a)(1)(A) provides in relevant part, "assault weapon" shall also mean...(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and...(A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon." Now, since according to you, you have more information than a doctor of law, please cite your authority indicating the contrary.

I stated that a fixed magazine exempts the rifle from Penal Code section 12276.1(a)(1)(A). If that is not correct cite your authority.

I stated that a fixed magazine undermines the usefulness of his rifle, "Since a Saiga 7.62 is not designed like an SKS he cannot load it with stripper clips, leaving him with a rifle he cannot use." Certainly, he can load his magazine, and thereafter screw in the magazine retaining button (presumably with a tool). Once, the user fires the bullets, he/she must use a tool to unscrew the retaining button. Who are you kidding? That's preferable to having a Saiga where one can immediately insert another magazine to, for example, target shoot easily? For all practical purposes, a fixed magazine is moving backwards.

Now, if you are saying with a wink that a fixed magazine is not a fixed magazine because of some quick release tool used to release the magazine, I would not be so sure that is a wise approach. Legal practitioners and judges believe the law at its foundation to be based on reasonableness. What would the reasonable judge or prosecuting entity think about the quick release tool? Another poster here said in effect other people are using it. That other people are taking a similar unreasonable course does not make something reasonable or smart.

This article casts doubt on the reasonableness of some quick release tools: http://gs2ac.com/flyers/2009/20091223awweaponsmodificationsmemo.pdf . Mister BLASTEE use your better judgment. Enjoy your Saiga!

Bluhdow!
03-24-2011, 2:55 PM
The rest of your comment is off the mark since you do not know how to cite a statute.

Come on now. Don't try to out-lawyer people who aren't attorneys. That's a very "lawyer-y" thing to do. Use the spirit of the citation and try to be constructive.

And on a note actually related to the thread topic: Arsenal SGL21 for the win.

Dirtbiker
03-24-2011, 3:43 PM
This thread is getting good. Where's Gene?

sarabellum
03-24-2011, 4:23 PM
Come on now. Don't try to out-lawyer people who aren't attorneys. That's a very "lawyer-y" thing to do. Use the spirit of the citation and try to be constructive.



You are right, especially when addressing an informative dialogue.

You need to learn a little more about the law and how we stay within the law before you try to give legal advise on the subject.

This is wrong and not dialogue. Such responses invite correction.

I agree with you that being constructive is the right thing to do.

Now, turning to People v. Dingman (http://www.constitution.org/2ll/bardwell/people_v_dingman.txt), if that case is any indication of how a prosecutor and court would view the quick release button it does not bode well for its use. The reasoning in Dingman starts with the following over-arching general rule for how to interpret the Cal. assault weapons statute:

In enacting the AWCA in 1989, the Legislature stated its intent "to place restrictions on the use of assault weapons and to establish a registration and permit procedure for their lawful sale and possession." The Legislature declared that "the proliferation and use of assault weapons poses a threat to the health, safety, and security of all citizens of this state. The Legislature has restricted the assault weapons specified in Section 12276 based upon finding that each firearm has such a high rate of fire and capacity for firepower that its function as a legitimate sports or recreational firearm is substantially outweighed by the danger that it can be used to kill and injure human beings..." "The Legislature is presumed to have meant what it said, and the plain meaning of the language will govern the interpretation of the statute..."

The rules for statutory interpretation are well established:"Our role as an appellate court is to ascertain the intent of the Legislature so as to effectuate the purpose of the statute. In ascertaining legislative intent, a court must look to the language of the statute and accord words their usual, ordinary, and common sense meaning based on the language used and the evident purpose for which the statute was adopted. In doing so, we must presume that the Legislature did not intend absurd results..." We read the statute in light of the evils which prompted its enactment and the method of control which the Legislature chose...Here, the stated purpose of the legislation was to restrict firearms with a high rate of fire and capacity for firepower."

In Dingman, Police arrived to a residence upon receiving a report of a disturbance. Then the facts of the case indicate that Dingman "consented" to a search of his home. Thereafter, police officers found an SKS rifle with 30 round magazine inserted. In the statement of undisputed facts, the Court of Appeals made it a point of construing the facts as follows, "Officer Campi removed the 30-round magazine from the SKS simply by opening the bolt and pulling a latch. He checked the Penal Code and consulted with his supervisor and the police department armorer, and concluded defendant's rifle was a prohibited assault weapon."

Dingman at the trial and appellate level argued that the definition of "detachable" is ambiguous and that from a technical standpoint his magazine was not detachable. The Court of Appeals in applying the law to the facts explained, "Here, we have no trouble reading the statute to mean what it says: that any SKS rifle with a magazine that 'detaches,' as defendant's did, is prohibited. Nor do we think any ordinary person of reasonable intelligence, or anyone familiar with gun parlance, would doubt that the weapon as possessed by defendant was prohibited. The arresting police officer, the gun shop owner, and most of the expert witnesses all readily concluded defendant's rifle had a detachable magazine. And as such it is specifically prohibited by the AWCA."

Applying the principle of statutory construction, turning to the legislative history for legislative intent as the Dingman court did, how would the chain of actors police-prosecutor-court view the quick release button? Notice how the Court makes disparaging reference to arguments challenging the application of the California Assault Weapons Act to movable magazines, "any ordinary person of reasonable intelligence..." It is most likely that a reviewing court will look for any way possible to find liability for the quick release button.

Dingman makes clear that the Attorney General's regulations offering definitions for the statute have no binding effect upon a local prosecutor and certainly not a court, whose exclusive authority it is to interpret the meaning of statutes.

People v. Dingman is being reviewed by the California Supreme Court.

An analogous case on point is People v. Fuentes, (1976) 64 Cal.App.3d 953. In California it is unlawful to carry a concealed dagger/fixed blade knife. It is lawful to carry a fixed blade knife if it carried at the waist. Then it must be ok to carry a fixed blade knife on the waist on a cold day, while wearing a coat, right? After all the knife is definitely on the waist, right? Wrong, at least according to the Court where it matters. While literally on the waist, "Fuentes contends that there was no evidence to show that the dirk was concealed and argues that '[t]here is not even a suggestion in the record that the dirk was ever anywhere but in plain sight.' The dirk obviously was not in plain sight. This is not a situation where the weapon was carried openly in a sheath or attached to a belt. The dirk was in Fuentes' waistband. [1] The mere fact that some portion of the handle may have been visible makes it no less a concealed weapon. A defendant need not be totally successful in concealing a dirk to be guilty of violation of Penal Code section 12020, subdivision (a)." The Court concluded that only substantial concealment is requirement. Notice how the Court suppressed the technical definition of "concealed" for a functional application of "substantial" concealment.

