PDA

View Full Version : Yugo SKS illegal?


safewaysecurity
09-02-2011, 12:44 PM
Found this on the ag website when doing a search about grenade launcher legality in Ca. It says that the yugo SKS is illegal because it is a destructive device and has the ability to launch a grenade.

Zastava SKS Carbines 59/66 are considered destructive devices in California and therefore may not be purchased, possessed, imported, or kept for sale without a permit.


http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/zastava.php

bwiese
09-02-2011, 12:50 PM
Yes, old news.

Don't have a 'grenade launcher' - those devices are separately and intrinsically illegal.

Now, a G/L is listed as a separate 'characteristic' feature in 12276.1PC for semiauto centerfire rifles with detachable magazines. But even if you have such a semiauto centerfire rifle with a BulletButton maglock, you can't have one of these per separate D/D law.

These devices are illegal even if not on the gun and if you find yourself having one , you should find yourself rapidly NOT having one ASAP.

On a separate matter, this memo is also especially useful in clarifiying that the gun in question (Zastava Arms Model 59/66 - or even the Model 59 for that matter) is indeed NOT nor CANNOT be regarded as an "SKS rifle".

safewaysecurity
09-02-2011, 12:56 PM
So if you are building a yugo AK from parts are you supposed to weld over the tip of the barrel so that it can't accept a G/L?

bwiese
09-02-2011, 12:59 PM
So if you are building a yugo AK from parts are you supposed to weld over the tip of the barrel so that it can't accept a G/L?

No, why would you think that?

"Capcity to accept..." does not apply to G/L or other evil features.

Just don't have G/L at all installed - either attached or in your toolbox. If your parts kit is being shipped from outside CA to here,
you should specify in writing for it NOT to have any G/L muzzle attachment, no hicap mags and no F/A-exclusive fire control parts.
Since you're gonna swap out the FCG stuff anyway for 922(r) compliance, just say 'no fire control parts'.

jrr
09-02-2011, 1:05 PM
Has there been any word from those in the know about whether an m59/66 is an aka for purposes of th aw list? If not, would detachable mags be gtg?

jrr
09-02-2011, 1:06 PM
Dang auto correct... sks not aka...

todd2968
09-02-2011, 1:11 PM
Only in California I've got mine back in IL with attachment that shoots the practice pineapples grenades, it is cool look it up on youtube gotta find 7.62x39 blanks.

bwiese
09-02-2011, 1:21 PM
Has there been any word from those in the know about whether an m59/66 is an aka for purposes of th aw list? If not, would detachable mags be gtg?

Jrr,


This has been gone over several times here on Calguns since Jan 1 2007.

Since a Zastava M59 or M59/66 is NOT an SKS, it can have a detachable magazine. (For SKS to include other separately identifiable models would be a Harrott "series" violation.) The term "Yugo SKS" is an informal, colloquial term only and does not have legal significance due to above. A Yugo M59 is not an SKS anymore than a CA-legal Stag Arms Stag-15 is an AR15.

If the DOJ had wanted to ban M59s with detachable magazines, they could have petitioned a judge in a large county to make a determination of AW status and followed the 12276.5 'add-on' provisions. They elected instead to support AB2728, which 'froze the lists' of banned guns and also removed the add-on provision (and prohibited them from identifying other AR/AK 'series' members further extending the "Kasler" list, 11 CCR 5499).

This also assumes the M59/66 does NOT have a G/L attached (or it's been permanently disabled - i.e., welded sleeve vastly increasing diameter).
One again should not even SEPARATELY possess an M59/66 G/L device inside CA.

However, having a Yugo M59(/66) with a detachable magazine requires 18 USC 922(r) / 27 CFR 478.39 '10 or less key foreign parts' game to be played using US-mfgd 'compliance parts'.

But since the Yugo M59s work so well as-is, and since the compliance parts appear only to be junque from TAPCO - and the US-mfgd detachable mags for such guns appear to be not that great - why mess up a good carbine??

Rascal
09-02-2011, 3:20 PM
Listen to what Bill is saying. He is correct.
On the detachable mags, I have tried them on my M59/66 and it was a dismal failure. They would jam all the time. Sold them and went back to the the OEM mag parts and never looked back.

dmax11
09-03-2011, 12:38 PM
never had any feeding/jamming problems with my 1 tapco 10 round mag. the OEM mag works better all around esp with loading, with the tapco i have to make sure i load rounds a certain way or the extractor rim gets caught on the back of the mag well and pretty much forces you to chamber a round and give up on loading the rest of the mag if it happens but once the mag is loaded i've never had a single jam on my 59/66 ever with any mag.

jrr
09-04-2011, 12:00 AM
Cool.... more of a curiosity than anything else, seeing as I don't own an sks. Still, any showing that the doj rules and ca laws are nonsense is helpful to the cause. One more case of an assault rifle that is literally identical to a legal rifle. Arbitrary and capricious much?