Cali-legal AK? Legal modifications?

[saki302]

A freind and I were discussing the possibility of cali-legal AK designs, and here's what we came up with:

1. weld the mag in place- you just made a 'FAK-10' (think: FAB10!), but it will load like crap- field strip to load, or make a safety into a bolt-hold open device, and pull dust cover to load (still not nice). My thoughts were to weld the mag right to the receiver, or weld a steel wedge to the mag release, thereby disabling it from releasing forever... (it's too thin to even think about putting a set screw on it).

2. Disable the gas system, make it a straight-pull bolt action. I like this idea as it keeps the appearance correct. It would be easy to weld the barrel gas hole shut, or plug the port, and cut the piston off the bolt carrier.

3. Test the 'harrott' decision and build yourself a Saiga-like AK with no pistol grip. hrmm.. thinking about it, if you built up one of those Czech VZ58 (?) rifles into a non-pistol gripped gun it wouldn't be an AK variant at all, but good luck finding 10 round mags for it.

Any other ideas? Doing your own pump conversion would be too much- better off buying the 'real' one.

-Dave

[art_e@hotmail.com]

Build a krinker plinker?

[C.G.]

Originally posted by Dave A.:
3. Test the 'harrott' decision and build yourself a Saiga-like AK with no pistol grip. hrmm.. thinking about it, if you built up one of those Czech VZ58 (?) rifles into a non-pistol gripped gun it wouldn't be an AK variant at all, but good luck finding 10 round mags for it.

I can't wait to see which way will the test case go, I am glad to see that someone is brave enough to be the the guinea pig.
Personally, I guess I am too chicken.

[bwiese]

An AK style rifle w/fixed mag really can't be loaded from the top like the CaliFALs can.

There are pump AKs but somehow these receivers are slightly different than reg AK receivers.

I would not do ANYTHING with AK or AR receivers in CA without prior express written DOJ permission or certification. When you build these, you are taking a risk of having a Kasler AR or AK before the mod.

Harrott decision is applicable to commerically mfgd AR, AK rifles not already found on DOJ Roster of AR15-series And AK Weapons; since this decision came about due to confusion over what is an AR/AK model it listed specific makes/models. It would be impossible to have homebuilt models specifically listed by make and model (i.e., "BillyBob Model A"). The legislative intent of SB23 law was to ban further AWs constructed in or imported to CA and Harrott was a clarification: a court could well find it does not give carte blanche to go build new rifles since any homebuilt AK receiver would not be on the list.

We're dealing with felony territory here now. Got a spare $25K for your defense? Awful lot of prospective grief to get a crappy rifle.


Bill Wiese
San Jose

[Charliegone]

This guy came up with a bolt hold open device for the ak-47.

http://www.geocities.com/akcatch/

You know I was thinking the same thing? The problem is you have to build it out of state, since ak and ar receivers are completely banned. I would be great if some how you could attach the dust cover to the bolt hold open so that when you unload it completely it would hold the dust cover back as well. You could use stripper clips from top, but I am not to familiar how the ak-47's receiver works. I know theres a piston on top (I believe) that runs through all the way back right? Please, if am incorrect, tell me

[saki302]

Yep- the piston runs all the way forwards even when the bolt is back), so really, the only way to top-load an AK fixed mag would be to strip the thing. You could try doing it through the open port with the bolt locked back, but I think it might be too tight.

*I* didn't volunteer to test 'Harrotts'- just thinking aloud

If I were to build one now, I'd weld the mag to the receiver to be safe, but that's me being paranoid. You can weld the mag in place before completion on a bent-channel-build 80% receiver before finishing it, but I don't know what you'd do to fix the mag on a press-stamped receiver before going to 100%- though technically a mag won't lock in place until the trunion's fixed. You could just slice off the front mag lug- you won't need it once the mag is welded up.

If the FAB-10 is not an AR, I don't see how a 360 degree welded mag onto an AK receiver would be an AK- that's not even a test case for Harrot's anymore (especially since it's even less reversible than the FAB-10- remove it and the receiver will surely be destroyed)...

-Dave

[saki302]

PS- Bill,

I'd still be wary of whatever DOJ gives in writing- I've seen letters from field agents which are clearly wrong if you have a rudimentary understanding of some of the laws- if they say OK, it may not be!