In both, Dingman and Fuentes, the Courts applied an analysis/reasoning which swallowed the technical rule to ensure the conviction. Applying both Dingman and Fuentes, would a Court apply a "substantially detachable" rule to the technical quick release bullet button? I would say yes.

Back to my original sensible suggestion to the OP, forget about spending money or time to add a pistol grip only to grapple with making it exempt by having a functionally fixed magazine.

CSACANNONEER
03-24-2011, 7:03 PM
The use of the tool means the magazine is fixed. So, what is your point? The rest of your comment is off the mark since you do not know how to cite a statute.
Yes, the use of a tool to REMOVE the magazine means it's a "fixed" magazine. Why don't you teach me how to cite a statute? Then maybe myself and others here can converse with you in some upity lawerese that seems to be required here

When you state "[y]ou need to learn a little more about the law and how we stay within the law before you try to give legal advise on the subject," by advise [sic] you mean that the rest of the mis-information you provided is preferable to reading the law carefully.
I think you really should read the law a little more carefully.
I shared with the OP that for example a centerfire rifle with a detachable magazine and pistol grip is an assault rifle. Penal Code section 12276.1(a)(1)(A) provides in relevant part, "assault weapon" shall also mean...(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and...(A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon." Now, since according to you, you have more information than a doctor of law, please cite your authority indicating the contrary.
So far I don't see a problem.
I stated that a fixed magazine exempts the rifle from Penal Code section 12276.1(a)(1)(A). If that is not correct cite your authority.

I stated that a fixed magazine undermines the usefulness of his rifle, "Since a Saiga 7.62 is not designed like an SKS he cannot load it with stripper clips, leaving him with a rifle he cannot use." Certainly, he can load his magazine, and thereafter screw in the magazine retaining button (presumably with a tool). Once, the user fires the bullets, he/she must use a tool to unscrew the retaining button. Who are you kidding? That's preferable to having a Saiga where one can immediately insert another magazine to, for example, target shoot easily? For all practical purposes, a fixed magazine is moving backwards.
Now we do read the law differently. If I understand you correctly, you think that it's OK to unscrew a mag, remove the mag, reload, insert mag and screw back down the lock. On a rifle with an "evil feature", this would be committing a felony since, once you "unscrew" a maglock, you are manufacturing au unregistered AW. The proper type of mag lock will never allow you to have a mag which could be dropped without a tool. Once you "unscrew" the lock, you have a firearm which is capable of inserting and removing a magazine without the use of a tool.

When using a Saiga which appears stock but has 10 or less imported parts, one can legally use +10 round mags in it as long as there is NO magazine lock on it. So, who are we kidding? There's no need for a mag lock on a Saiga, which is 922(r) compliant, and, you can use +10 round mags.

Now, if you are saying with a wink that a fixed magazine is not a fixed magazine because of some quick release tool used to release the magazine,BINGO! That's why the California DOJ's leading firearms expert (at that time) went on national television to demonstrate just why and how "bullet buttons" are legal. Every bullet is a quick release tool.

I would not be so sure that is a wise approach. Legal practitioners and judges believe the law at its foundation to be based on reasonableness. What would the reasonable judge or prosecuting entity think about the quick release tool? Another poster here said in effect other people are using it. That other people are taking a similar unreasonable course does not make something reasonable or smart.
Really? Can you explain why the few people who have gone to court over these with fixed mag firearms (that you can ATTACH magazines to without a too)l have all been found innocent of possession of an AW then?

This article casts doubt on the reasonableness of some quick release tools: http://gs2ac.com/flyers/2009/20091223awweaponsmodificationsmemo.pdf . Mister BLASTEE use your better judgment. Enjoy your Saiga!

You're right. Those tools could become attached to the gun thus, they could become part of the gun and no longer considered a "tool". However, these tools can safely be used out of state.

Back to my original sensible suggestion to the OP, forget about spending money or time to add a pistol grip only to grapple with making it exempt by having a functionally fixed magazine.

I completely agree. But, I think you are missing what some of us were trying to say. You can make a Saiga accept 30 round magazines by installing a bullet guide and modifying the mag catch a little. But, if you do this, it would be in violation of 922(r) (if I knew how to correctly cite 922(r) I would. At least the ATF agents I've spoken whith about this were all able to understand me) if it has more than 10 imported parts. So, you have to replace a few internal parts before you install a bullet guide. THen, you have a stock looking "converted" Saiga which can legally accept +10 round detachable magazines.

sarabellum
03-25-2011, 1:59 PM
You can make a Saiga accept 30 round magazines by installing a bullet guide and modifying the mag catch a little. But, if you do this, it would be in violation of 922(r) (if I knew how to correctly cite 922(r) I would. At least the ATF agents I've spoken whith about this were all able to understand me) if it has more than 10 imported parts. So, you have to replace a few internal parts before you install a bullet guide. THen, you have a stock looking "converted" Saiga which can legally accept +10 round detachable magazines.

That you do not know how to cite a statute casts doubt on your claim to be competent to explain firearms law. Turning to your assertions regarding the capacity of the magazine and "922(r)," I do not see the connection in your claims between 18 USC section 922 ( r ) and California Penal Code section 12276.1.

If you note, the plain text of California Penal Code section 12276.1 does not prohibit the use of detachable magazines of over 10, 20, or 30 + rounds in rifles without pistol grips. Presently, an original Saiga rifle with a hunting stock may lawfully accept magazines of any capacity.


I think you really should read the law a little more carefully. .

It's always advisable to the read the law. You may instruct me as soon as you take the time to read it yourself. Had you read it yourself you would have taken the time to cite its text. Notice, that I cited to the relevant parts of Penal Code section 12276.1 in support of my argument that adding a pistol grip, only to be required to make the magazine fixed or non-detachable defeats the purpose of the rifle.


Now we do read the law differently. If I understand you correctly, you think that it's OK to unscrew a mag, remove the mag, reload, insert mag and screw back down the lock. On a rifle with an "evil feature", this would be committing a felony since, once you "unscrew" a maglock, you are manufacturing au unregistered AW. The proper type of mag lock will never allow you to have a mag which could be dropped without a tool. Once you "unscrew" the lock, you have a firearm which is capable of inserting and removing a magazine without the use of a tool. .

