PDA

View Full Version : SKS banned in CA???


J.D.Allen
05-24-2012, 11:09 AM
In one of the Yee threads that got deleted KCBROWN seemed to be saying that all SKS rifles are banned in CA, and had posted some PC sections to go with it. Is this true? does anyone know?

Prince50
05-24-2012, 11:12 AM
No, SKS rifles are not banned, or slated to be banned.

Darin

taperxz
05-24-2012, 11:12 AM
10 round fixed SKS is legal. Over 10 fixed is illegal, detachable or attachable is illegal by name. (roberti Roos )

ojisan
05-24-2012, 11:15 AM
There were some SKS that had detachable magazines...these were originally OK to keep as is but then were banned (and some owners had to surrender them to LE!)

The standard SKS with fixed 10 round mag is OK.

FX-05 Xiuhcoatl
05-24-2012, 11:19 AM
only norinco SKS model "M", only model "M" not type 56 or "para"

taperxz
05-24-2012, 11:24 AM
only norinco SKS model "M", only model "M" not type 56 or "para"

???:confused:

Prince50
05-24-2012, 11:28 AM
M and S SKS rifles were imported in a configuration that allows AK mags to be used.

Also adding a "duckbill" mag to the SKS is illegal.

Darin

Prince50
05-24-2012, 11:35 AM
M and S SKS rifles were imported in a configuration that allows AK mags to be used.

Also adding a "duckbill" mag to the SKS is illegal.

Darin

alfred1222
05-24-2012, 11:48 AM
only norinco SKS model "M", only model "M" not type 56 or "para"

What???

unusedusername
05-24-2012, 11:53 AM
Please read the flowchart (http://www.calguns.net/caawid/flowchart.pdf).

Appendix A
Roberti-Roos AW list
...
SKS w/ detachable magazine

A "SKS w/ detachable magazine" is listed on Roberti-Roos. This means you don't want a rifle that says (literally) "SKS" stamped on the side of it and also has a detachable magazine.

If you rifle is stamped "type 56", or "para" or "I like rifles" on the side then it isn't banned.

If you rifle is stamped "SKS" anywhere then make sure it never has a detachable magazine.

FX-05 Xiuhcoatl
05-24-2012, 11:55 AM
M and S SKS rifles were imported in a configuration that allows AK mags to be used.

Also adding a "duckbill" mag to the SKS is illegal.

Darin

you are correct, I forgot about "S" model.

taperxz
05-24-2012, 12:20 PM
Please read the flowchart (http://www.calguns.net/caawid/flowchart.pdf).



A "SKS w/ detachable magazine" is listed on Roberti-Roos. This means you don't want a rifle that says (literally) "SKS" stamped on the side of it and also has a detachable magazine.

If you rifle is stamped "type 56", or "para" or "I like rifles" on the side then it isn't banned.

If you rifle is stamped "SKS" anywhere then make sure it never has a detachable magazine.

YES! The OP is about the SKS. Type 56 and Para are not an SKS. I'm being literal, in my answer.:D

safewaysecurity
05-24-2012, 12:29 PM
Weren't the Yugo SKS illegal if they had the capacity to accept a grenade launcher? Isn't that why they have to weld them on the front so they can't accept?

mosinnagantm9130
05-24-2012, 1:34 PM
Weren't the Yugo SKS illegal if they had the capacity to accept a grenade launcher? Isn't that why they have to weld them on the front so they can't accept?

Not "capacity to accept"....the Yugo M59/66 has a grenade launcher mounted on the barrel. The some of the CA-compliant ones have the grenade launcher removed, and a muzzle brake added. Others just have the grenade launcher removed.

someR1
05-24-2012, 1:52 PM
they are sold at Big 5 :)

completely legal (10 round fixed mags)

Nick Justice
05-24-2012, 1:58 PM
Not banned. Some sellers wont sell to CA because they offer some Yugo models with grenade launchers, and don't want to take the chance. Technically the models are legal, because the guns are 10-round-fixed mag, and can have all the "evil" features you want. Still, the sellers don't want to make any mistake.

