Backup on the move to CA

[six seven tango]

Does anybody have a copy of, or know where I can one, the ATF letter stating that replacing the GL with a compensator or brake does not violate 922r?

I keep seeing on many forums that it exists, but have not been able to find one through google searches or forum searches.

As long as the comp/brake is US made, do you even need a letter?

[scottyb]

As long as the comp/brake is US made, do you even need a letter?

I think so, based on the 10 parts or less rule in 922r, without it it would seem you would have to swap 4 more parts with American ones (in addition to the brake).

[six seven tango]

Arrrrrrgh Now my head hurts.

I see what you mean. I forgot about all the little technicalities in that little jewel of a reg (922r). Removing the grenade launcher to make it CA compliant turns it into a non-C&R, making it non-compliant with 922r at the same time.

I found this, but I can't find a copy of the actual letter...

From:
Dept. Of Treasury
BATF
Wash. DC

To:
[name deleted]
11250 Waples Mill Road
Fairfax, VA.

Dear Sir:

In answer to your specific questions, the following modifications of an SKS type rifle WOULD _NOT_ BE A VIOLATION of Section 922 (r):

1. Replace the existing stock and handguard with a non-folding wooden or synthetic stock having either a Monte Carlo or thumbhole design.

2. Attach a muzzle mounted recoil compensator, provided that thedevice is not also designed as a flash suppressor.

3. Replace the standard configuration stock with a Monte Carlo or thumbhole style stock and replace the fixed magazine with a detachable magazine. THIS MODIFICATION MAY BE DONE PROVIDED THAT THE BAYONET MOUNT IS COMPLETELY REMOVED FROM THE RIFLE.

4. Replace the existing 10 round magazine with a fixed magazine of a larger capacity.

5. Replace the existing 10 round magazine with a fixed 5 round magazine or install a block in the well of the 10 round fixed magazine to limit its capacity to 5 rounds.

6. Replace the existing receiver cover with a cover having a telescopic sight based and\or rings.

7. Replace the front and\or rear sight or install an ambidextrous safety.

#2 would lead me to believe that removal of the GL and installation of a comp/brake is allowed, although it doesn't specifically mention the GL.



Have you tried these guys? http://www.sksboards.com/smf/index.php They might be able to help you out.

[Mssr. Eleganté]

ATF hasn't tried to stop any of the big importers/distributors from replacing the grenade launchers on Yugo M59/66s and that's who they'd go after if they thought removing the grenade launcher changed C&R status. ATF says on their web site "that a minor change such as the addition of scope mounts, non-original sights, or sling swivels would not remove a firearm from its original condition." So I'm assuming ATF thinks removing the grenade launcher is a "minor change". They probably also don't want to be in the position of punishing people for destroying grenade launchers. It wouldn't look good in the press.

[six seven tango]

ATF hasn't tried to stop any of the big importers/distributors from replacing the grenade launchers on Yugo M59/66s and that's who they'd go after if they thought removing the grenade launcher changed C&R status. ATF says on their web site "that a minor change such as the addition of scope mounts, non-original sights, or sling swivels would not remove a firearm from its original condition." So I'm assuming ATF thinks removing the grenade launcher is a "minor change". They probably also don't want to be in the position of punishing people for destroying grenade launchers. It wouldn't look good in the press.

Actually, there was an ATF letter in 2002/2003 that said removal of the GL from an SKS did change the C&R status. The quote that I found above does not have a date on it, but tends to agree with your belief. I think the 2 conflicting letters is what's causing the confusion. There could be other ATF opinions that are more recent, but like the OP, I haven't been able to find them.

[Mssr. Eleganté]

Actually, there was an ATF letter in 2002/2003 that said removal of the GL from an SKS did change the C&R status. The quote that I found above does not have a date on it, but tends to agree with your belief. I think the 2 conflicting letters is what's causing the confusion. There could be other ATF opinions that are more recent, but like the OP, I haven't been able to find them.

The letter you posted above is in regard to changing a non-C&R SKS from an importable "sporting" configuration into a non-importable "non-sporting" configuration. It's a slightly different issue than the OP is dealing with on his C&R SKS. For instance, changing the stock on a commercial Chinese SKS from standard to a plastic Monte Carlo would not violate 922(r), but doing the same thing on an SKS that was imported as C&R would be a violation. To avoid 922(r) issues a commercial SKS just has to stay "sporting", but a C&R SKS has to stay "C&R".

[scottyb]

Actually, there was an ATF letter in 2002/2003 that said removal of the GL from an SKS did change the C&R status. The quote that I found above does not have a date on it, but tends to agree with your belief. I think the 2 conflicting letters is what's causing the confusion. There could be other ATF opinions that are more recent, but like the OP, I haven't been able to find them.

Back again. Changing the C&R status isn't a bid deal for the private owner if it was purchased from a 01 FFL, or am I out to lunch?

[six seven tango]

Back again. Changing the C&R status isn't a bid deal for the private owner if it was purchased from a 01 FFL, or am I out to lunch?

[Quiet]

Begs the question of why even put in this list if they are already illegal.

Because some people legally own grenade launchers in CA.

[scottyb]

Did you check with the guys on the sks board like I suggested?

I did. They, for the most part, seem to think that the removal of a GL for ownership in CA is no big deal. Although, I still haven't seen the ATF letter allowing for it. I am still looking though.

[six seven tango]

OK, here's a couple of questions for the more knowledgeable members. If the OP was to change enough parts for the SKS in question to be 922r compliant, would he be in violation of any other laws because the gun was originally imported as C&R?
Would there be anything wrong with it being converted back to original configuration if it was taken back out of CA, or does it lose C&R status permanently if altered?

[Quiet]

If the OP was to change enough parts for the SKS in question to be 922r compliant, would he be in violation of any other laws because the gun was originally imported as C&R?

No.

Would there be anything wrong with it being converted back to original configuration if it was taken back out of CA, or does it lose C&R status permanently if altered?

No.

[Mssr. Eleganté]

...Although, I still haven't seen the ATF letter allowing for it. I am still looking though.

There is no ATF letter that says removing the grenade launcher from a Yugo SKS is allowed or forbidden with regard to changing C&R status. But all of the big importers and distributors (with whom ATF actually does enforce 922(r) violations) had no problems doing it. If ATF had a problem with it then they would have gone after the importers and distributors who were doing it.

[six seven tango]

Thanks, Quiet.

[saki302]

Weld a blob of metal underneath the front of the GL. Now, it no longer works as a grenade launcher- nothing will slip past the weld blob.

People have also welded rings around them too, but IMO the blob is just as effective. Done right, you cannot simply file off a blob of HARD welded metal either (unless you have diamond files or a power sander)- it'll ruin steel files.