You appear to be saying that making a magazine removable only upon dis-assembly would be unlawful and/or would be manufacturing. That is wrong. Cite your authority for that contention. The legislative history, which all persons are required to consult and know (see People v. Dingman), indicates that the more dis-assembly needed to remove the magazine the more likely it is to considered by the reasonable person to be fixed. For your review: http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/fsor.pdf


BINGO! That's why the California DOJ's leading firearms expert (at that time) went on national television to demonstrate just why and how "bullet buttons" are legal. Every bullet is a quick release tool. .
What you allege are some expert's statements is hearsay with zero legal significance. Cite the text of a statute and published decision in support of your position.


Can you explain why the few people who have gone to court over these with fixed mag firearms (that you can ATTACH magazines to without a too)l have all been found innocent of possession of an AW then?

Cite the published decisions ruling that the quick release button and tool are in fact not part of a detachable magazine or do not violate Penal Code section 12276.1. I took the time to cite the verbatim text from published decisions which are the controlling authority in California, namely People v. Dingman. I also took the time to carefully explain that a reasonable prosecutor and Court would view the quick release tool as "substantially detachable" and violative of the legislature's intent. That intent is to rid the state of particular weapons, " The Legislature declared that "the proliferation and use of assault weapons poses a threat to the health, safety, and security of all citizens of this state. The Legislature has restricted the assault weapons specified in Section 12276 based upon finding that each firearm has such a high rate of fire and capacity for firepower that its function as a legitimate sports or recreational firearm is substantially outweighed by the danger that it can be used to kill and injure human beings." People v. Dingman, (1996) 55 Cal.Rptr. 211.

Mr. Canoneer you seem very interested in arguing, while at the same time dismissing the law. Mr. Canoneer, we can't live life without rules. The law obligates us to know it and follow it like reasonable persons. While I may not agree with laws that overly restrict legitimate purposes like target practice, hunting, and personal defense, I nonetheless have to follow them and be cautious as to their purpose. Some laws are designed to ensnare the unwary.

In the case of Mr. Fuentes in People v. Fuentes, he mistakenly thought his technical compliance with the law- a dagger on the waist- would insulate him against liability. A Court promptly fashioned a rule to swallow his technical compliance- "substantial concealment"- due to clothes. The more technical the compliance effort, the more likely the California judiciary will invoke a flip side doctrine, substantial violation. The judiciary is saying that you can't have it both ways: violation and compliance, quick release and a fixed magazine.

Let's be sensible. The Saiga rifle and its predecessor the Valley Hunter, were designed for entry into closed markets, those states banning evil features and national regulation of military arms. The ensuing sporting rifle with a traditional rifle stock, forestock, on an AK receiver with a detachable magazine is a brilliant invention. Putting the evil features back on the Saiga at one's expense in order to grapple with complying with a fixed magazine requirement is imprudent.

orangeusa
03-25-2011, 4:21 PM
I've read this thread several times. Trolls come from ALL backgrounds.

"Now, since according to you, you have more information than a doctor of law, please cite your authority indicating the contrary." Wow, just wow.

"Putting the evil features back on the Saiga at one's expense in order to grapple with complying with a fixed magazine requirement is imprudent. " Lots of folks have converted their Saigas and added a fixed magazine. Imprudent? Maybe, but it's a free country.

And 922r IS confusing.

Back to OP : I dig my Saiga - stock for now. But getting another and converting trigger group and foregrip sounds like a hoot.

.

CSACANNONEER
03-25-2011, 8:17 PM
That you do not know how to cite a statute casts doubt on your claim to be competent to explain firearms law.
Well, I'm sorry that you are not capable of communicating with us commoneers. Please note that I did ask you if you could teach me how to cite statue in such a way that you would be able to understand it. I guess that's too hard for you to do without falling off your pedistool.

Turning to your assertions regarding the capacity of the magazine and "922(r)," I do not see the connection in your claims between 18 USC section 922 ( r ) and California Penal Code section 12276.1.

I never said there was a connection between the two. 922(r) is a Federal law. Since importation of a centerfire rifle which is cabable of accepting a +10 round magazine is prohibited, it follows that converting a Saiga to accept +10 round magazines without first making sure that there are no more than 10 imported parts on it would also be illegal under Federal law. I never brought state law into the arguement about 922(r)


If you note, the plain text of California Penal Code section 12276.1 does not prohibit the use of detachable magazines of over 10, 20, or 30 + rounds in rifles without pistol grips. Presently, an original Saiga rifle with a hunting stock may lawfully accept magazines of any capacity.


Federal law prohibits this. Did you notice that in my earlier post about 922(r) I refered to a conversation I had with a Federal agent? We were talking about Federal law and never brought up any California laws at all.


It's always advisable to the read the law. You may instruct me as soon as you take the time to read it yourself. Had you read it yourself you would have taken the time to cite its text. Notice, that I cited to the relevant parts of Penal Code section 12276.1 in support of my argument that adding a pistol grip, only to be required to make the magazine fixed or non-detachable defeats the purpose of the rifle.

I already asked you if you could teach me how to cite the law to your liking. Apparently, even with your post grad degree, you seem incapable of this and would rather try to belittle someone who doesn't have the same degrees you have. I would have assumed that someone as inteligent as yourself would have the ability to converse with little old me. I guess an education isn't everything.


You appear to be saying that making a magazine removable only upon dis-assembly would be unlawful and/or would be manufacturing. That is wrong. Cite your authority for that contention. The legislative history, which all persons are required to consult and know (see People v. Dingman), indicates that the more dis-assembly needed to remove the magazine the more likely it is to considered by the reasonable person to be fixed. For your review: http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/fsor.pdf

I'm sorry that I wasn't able to get my message across to you. I never stated that it would be illegal to have a magazine which is removable with the use of a tool. I did say that if you "unscrew" a magazine and leave the magwell (even for a split second) in such a state where you can insert a magazine and then detach it without having to use a tool, it would be illegal. I'm not sure why you keep insisting on citing Dingman in relation to Catagory 3 AWs. Please note, Dingman was about a "SKS with a detachable magazine". This means the case was about a Catagory 1 AW. The capacity of the magazine really had no bearing on the case. It was probably a violation of 922(r) but, that's another story.

What you allege are some expert's statements is hearsay with zero legal significance. Cite the text of a statute and published decision in support of your position.

Again, you'll need to instruct me on exactly how you want that done. I'm not even trying to right now since, you have already insulted others for improperly citing laws.

Cite the published decisions ruling that the quick release button and tool are in fact not part of a detachable magazine or do not violate Penal Code section 12276.1.

There is no text stating what you are asking. Of course, there is no text stating that breathing doesn't violate any PC either.