J.D.Allen
05-24-2012, 2:43 PM
I sure would like to know what kcbrown was referring to. Don't remember the PC sections he was quoting but... oh well

kcbrown
05-24-2012, 9:18 PM
I sure would like to know what kcbrown was referring to. Don't remember the PC sections he was quoting but... oh well


My original message said this:


-----------------------


Did they come and retroactively seize all SKS rifles?? If so, I missed it cause there is one in my safe

I didn't see anything in the law allowing you to get a permit for it. The law says:


(f) (1) Any person, firm, company, or corporation that is in possession of an SKS rifle shall do one of the following on or before January 1, 2000:
(A) Relinquish the SKS rifle to the Department of Justice pursuant to subdivision (h).
(B) Relinquish the SKS rifle to a law enforcement agency pursuant to Section 12288.
(C) Dispose of the SKS rifle as permitted by Section 12285.


12285 covered a number of things, but the common theme there is that you can "render the weapon permanently inoperable, sell the weapon to a licensed gun dealer, obtain a permit from the Department of Justice in the same manner as specified in Article 3 (commencing with Section 12230) of Chapter 2, or remove the weapon from this state". However, since 12281 doesn't mention getting a permit in (C), but only mentions "disposing of" it, that means they only gave you the option of rendering it inoperable, selling it to an FFL, or removing it from the state.

In light of that, if yours fits the description of 12281(i)


(i) Notwithstanding paragraph (11) of subdivision (a) of Section 12276, an "SKS rifle" under this section means all SKS rifles commonly referred to as "SKS Sporter" versions, manufactured to accept a detachable AK-47 magazine and imported into this state and sold by a licensed gun dealer, or otherwise lawfully possessed in this state by a resident of this state who is not a licensed gun dealer, between January 1, 1992, and December 19, 1997.


then how in the world do you have one legally?

-----------------------



My suspicion is that your SKS does not fit the description in 12281(i).


In any case, the original purpose of my message was to point out that the government does have the power to forcibly deprive you of your property against your will without compensating you and without due process. The whole SKS thing is an excellent example of that. That some variant of them is available in stores today does nothing to negate the fact that the government did make a certain class of SKS rifles illegal without making it possible to take some action that would make it legal to retain ownership of them. A strict reading of the aforementioned law yields no possible way to do so even if one were to modify it so that it would normally no longer be an "assault weapon" per the law, because the wording says that the rifles in question were manufactured to accept a detachable magazine, which is a reference to how they were originally built and is an attribute that does not change with later modification.

It is, therefore, folly to believe that the California legislature cannot pass a law that bans a type of firearm and gives owners no recourse but to give up, in one way or another, that firearm. It can and it has, and there is no reason at all to believe the legislature won't do so again and every reason to believe it will.

Quiet
05-24-2012, 10:44 PM
In any case, the original purpose of my message was to point out that the government does have the power to forcibly deprive you of your property against your will without compensating you and without due process. The whole SKS thing is an excellent example of that. That some variant of them is available in stores today does nothing to negate the fact that the government did make a certain class of SKS rifles illegal without making it possible to take some action that would make it legal to retain ownership of them. A strict reading of the aforementioned law yields no possible way to do so even if one were to modify it so that it would normally no longer be an "assault weapon" per the law, because the wording says that the rifles in question were manufactured to accept a detachable magazine, which is a reference to how they were originally built and is an attribute that does not change with later modification.

It is, therefore, folly to believe that the California legislature cannot pass a law that bans a type of firearm and gives owners no recourse but to give up, in one way or another, that firearm. It can and it has, and there is no reason at all to believe the legislature won't do so again and every reason to believe it will.

The "SKS Sporter" (Norinco SKS-D/SKS-M/SKS-NR/MC-5D) is the reason why PC 30710, 30715, 30720, 30730 & 30735 were created.
"SKS Sporter" = SKS rifle manufactured to use AK magazines.