The item #3 (mag fed AK semi with no pistol grip) doesn't violate any legislative intent of SB23 unless you put a pistol grip on it- SB23 only cares about evil features- did you mean 'year 2000 Roberti-Roos', or whatever the heck they tried to modify it into (don't know the exact name of that law- series weapons or named weapons weren't mentioned in SB23 itself if I remember right)?
The Saiga was actually buyable in early 2000, but was not when they added it to the list of named weapons. I met a guy who had to register his later on (March or may 2000?) after they named it.. As an un-named weapon, it does pass all requirements of SB23.

-Dave

[bwiese]

Originally posted by Dave A.:
I'd still be wary of whatever DOJ gives in writing- I've seen letters from field agents which are clearly wrong if you have a rudimentary understanding of some of the laws- if they say OK, it may not be!

Absolutely. I should have clarified this. Never trust anything a desk jockey/phone clerk says. Sometimes these people are called 'analysts'. And field agents can be just as bad.

With BATF, for example, I'd only trust legality of something that came signed from the Tech Branch (Ed Owen used to sign those).

If you got preapproval in the way Vulcan, etc. did for their AR-like lowers, that approval would be coming from sufficiently high up that I'd consider it OK.

The item #3 (mag fed AK semi with no pistol grip) doesn't violate any legislative intent of SB23 unless you put a pistol grip on it- SB23 only cares about evil features- did you mean 'year 2000 Roberti-Roos', or whatever the heck they tried to modify it into (don't know the exact name of that law- series weapons or named weapons weren't mentioned in SB23 itself if I remember right)?

I shoulda clarified a bit. SB23 added by-feature bans. "Legislative intent" of assault weapon laws was to ban assault weapons - first there was Roberti-Roos, then SB23. Right during SB23 reg period (Aug 2000) Kasler threw ARs and AKs back under Roberti-Roos.

With this envelopment, making your own AR or AK and relying on [i]Harrott[/] protection for homebuilt gun is very dubious to me; that's not a loophole, and courts could go along with 'legislative intent'.

The Saiga was actually buyable in early 2000, but was not when they added it to the list of named weapons. I met a guy who had to register his later on (March or may 2000?) after they named it. As an unnamed weapon, it does pass all requirements of SB23.

Yes, it was. So was the Valmet Hunter. These were determined to use AK actions.


Bill Wiese
San Jose

[saki302]

Legislative intent is a funny thing though-

Roberti-Roos intended to ban all 'assault weapons', but copycats came out almost immediately afterwards. Still not something I'd play around with

-Dave

PS- Bill,

Have you read through all of Kasler and Harrott already? I've been trying to read through the two decisions this morning (slow day here!), and the Harrott decision sure seems to strike out the 'series' designation for all weapons, even homebuilts, especially if you read the dissenting judge's opinion. Kasler doesn;t really say anything except to reaffirm the old Roberti-roos law, and the right to add new weapons to the list.
I think Roberti-roos always said 'series' when it referred to the AK-type weapons, yet the MAK-90's were available for sale in '93-94.. go figure.. As long as your receiver doesn't say 'AK' anywhere and you have a chunk of money to toss at a lawyer, I'd put the odds on Harrott's deciding the case..
Now I'm going to go stick my head in a cold bucket of water to wash out all the 'lawyer speak'...

[devo681]

Why not buy a vz58 rifle from Marstar? Get someone to weld a muzzle brake on the barrel for legal barrel length and pin one of the 10rd mags provided, then have it shipped over with the use ATF form 9?. It load like a SKS, looks like a AK-47. It is completely different than an AK47 in terms of operation. Therefore, CADOJ can not bust you saying it's a AK47, because it's not. Sorry for any misspellings

[HEUER]

vz58

Last time I checked with Marstar they would not ship to the U.S. (I was checking about Norinco M14's so that may have something to do with it)

[saki302]

Yup- anything made in China is not importable to the U.S..

-Dave

[imported_Skammy]

I sent off a letter about Harrott vs. Kings a couple weeks back.. I'll make a new topic once I get it if its any good.

[imported_kantstudien]

Originally posted by bwiese:

There are pump AKs but somehow these receivers are slightly different than reg AK receivers.

I think the pump-AK had the exact same receiver (Romanian) as the semi-auto.