I took the time to cite the verbatim text from published decisions which are the controlling authority in California, namely People v. Dingman. I also took the time to carefully explain that a reasonable prosecutor and Court would view the quick release tool as "substantially detachable" and violative of the legislature's intent.
Sorry, "legislative intent" is not written law. there is no legal definition of "substantially detachable" nor is that term written into the law. It is either "detachable" or not". I've always thought that the letter of the law trumps "legislative intent".


That intent is to rid the state of particular weapons, " The Legislature declared that "the proliferation and use of assault weapons poses a threat to the health, safety, and security of all citizens of this state. The Legislature has restricted the assault weapons specified in Section 12276 based upon finding that each firearm has such a high rate of fire and capacity for firepower that its function as a legitimate sports or recreational firearm is substantially outweighed by the danger that it can be used to kill and injure human beings." People v. Dingman, (1996) 55 Cal.Rptr. 211.

Hmmm, now that I understand the the courts rule on "legislative intent" and not the written law, I wonder why the Harrott decision went the way it did??? Why would the courts rule against "legislative intent" and find that all AR/AK series rifles was too vague and impossible for a lay person to understand.

Mr. Canoneer you seem very interested in arguing, while at the same time dismissing the law. Mr. Canoneer, we can't live life without rules. The law obligates us to know it and follow it like reasonable persons. While I may not agree with laws that overly restrict legitimate purposes like target practice, hunting, and personal defense, I nonetheless have to follow them and be cautious as to their purpose. Some laws are designed to ensnare the unwary.

I have not dismissed any law. If you think I have, please point out what law and how I dismissed it.

In the case of Mr. Fuentes in People v. Fuentes, he mistakenly thought his technical compliance with the law- a dagger on the waist- would insulate him against liability. A Court promptly fashioned a rule to swallow his technical compliance- "substantial concealment"- due to clothes. The more technical the compliance effort, the more likely the California judiciary will invoke a flip side doctrine, substantial violation. The judiciary is saying that you can't have it both ways: violation and compliance, quick release and a fixed magazine.
Please show me where the law spells this out? IF you can, every "bullet button" build in this state is a felony.

Let's be sensible. The Saiga rifle and its predecessor the Valley Hunter, were designed for entry into closed markets, those states banning evil features and national regulation of military arms. The ensuing sporting rifle with a traditional rifle stock, forestock, on an AK receiver with a detachable magazine is a brilliant invention. Putting the evil features back on the Saiga at one's expense in order to grapple with complying with a fixed magazine requirement is imprudent.

To each his own. Although, I tend to agree with you on this matter, I don't fault those who deside to convert their Saigas into more military looking arms.

IW378
03-25-2011, 9:01 PM
To the OP. No cons with saiga rifles at all. Leave it stock or convert it to however you wish you would like it to be within the law of course. I converted mine for about 250 bucks and added a grip wrap as to retain the convenience of
being able to drop a mag as intended. They are good shooters right out of the box.

jtmkinsd
03-25-2011, 9:02 PM
Sarabellum, judging by your recently joining us (welcome to Calguns by the way) and your description of the mechanism "required" to make a fixed magazine, you are not up to speed on the options available for the Saiga. I'm curious if you know what a "bullet button" actually is, and how it works. Or how the mag-lock on a California compliant Saiga works. There is nothing in any law, anywhere, that says one must "screw" anything in to make a magazine "fixed". It simply states the use of a "tool" must be necessary to release the magazine.

No need to get into an e-penis sword fight over who knows more.

gotshotgun?
03-25-2011, 9:02 PM
I wonder why? :eek:

The Saiga is perfect just the way it is. As a non-practicing attorney, I am concerned anytime folks give out information related to a law but fail to cite the law or worse mis-cite the law. California Penal Code section 12276.1 provides:
(a) Notwithstanding Section 12276, "assault weapon" shall
also mean any of the following:
(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to
accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action
of the weapon.
(B) A thumbhole stock.
(C) A folding or telescoping stock.
(D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(E) A flash suppressor.
(F) A forward pistol grip.
(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine
with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length
of less than 30 inches.

Applied to your case, a Saiga 7.62 as OEM does not have any of the features in subsections (a)(1)(A)-(F). Therefore, the rifle in its present form is exempt from any control under Cal. Penal Code section 12276.1. Or stated differently, you are not subject to liability under section 12276.1.

All of the prior advice from folks here is working backwards into creating a firearm that for all practical purposes you cannot effectively use. Why? The Saiga can accept a detachable magazine. Therefore, as a threshold matter upon "converting" the Saiga by adding a pistol grip it becomes a prohibited assault weapon by definition under subsection (a)(1)(A) since it would have both a detachable magazine and a pistol grip.

Some members suggested that he install a "bullet button." That must mean making the magazine fixed (at 10 rounds and non-detachable) so the rifle no longer "has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine" and is no longer subject to subsection (a)(1)(A). Since a Saiga 7.62 is not designed like an SKS he cannot load it with stripper clips, leaving him with a rifle he cannot use.

Next, what is all of this talk of "922r?" That is not even a proper citation to a statute or a regulation. There are plenty of articles online citing to the law, and whether or not the addition of any component means anything and whether or not the law is void due to ambiguity. I suggest people, in particular the original poster, read those articles.

Let's be more responsible. There are reliable sources for information on firearms in California or any other state in the form of firearms law practice guides and Westlaw/Lexis (simply go to a public law library to search for the annotated Cal. Penal Code section 12276.1 for cases on a variety of issues).

Maybe, I'll get hate mail. I don't care. Anyone who fails to take heed of readily available statutes, regulations, practice guides, and articles does so at his own peril.

MasterBlastee, if you would like more guidance, please send me a PM as I do not want to take this thread further off course than it already is. Enjoy your original Saiga!

Librarian
03-25-2011, 10:39 PM
Just to add to the fun, a short quote from the California Code of Regulations (as published on the AG's web site (http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/chapter39.pdf)) ARTICLE 2. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED TO IDENTIFY ASSAULT WEAPONS
The following definitions apply to terms used in the identification of assault weapons pursuant to Penal Code section 12276.1:
(a) "detachable magazine" means any ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with neither disassembly of the firearm action nor use of a tool being required. A bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool. Ammunition feeding device includes any belted or linked ammunition, but does not include clips, en bloc clips, or stripper clips that load cartridges into the magazine.

A longer discussion of the topic is on the Wiki - http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Non_detachable_magazines

straykiller
03-25-2011, 10:42 PM
none just get one

smittty
03-25-2011, 10:42 PM
OK, forget the russian hi-cap pre-pan mags. What if someone just wants to use US made mags. Here in Cali that would be 10 rounders but in other states it could mean US made hi-caps.