Roberti-Roos AWB of 1989 bans SKS with detachable magazines.
In 1991, a distributor asked CA DOJ if what they were advirtising as the "SKS Sporter" (Norinco SKS-D/SKS-M) fell under the Roberti-Roos AWB of 1989.
CA DOJ responded back saying they were not "SKS with detachable magazines".
"SKS Sporter" was then legally sold in CA from 1992-1997.
In 1998, CA DOJ said they made a mistake and that the "SKS Sporter" were "SKS with detachable magazines" and everyone who legally acquired one, was now in felony possession of an unregistered assault weapon.
Several people cried to their politicians about this and they in turned passed laws to allow those people who legally acquired the "SKS Sporter" a grace period to get rid of them without facing prosecution for possessing unregistered assault weapons.
CA DOJ then implemented a "buy back" on the "SKS Sporter". $250 per rifle, even though they were sold in the $400-500 range.
Grace period lasted until 12-31-1999, after which anyone possessing a "SKS Sporter" in CA would be in possession of an unregistered assault weapon.

mosinnagantm9130
05-25-2012, 12:51 AM
Not banned. Some sellers wont sell to CA because they offer some Yugo models with grenade launchers, and don't want to take the chance. Technically the models are legal, because the guns are 10-round-fixed mag, and can have all the "evil" features you want. Still, the sellers don't want to make any mistake.

The M59/66 is not legal in CA if it has the grenade launcher.

Wherryj
05-25-2012, 10:32 AM
???:confused:
That is apparently how the Plesanton PD/Alameda DA seem to feel. These laws seem designed specifically to confuse EVERYONE. Either that or our law makers are dumber than even we give them credit for. (I personally vote for both.)

J.D.Allen
05-25-2012, 10:40 AM
My original message said this:


-----------------------


I didn't see anything in the law allowing you to get a permit for it. The law says:



12285 covered a number of things, but the common theme there is that you can "render the weapon permanently inoperable, sell the weapon to a licensed gun dealer, obtain a permit from the Department of Justice in the same manner as specified in Article 3 (commencing with Section 12230) of Chapter 2, or remove the weapon from this state". However, since 12281 doesn't mention getting a permit in (C), but only mentions "disposing of" it, that means they only gave you the option of rendering it inoperable, selling it to an FFL, or removing it from the state.

In light of that, if yours fits the description of 12281(i)



then how in the world do you have one legally?

-----------------------



My suspicion is that your SKS does not fit the description in 12281(i).


In any case, the original purpose of my message was to point out that the government does have the power to forcibly deprive you of your property against your will without compensating you and without due process. The whole SKS thing is an excellent example of that. That some variant of them is available in stores today does nothing to negate the fact that the government did make a certain class of SKS rifles illegal without making it possible to take some action that would make it legal to retain ownership of them. A strict reading of the aforementioned law yields no possible way to do so even if one were to modify it so that it would normally no longer be an "assault weapon" per the law, because the wording says that the rifles in question were manufactured to accept a detachable magazine, which is a reference to how they were originally built and is an attribute that does not change with later modification.

It is, therefore, folly to believe that the California legislature cannot pass a law that bans a type of firearm and gives owners no recourse but to give up, in one way or another, that firearm. It can and it has, and there is no reason at all to believe the legislature won't do so again and every reason to believe it will.

Thanks for clarifying. I originally thought the wording said "includes" instead of "means", which would of course change the entire meaning of the statute...

motorhead
05-25-2012, 11:32 AM
the yugo model (66?) had a gas cutoff/grenade sight, as well as a grenade spigot. to be compliant, both need to be removed. ca compliant versions were sold.

J.D.Allen
05-25-2012, 11:41 AM
the yugo model (66?) had a gas cutoff/grenade sight, as well as a grenade spigot. to be compliant, both need to be removed. ca compliant versions were sold.