Let's say you change to a US made trigger, hammer, forend, add a US bullet guide/trunnion, and use US made 10 round mags (for cali) which totals 7 US made parts leaving 9 foreign parts.

1- Receiver
2- Barrel
3- Front Trunnion
4- Rear Trunnion
5- Muzzle Attachment
6- Bolt
7- Bolt Carrier
8- Gas Piston/Puck
9- Trigger
10- Hammer
11- Disconnector
12- Buttstock
13- Forearm/Handguard
14- Magazine Body
15- Magazine Follower
16- Magazine Floorplate

I have thought about un-converting my Saiga because I don't like the mag lock. I'm still thinking about it.

smittty
03-25-2011, 11:37 PM
I have my original factory sporter buttstock and a new Arsenal Nato length AK stock. I just compared them side x side and I think the Nato length stock could be used in place of the sporter stock to gain 1 more US made part. It would have a shorter length of pull but probably still manageable.

Shady
03-26-2011, 12:15 AM
The Saiga is perfect just the way it is. As a non-practicing attorney, I am concerned anytime folks give out information related to a law but fail to cite the law or worse mis-cite the law. California Penal Code section 12276.1 provides:
(a) Notwithstanding Section 12276, "assault weapon" shall
also mean any of the following:
(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to
accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action
of the weapon.
(B) A thumbhole stock.
(C) A folding or telescoping stock.
(D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(E) A flash suppressor.
(F) A forward pistol grip.
(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine
with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length
of less than 30 inches.

Applied to your case, a Saiga 7.62 as OEM does not have any of the features in subsections (a)(1)(A)-(F). Therefore, the rifle in its present form is exempt from any control under Cal. Penal Code section 12276.1. Or stated differently, you are not subject to liability under section 12276.1.

All of the prior advice from folks here is working backwards into creating a firearm that for all practical purposes you cannot effectively use. Why? The Saiga can accept a detachable magazine. Therefore, as a threshold matter upon "converting" the Saiga by adding a pistol grip it becomes a prohibited assault weapon by definition under subsection (a)(1)(A) since it would have both a detachable magazine and a pistol grip.

Some members suggested that he install a "bullet button." That must mean making the magazine fixed (at 10 rounds and non-detachable) so the rifle no longer "has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine" and is no longer subject to subsection (a)(1)(A). Since a Saiga 7.62 is not designed like an SKS he cannot load it with stripper clips, leaving him with a rifle he cannot use.

Next, what is all of this talk of "922r?" That is not even a proper citation to a statute or a regulation. There are plenty of articles online citing to the law, and whether or not the addition of any component means anything and whether or not the law is void due to ambiguity. I suggest people, in particular the original poster, read those articles.

Let's be more responsible. There are reliable sources for information on firearms in California or any other state in the form of firearms law practice guides and Westlaw/Lexis (simply go to a public law library to search for the annotated Cal. Penal Code section 12276.1 for cases on a variety of issues).

Maybe, I'll get hate mail. I don't care. Anyone who fails to take heed of readily available statutes, regulations, practice guides, and articles does so at his own peril.

MasterBlastee, if you would like more guidance, please send me a PM as I do not want to take this thread further off course than it already is. Enjoy your original Saiga!

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

orangeusa
03-26-2011, 12:37 AM
No need to get into an e-penis sword fight over who knows more.

Man, that is GOLD PLATED sigline material!! :)

.

tankerman
03-26-2011, 5:42 AM
The Saiga is perfect just the way it is. As a non-practicing attorney, I am concerned anytime folks give out information related to a law but fail to cite the law or worse mis-cite the law.

I can clearly see why you're a nonpracticing attorney; you have no idea what you're talking about.....But that doesn't stop you from spewing garbage.



To the OP, remember not every doctor is a good doctor, not every attorney is a good attorney.

Fjold
03-26-2011, 7:09 AM
What do you call a guy who finishes last in his law school class?

An attorney.


What do you call someone who cannot pass the bar exam?

"Non-practicing attorney"

hoffmang
03-26-2011, 10:21 AM
Cite the published decisions ruling that the quick release button and tool are in fact not part of a detachable magazine or do not violate Penal Code section 12276.1.

Due to the definitions in the CCR, no cases are getting out of the lower courts. We have on hand but have not published, for strategic reasons, findings of factual innocence in cases where possession of an unregistered assault weapon were nolle prossed based on a bullet button. We have those for both AR and AK style rifles (and pistols!).

As such, you're not going to find appellate court decisions on point. It's not all that hard to understand what, "A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept any ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with neither disassembly of the firearm action nor use of a tool being required. A bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool." If it was hard to understand, the law would face... other... problems.

Also, you should read the law closer. A non-detachable magazine is not necessarily a fixed magazine as "fixed magazine" has a very specific definition under the enabling regulations. That has very interesting implications that I don't suggest anyone tackling yet.

You will find that for those calgunners without law degrees, the legal expertise around here is better than all but the best law offices, prosecutors offices, and chambers.

-Gene

zfields
03-26-2011, 10:24 AM
/thread

Hoff has spoken.

mif_slim
03-26-2011, 4:38 PM
Pro:
Price, fun, reliable, fun, reliable... Did I mention fun?

Con:
Mines group 5" at 50 yards. Estimated to group 10" at 100... It can hit a man sze target but I don't think you can hit where you want it to.

If your buying for fun, it's a hell-of-a-fun gun to shoot! If you want to hit something smaller then a man size target.... Look for a different gun.

Mister BLASTEE
03-26-2011, 6:31 PM
Lots of good info from everyone, thanks.
And sorry about starting internets wars. LOL

bigbob76
03-26-2011, 8:47 PM
Lots of good info from everyone, thanks.
And sorry about starting internets wars. LOL

I say thanks for the entertainment!

smokeysbandit
03-27-2011, 7:58 AM
The Saiga is perfect just the way it is. As a non-practicing attorney, I am concerned anytime folks give out information related to a law but fail to cite the law or worse mis-cite the law. California Penal Code section 12276.1 provides:
(a) Notwithstanding Section 12276, "assault weapon" shall
also mean any of the following:
(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to
accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action
of the weapon.
(B) A thumbhole stock.
(C) A folding or telescoping stock.
(D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(E) A flash suppressor.
(F) A forward pistol grip.
(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine
with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length
of less than 30 inches.

Applied to your case, a Saiga 7.62 as OEM does not have any of the features in subsections (a)(1)(A)-(F). Therefore, the rifle in its present form is exempt from any control under Cal. Penal Code section 12276.1. Or stated differently, you are not subject to liability under section 12276.1.

All of the prior advice from folks here is working backwards into creating a firearm that for all practical purposes you cannot effectively use. Why? The Saiga can accept a detachable magazine. Therefore, as a threshold matter upon "converting" the Saiga by adding a pistol grip it becomes a prohibited . . . .

Yup. Just found the ignore button.

welchy
03-27-2011, 4:29 PM
I'm sure you all know what Shakespeare said...

Librarian
03-27-2011, 7:01 PM
Let us not veer off into personal attacks.

Markus
03-27-2011, 7:49 PM
What does a stock saiga 7.62x39 run? I saw a couple at the costa Mesa gun show for 399.99 which I thought was a really good deal but wasn't exactly what I was hunting for at that time.

Cokebottle
03-27-2011, 8:36 PM
*Not legal opinion*
I do not think there is anything in any of the CA gun laws saying that a "Round trunnion for a Saiga rifle is illegal"
Yes as long as you owned if before the 2000 ban. However if you have ANY evil features on the rifle then it would be considered an AW even with a bullet button by California law.
You are confusing a couple of issues.

The trunnion is not the issue. The bullet guide must be replaced to allow the use of +10 mags.
USe of +10 mags triggers 922(r), which is a Federal regulation that dictates that no more than 10 parts may be imported. Stock Saiga has 14 imported parts.

The problem with the Saiga conversion is that to replace enough parts, the easiest route is to replace the trigger group. Domestic trigger groups will not work with the stock Saiga trigger configuration.

Converting it to the forward trigger takes care of 922(r), but leaves you with an uncomfortable firing position without a pistol grip.

Installation of a pistol grip creates an assault weapon unless a mag lock is fitted.
Mag lock and +10rd magazines = assault weapon.

So it's a catch-22. Making a stock-configuration Saiga 922(r) compliant requires the replacement of 4 parts with domestic parts. It doesn't have a muzzle brake, so that can't be used (adding a domestic part doesn't count, imported parts MUST be removed and either left off or replaced with domestic parts).
Magazine... If you have pre-2000 domestic high caps, or have pre-2000 imported mags that you have rebuilt with modern domestic parts, that's 3 parts.
3 down, 1 to go.
Gas piston is a fairly simple change.
4 down, 0 to go.

But that is with domestic magazine parts. Domestic 30rd AK mags are not known for their reliability.

So lets go back to stock... what can be changed, and allow the use of imported high caps?

Gas piston
1 down, 3 to go
Forearm
2 down, 2 to go

And now you're stuck. Changing the buttstock isn't a good option, because the Monte-Carlo buttstock is what makes the rifle work so well with the rearward trigger positon.
And even if you do change it out, you're still left with one part that needs to be changed... and no available parts on the gun other than the trigger group, or the receiver itself.

None of this has to do with owning anything prior to 2000 other than the +10 magazines.


So in general, high caps (that work reliably) in a Saiga are going to be a no-go, unless you do the full conversion to pistol grip, then put a Kydex fin grip wrap to render it featureless.

zfields
03-27-2011, 10:18 PM
/thread

Hoff has spoken.

...

ZX-10R
03-28-2011, 9:26 AM
They are cheap is the pro...The con is NONE. AK patterns rule.

Mister BLASTEE
03-28-2011, 9:36 AM
Cokebottle you hit the nail on the head with your last post. Thank you so much for that information. With that said when I pick up my rifle I'm just gonna leave it bone stock & have fun!
I don't want to mess with any laws at this point.

vintagedude88
03-28-2011, 10:39 AM
Dinzag Arms offers a U.S. trigger for the factory configuration that counts as two parts towards 922r.
http://www.dinzagarms.com/misc_parts/fcg.html

So:
Gas piston 1 part 3 to go
Handguard 1 part 2 to go
Dinzag FCG for factory config 2 parts 0 to go.

You're done. Happy shooting:)

BTW, keep in mind that you'll need a bullet guide to use those old AK mags in the Saiga.

vintagedude88
03-28-2011, 11:10 AM
I just worked out the numbers.

Its cheaper and easier to convert using an MMG than it is to make the factory config. 922r compliant.

Slug_SCM
03-28-2011, 1:32 PM
Con:
Mines group 5" at 50 yards. Estimated to group 10" at 100... It can hit a man sze target but I don't think you can hit where you want it to.

Awkward..

A Saiga can do 2-4 moa at hundred yards with irons every time in the right hands with decent ammo.

I can only see Pro's in getting a Saiga rifle, I know i love my Saiga 12! :D

Cokebottle
03-28-2011, 6:07 PM
I just worked out the numbers.

Its cheaper and easier to convert using an MMG than it is to make the factory config. 922r compliant.
But you still have to meet 922(r) compliance to run >10rd mags.

Remember, you're adding, not replacing, the PG/MMG so it doesn't count.

Also, good luck at finding an MMG adapter for the AK receiver... they haven't been made in a year or more. Currently, the only "new" parts that can be used would be a Kydex wrap.

So you'd be looking at a full 922(r) trigger relocation conversion, which includes a new buttstock (but now you're good on 922(r) parts without replacing the piston), still need the bullet guide, and add the Kydex grip wrap (or MMG and adapter).

smittty
03-28-2011, 8:27 PM
Cokebottle you hit the nail on the head with your last post. Thank you so much for that information. With that said when I pick up my rifle I'm just gonna leave it bone stock & have fun!
I don't want to mess with any laws at this point.

Keeping the sporter buttstock is good idea but I would still add the bullet guide. You can use 10 round mags such as those made by Tapco which are $10 each. I use these mags in my converted Saiga and they work great.

I think I'm regretting converting mine.

Shady
03-28-2011, 8:29 PM
I think I'm regretting converting mine.

are you kidding
:rolleyes:

mif_slim
03-28-2011, 8:58 PM
A Saiga can do 2-4 moa at hundred yards with irons every time in the right hands with decent ammo.

I can only see Pro's in getting a Saiga rifle....

Yeah, that's why I said "my saiga" instead of "saiga's".

I have plenty of sub-MOA rifles, but when I fired te saiga, I told my friend I was going from sub-MOA rifles to minute-of-barn rifles.
Like I said thou, I dint hate it because it is a fun gun to shoot but the group I had wasn't that appealing.... The paper that came with the saiga stated the gun shot 4" at 50 yards... So "I dunno"??

CHS
03-29-2011, 9:30 AM
Also, good luck at finding an MMG adapter for the AK receiver... they haven't been made in a year or more. Currently, the only "new" parts that can be used would be a Kydex wrap.