What's a grenade spigot?

ke6guj
05-25-2012, 1:43 PM
the yugo model (66?) had a gas cutoff/grenade sight, as well as a grenade spigot. to be compliant, both need to be removed. ca compliant versions were sold.
really? got a cite for that?

there is nothing illegal about a gas cutoff on a rifle, and neither are "grenade sights" illegal.

ke6guj
05-25-2012, 1:44 PM
What's a grenade spigot?
that is the 22mm barrel extension that is designed to hold a rifle-fired grenade.

22mm is the common size for many flash hider/muzzle brakes on EBRs.

mosinnagantm9130
05-25-2012, 5:56 PM
the yugo model (66?) had a gas cutoff/grenade sight, as well as a grenade spigot. to be compliant, both need to be removed. ca compliant versions were sold.

The only thing that needs to be removed on the 59/66 is the grenade launcher.

Cylarz
05-25-2012, 6:27 PM
There were some SKS that had detachable magazines...these were originally OK to keep as is but then were banned (and some owners had to surrender them to LE!)

The standard SKS with fixed 10 round mag is OK.

Here's the link to CA-DOJ which mentions the Yugo 59/66 grenade launcher attachment that several have now mentioned. It is designated as a "Zastava" carbine and is illegal:

http://oag.ca.gov/firearms/zastava

Be careful because they're perfectly legal in neighboring states and some sellers there (particularly private party sellers) will be happy to sell you one, cash and carry (since some are over 50 years old and therefore C&R eligible) and not knowing (or caring) that you're from California. But bring that thing across the border, and you're going to be in a pack of trouble if you're caught.

As mentioned, the Zastava is a Yugo variant of SKS and is recognizable by the large grenade launcher attachment on the muzzle. Legal Yugo's have a muzzle brake (with 9-12 small holes in it) instead. Be aware.

TRICKSTER
05-25-2012, 6:49 PM
Here's the link to CA-DOJ which mentions the Yugo 59/66 grenade launcher attachment that several have now mentioned. It is designated as a "Zastava" carbine and is illegal:

http://oag.ca.gov/firearms/zastava

Be careful because they're perfectly legal in neighboring states and some sellers there (particularly private party sellers) will be happy to sell you one, cash and carry (since some are over 50 years old and therefore C&R eligible) and not knowing (or caring) that you're from California. But bring that thing across the border, and you're going to be in a pack of trouble if you're caught.

As mentioned, the Zastava is a Yugo variant of SKS and is recognizable by the large grenade launcher attachment on the muzzle. Legal Yugo's have a muzzle brake (with 9-12 small holes in it) instead. Be aware.

It is only illegal because of the grenade launcher. If you have the grenade launcher removed before it gets into CA, it is perfectly legal.

darksands
05-26-2012, 3:39 PM
I received a list of p.c. codes from a LAPD officer friend and one said SKS rifles are illegal and it was that vauge. Just don't be surprised if you get busted for one. Arrest now, ask questions later is what seems to be the case.

Cylarz
05-26-2012, 5:19 PM
It is only illegal because of the grenade launcher. If you have the grenade launcher removed before it gets into CA, it is perfectly legal.

That's correct, and that's key to remember if you bought a Zastava in another state and want to bring it into California permanently because you're moving here.

If you're buying a Yugo 59/66, however, it's probably easier to buy one that already has the launcher removed, not unless you're getting some super-duper deal on a Zastava and can remove the launcher A) without damaging the weapon and B) still come out ahead on the math. My $0.02 anyway.

I just wanted to warn people who might inadvertently buy one cash & carry in a red state, then bring it here without knowing what a serious offense that is.

What would happen if an FFL01 in another state (who doesn't know those are illegal here) tried to ship a Zastava (or any other CA-illegal firearm) to a CA FFL01...would they just send it back, or would the buyer (and one or both of the stores) be in a bunch of trouble?

forgiven
06-16-2012, 6:24 PM
There were some SKS that had detachable magazines...these were originally OK to keep as is but then were banned (and some owners had to surrender them to LE!)

The standard SKS with fixed 10 round mag is OK.