6$, still made and sold here:
http://www.dsarms.com/AK47-to-AR15-Grip-Adapter---ACEAKRA/productinfo/ACEAKRA/

Made by ACE.

ns3v3n
03-29-2011, 10:57 AM
I researched as well, from what i got, if you want to mod your saiga to take high cap ak mags, you will have to replace 4 parts. And easiest way to do so is get the single hook trigger group and the tapco gas piston from carolina shooter supplies, then you'll have your four parts.

http://store.carolinashooterssupply.com/servlet/-strse-119/SAIGA-AK-TAPCO-FCG/Detail (this counts as 3 parts and it's $30)

http://store.carolinashooterssupply.com/servlet/-strse-126/AK47-TAPCO-SAIGA-AXIS/Detail ( one of these to hold the trigger assembly)
http://store.carolinashooterssupply.com/servlet/-strse-166/Tapco-Saiga-Rifle-12/Detail ( and i think one of these as stated in the trigger page)

http://store.carolinashooterssupply.com/servlet/-strse-194/SAIGA-RIFLE-GAS-PISTON/Detail (this is 1 part and it's $13)

http://store.carolinashooterssupply.com/servlet/-strse-367/Saiga-Bullet-Guide-7.62x39/Detail ( one of these guys for the bullet guide)

I think with these parts, you're stock rifle would be legal to accept AK mags because it's under 10 foreign parts. Given you have the mags already. This is what i came up with my research so far. So please correct me if i'm wrong, so i know in the future. :cool2:

Grumpyoldretiredcop
03-29-2011, 11:20 AM
OK, forget the russian hi-cap pre-pan mags. What if someone just wants to use US made mags. Here in Cali that would be 10 rounders but in other states it could mean US made hi-caps.

Let's say you change to a US made trigger, hammer, forend, add a US bullet guide/trunnion, and use US made 10 round mags (for cali) which totals 7 US made parts leaving 9 foreign parts.

1- Receiver
2- Barrel
3- Front Trunnion Adding a bullet guide does not replace the front trunnion
4- Rear Trunnion
5- Muzzle Attachment
6- Bolt
7- Bolt Carrier
8- Gas Piston/Puck Replace this instead
9- Trigger
10- Hammer
11- Disconnector
12- Buttstock
13- Forearm/Handguard
14- Magazine Body
15- Magazine Follower
16- Magazine Floorplate

I have thought about un-converting my Saiga because I don't like the mag lock. I'm still thinking about it.

With the change noted above, a Saiga in sporting configuration should be able to have a bullet guide installed without violating Federal statute.

As for the issue of cheek weld with a side scope mount, there is an adjustable cheek rest available. I have one, just can't recall the brand. It requires drilling through the stock to install and uses two bolts/knobs to adjust the height. I'll try to remember to put a pic up later today.

vintagedude88
03-29-2011, 11:22 AM
But you still have to meet 922(r) compliance to run >10rd mags.

Remember, you're adding, not replacing, the PG/MMG so it doesn't count.

Also, good luck at finding an MMG adapter for the AK receiver... they haven't been made in a year or more. Currently, the only "new" parts that can be used would be a Kydex wrap.

So you'd be looking at a full 922(r) trigger relocation conversion, which includes a new buttstock (but now you're good on 922(r) parts without replacing the piston), still need the bullet guide, and add the Kydex grip wrap (or MMG and adapter).

As I said, converting the rifle with new AK style stock and FCG is the easiest and cheapest way to meet 922r. Adding the MMG instead of the pistol grip will make it featureless. And the AR grip adapter for AKs are ubiquitous.

vintagedude88
03-29-2011, 11:27 AM
I researched as well, from what i got, if you want to mod your saiga to take high cap ak mags, you will have to replace 4 parts. And easiest way to do so is get the single hook trigger group and the tapco gas piston from carolina shooter supplies, then you'll have your four parts.

http://store.carolinashooterssupply.com/servlet/-strse-119/SAIGA-AK-TAPCO-FCG/Detail (this counts as 3 parts and it's $30)

http://store.carolinashooterssupply.com/servlet/-strse-126/AK47-TAPCO-SAIGA-AXIS/Detail ( one of these to hold the trigger assembly)
http://store.carolinashooterssupply.com/servlet/-strse-166/Tapco-Saiga-Rifle-12/Detail ( and i think one of these as stated in the trigger page)

http://store.carolinashooterssupply.com/servlet/-strse-194/SAIGA-RIFLE-GAS-PISTON/Detail (this is 1 part and it's $13)

http://store.carolinashooterssupply.com/servlet/-strse-367/Saiga-Bullet-Guide-7.62x39/Detail ( one of these guys for the bullet guide)

I think with these parts, you're stock rifle would be legal to accept AK mags because it's under 10 foreign parts. Given you have the mags already. This is what i came up with my research so far. So please correct me if i'm wrong, so i know in the future. :cool2:

The problem with the FCG you listed is that it only works for a converted rifle not for the rifle in the stock sporter configuration. Look at the link: http://www.dinzagarms.com/misc_parts/fcg.html to see why.

Changing out the piston is not a matter of unscrewing the stock on for a new one. Check this link and its instructions to see why. http://www.dinzagarms.com/misc_parts/usgpk.html

vintagedude88
03-29-2011, 11:30 AM
With the change noted above, a Saiga in sporting configuration should be able to have a bullet guide installed without violating Federal statute.

As for the issue of cheek weld with a side scope mount, there is an adjustable cheek rest available. I have one, just can't recall the brand. It requires drilling through the stock to install and uses two bolts/knobs to adjust the height. I'll try to remember to put a pic up later today.

Here you go.

http://www.snipercentral.com/karsten.htm
http://www.snipercentral.com/images/reviews/karsten1.jpg

ns3v3n
03-29-2011, 11:33 AM
The problem with the FCG you listed is that it only works for a converted rifle not for the rifle in the stock sporter configuration. Look at the link: http://www.dinzagarms.com/misc_parts/fcg.html to see why.

Changing out the piston is not a matter of unscrewing the stock on for a new one. Check this link and its instructions to see why. http://www.dinzagarms.com/misc_parts/usgpk.html

Ah i see, Thanks for the additional info.

LeatherNuts
03-29-2011, 12:34 PM
I don't see any cons to my Saiga right now. I've had it about 3 weeks now did the conversion, put a maglock on it and have got a couple hundred down the tube. Not a single misfeed or FTF. Accuracy is far better than I expected, out of the box with elevation and windage zero'ed I was hitting clay pigeons set up on the side of a hill at 80 yards. If you're comfortable with whatever price it is your getting it for I say go for it, very enjoyable.

Cokebottle
03-29-2011, 3:24 PM
6$, still made and sold here:
http://www.dsarms.com/AK47-to-AR15-Grip-Adapter---ACEAKRA/productinfo/ACEAKRA/

Made by ACE.
Woa!

Good that ACE picked up the ball and ran with it after MMG dropped it.

smittty
03-29-2011, 3:53 PM
are you kidding
:rolleyes:

No kidding here. After the conversion it handles a lot better with the exception of having a maglock. Any maglock/bullet button sucks on an AK style rifle.

On an AR it's hardly a burden because they work with one hand and the mag drops free. With an AK it takes two hands to remove the mag, this is what sucks about it.

Smitty

CHS
03-29-2011, 8:25 PM
Good that ACE picked up the ball and ran with it after MMG dropped it.

MMG ALWAYS bundled the ACE adapter ;)

ellenshan
03-30-2011, 2:31 PM
Interesting how a simple question can turn into such a involved discussion. But that's what is so great about Calguns.
I own one of these Saiga 7.62/39 AK's. Here's the deal, I paid $300.00 for the gun stock. I added a front rail and a strap for another $50.00. That's it. I just purchased 1120 rounds of 7.62/39 ammo for $237.00 from the-armory.com includes shipping. You can shoot all day cheap. Tons of fun and good enough if your not a sniper. I shoot paper plates at 50 & 100 yards (can't see past that. 7 out of 10 at 50 yards 6 out of 10 at a 100. Probably better than this for most people but eyes are bad.
I purchased an extra magazine for $40.00 new. Guy on here was right I purchased 4 more for $15.00 each. Guys converting were selling them cheap.
Buy it and have fun.

Rekrab
03-30-2011, 2:36 PM
No kidding here. After the conversion it handles a lot better with the exception of having a maglock. Any maglock/bullet button sucks on an AK style rifle.

On an AR it's hardly a burden because they work with one hand and the mag drops free. With an AK it takes two hands to remove the mag, this is what sucks about it.

Smitty

And that's why all of my AKs(with the exception of my pistol) will be featureless with custom grip wraps by Munkeeboi. I hate those maglocks.

smittty
03-30-2011, 5:35 PM
And that's why all of my AKs(with the exception of my pistol) will be featureless with custom grip wraps by Munkeeboi. I hate those maglocks.

I don't like the grip wrap either. I think it looks rediculous!

Had I fully understood that it would take two hands to remove the AK mag I wouldn't have converted it. I feel that trading the functional mag release for the benefit of a pistol grip and shorter OAL doesn't result in a better handling rifle.

I guess it's official then, I'm anti-conversion. When I have some time, maybe this weekend, I'll undo my conversion. I kept all my factory parts but I will need to find a substitute for the two pins that held the trigger and connecter thing.

Smittty

Shady
03-30-2011, 7:44 PM
I don't like the grip wrap either. I think it looks rediculous!

Had I fully understood that it would take two hands to remove the AK mag I wouldn't have converted it. I feel that trading the functional mag release for the benefit of a pistol grip and shorter OAL doesn't result in a better handling rifle.

I guess it's official then, I'm anti-conversion. When I have some time, maybe this weekend, I'll undo my conversion. I kept all my factory parts but I will need to find a substitute for the two pins that held the trigger and connecter thing.

Smittty

your right
looks are the most important thing when it comes to a
personal defense firearm
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Cokebottle
03-30-2011, 8:10 PM
your right
looks are the most important thing when it comes to a
personal defense firearm
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
A bullet button or other maglock on a personal defense firearm is a bit silly.

Grumpyoldretiredcop
03-30-2011, 10:37 PM
Here you go.

http://www.snipercentral.com/karsten.htm
http://www.snipercentral.com/images/reviews/karsten1.jpg

That's it. Works very well on an unconverted .308 Saiga. Thanks, vintagedude!

smittty
03-31-2011, 10:58 AM
A bullet button or other maglock on a personal defense firearm is a bit silly.

Thank you for saying that. I feel the same way about it.

Doing a conversion to get the look of an AK but without the full function if is silly.

Added a grip wrap to avoid the maglock is equally silly...if you can't use your thumb to get a full grip on the weapon then why do it? I feel like a turkey for doing the conversion. It looks cool but the end result feels like a compromise.

Shady
03-31-2011, 12:08 PM
Thank you for saying that. I feel the same way about it.

Doing a conversion to get the look of an AK but without the full function if is silly.

Added a grip wrap to avoid the maglock is equally silly...if you can't use your thumb to get a full grip on the weapon then why do it? I feel like a turkey for doing the conversion. It looks cool but the end result feels like a compromise.

ZbFNQrEIMYQ
-
http://s276.photobucket.com/albums/kk7/labiocars/?action=view&current=video-2011-03-19-13-52-07.mp4

what exactly looks so silly in these videos?
very little control is lost by useing a grip wrap
anyone who has actually used one can vouch for that.

the ak47 was NEVER meant to have a monte carlo stock ,
it is awkward and cheesy on a ak no matter how you look at it.
it was also not meant to have the long pull trigger,
the stock long pull trigger that is in a unconverted saiga
is the worst trigger I have ever felt in my life.

no matter how "silly looking " you think it is
grip wraps are the best way legally and ergonomically to run a AK in california .


the overwhelming majority of experienced people will agree with me on that.

maybe you should get into SKS's they may work out better for you ;)

zfields
03-31-2011, 12:59 PM
My solution to the "dangling thumb"....

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/_L9wuEAD0zJM/TP214pHAKjI/AAAAAAAAACU/n74RjoBRZyM/grip.jpg


One of these days Ill get a black one : /
Id much rather have free dropping mags and slightly off ergos then a neutered rifle with a bullet button....

Quickdraw Mcgraw
03-31-2011, 1:43 PM
OKAY...first thing is I love my Stock Saiga 7.62x39!

That being said there is one con that I have found that I didn't see anyone mention...the trigger is pretty crap and there is really no way to smooth/lighten it without converting your rifle. That for me was a bummer since I like to Tune each rifle for Max accuracy!

vintagedude88
03-31-2011, 7:17 PM
OKAY...first thing is I love my Stock Saiga 7.62x39!

That being said there is one con that I have found that I didn't see anyone mention...the trigger is pretty crap and there is really no way to smooth/lighten it without converting your rifle. That for me was a bummer since I like to Tune each rifle for Max accuracy!

You can also buy a better trigger for the factory configuration.
http://www.dinzagarms.com/misc_parts/fcg.html

Conversion is only something to consider as an easy way to get around 922r. However, if you're gonna shoot it in the sporter configuration with 10rnd mags, you will never have to worry about 922r.