Yep, happened to my friend:mad:

zhyla
06-16-2012, 8:26 PM
The PC seems almost maliciously confusing. I'm sure it's actually incompetence to blame, but geeze that's some bad law.

In reality there is one SKS rifle, made in Russia in the 50's.

In PC 12881(i) there is an entirely different definition of what an SKS rifle is. And Russian SKS's don't meet that criteria, neither do most SKS clones.

RMP91
06-16-2012, 8:33 PM
Are Russian (Soviet) 10 round fixed mag SKS rifles exempt from this? Or am I stuck with the Chi-com stuff? (Not that they are terrible guns, but if I were given a choice, I'd take the Soviet over the Chinese).

mrlonewolf
06-16-2012, 8:35 PM
That's correct, and that's key to remember if you bought a Zastava in another state and want to bring it into California permanently because you're moving here.

If you're buying a Yugo 59/66, however, it's probably easier to buy one that already has the launcher removed, not unless you're getting some super-duper deal on a Zastava and can remove the launcher A) without damaging the weapon and B) still come out ahead on the math. My $0.02 anyway.

I just wanted to warn people who might inadvertently buy one cash & carry in a red state, then bring it here without knowing what a serious offense that is.

What would happen if an FFL01 in another state (who doesn't know those are illegal here) tried to ship a Zastava (or any other CA-illegal firearm) to a CA FFL01...would they just send it back, or would the buyer (and one or both of the stores) be in a bunch of trouble?

For reference:

http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/zastava.php

Quiet
06-16-2012, 11:28 PM
Are Russian (Soviet) 10 round fixed mag SKS rifles exempt from this? Or am I stuck with the Chi-com stuff? (Not that they are terrible guns, but if I were given a choice, I'd take the Soviet over the Chinese).

Any SKS with a fixed 10 round or less magazine is CA legal.

What is not legal, is using a detachable magazine in a SKS [PC 30510(a)(11)] and SKS type rifles that use AK magazines [PC 30710].

motorhead
06-17-2012, 10:10 AM
really? got a cite for that?

there is nothing illegal about a gas cutoff on a rifle, and neither are "grenade sights" illegal.
i stand corrected! even old dogs like myself aren't immune to FUD.:chris:

Calm Down
06-17-2012, 10:43 AM
I have a Yugo 59/66. The Harrot decision addressed "series" weapons. Thou the 59/66 is patterned after the original SKS; it's not marked "SKS". Therefore it would fall under "series", correct? Provided I comply with the federal law, 922(r); what would preclude me from converting the rifle to accepting a detachable magazine?

Librarian
06-17-2012, 12:58 PM
I have a Yugo 59/66. The Harrot decision addressed "series" weapons. Thou the 59/66 is patterned after the original SKS; it's not marked "SKS". Therefore it would fall under "series", correct? Provided I comply with the federal law, 922(r); what would preclude me from converting the rifle to accepting a detachable magazine?

Legally? Nothing.

Do you have the $10K or so it would take to pay the lawyers to explain the details at your trial? You'd win, and have a nice $10,400 Zastava.

bwiese
06-17-2012, 1:03 PM
CGF wiil defend any otherwise legally-owned, correctly-configured Yugo M59 [i.e., no flash hider-grenade launcher] even has a detachable magazine.

DOJ has in its own docs identified this rifle by its specific make and model, which is NOT "SKS". A Yugo M59 is to the SKS what a Stag Stag-15 is to a Colt AR15.

I believe various parties in the DOJ are aware of this and this would not get to trial when a forensic examiner is consulted.

taperxz
06-17-2012, 1:07 PM
CGF wiil defend any otherwise legally-owned, correctly-configured Yugo M59 [i.e., no flash hider] even has a detachable magazine.

DOJ has in its own docs identified this rifle by its specific make and model, which is NOT "SKS". A Yugo M59 is to the SKS what a Stag Stag-15 is to a Colt AR15.

I believe various parties in the DOJ are aware of this and this would not get to trial when a forensic examiner is consulted.

I thought you might chime in on this.:D