is there no cure, doctor?

[CAMPYBOB]

what the hell is WRONG with me??? i know i've gone over the edge, now!
friends...i NEED your help! i have come down with a bad case of bulgarian krink fever...a condition made all the more life threatening when the patient is already incurably afflicted with russian 5.45 malady (also referred to as m.k.s. ...modern kalashnikov syndrome).

yes...i'm gonna buy...and wreck, a perfectly good sar-2 or romack-2 just to gut it for its' rec. and front trunnion!!!

is there any hope, doctors??? give it to me straight...i can take it!

[Kenneth]

make sure you get a pre-ban donor gun if you plan on having folding stock, flame extinguisher, etc.

[CAMPYBOB]

no need ken. section 922r does not apply to sbr's. sect 922v and the nfa 0f '34 does.

[bsims]

Ok - what bardwell seems to be saying is that post 89, pre 94 receiver could be used to make a krinkov. This is because an SBR is exempt from 922(r), and a pre 94 would be grandfathered under 922(v), regardless of whether it is imported or US made. We tend to think that just the US made ones are grandfathered because assembling an imported semi-auto assault rifle would be a violation of 922(r). Actually assembling that rifle into a semi-auto assault weapon is the violation of 922(r), and the SBR gets around that.

However, isn't it the ATF's view that in order to be grandfathered, the firearm MUST have been in the "evil" assault weapon configuration prior to the ban. This is why an ar15 lower manufactured prior to sept 15 94, but not assembled into a complete rifle is not grandfathered. Bardwell seems to have the opinion that an unassembled parts kit is also grandfathered as long as you also in possession of the parts required to make it into a semi-auto assault rifle. Also by this reasoning, an assembled imported, 922(r) compliant rifle is also grandfathered provided that you were in possession of both the rifle and the parts required to make the rifle a semi-auto assault weapon prior to the ban. I guess this makes sense since they seem to consider possessing the parts to make an illegal weapon the same as actually making the evil weapon (i.e., if I get my krinkov parts kit, which includes the folding stock, and I only have post ban guns, I could theorectically be prosecuted for intent to manufacture). The difference seems that YOU need to be in possession of the parts, rather than the reicever sitting in the manufacturers warehouse somewhere. However, even provided this is correct, it seems like you would need to prove that the rifle (or parts kit) were in your possession prior to 922(v). While I realize that one should need to be proven guilty rather than the other way around, it seems to be the other way around with firearms violations. They may not prosecute you, but you probably won't get the gun back unless you can prove it's legal.

So, it may be possible to use a pre-94 receiver, but not a post 94 ban. I believe all the 5.45 guns are post 94, so you'd either need to replace the trunion on a AKM receiver (we're still don't know if that is legal since that is where the serial # is located), or sleeve the barrel to fit in the original trunion.

Regardless, I think I'd have a hard time convincing a smith that this is correct, and I am not an ATF agent trying to make a bust. I don't have the facilities to make or build a gun myself so I may be stuck getting a pre-89 anyway. Best thing to do may be write the ATF about this.

Brian

Brian

[This message has been edited by bsims (edited 01-31-2001).]

[CAMPYBOB]

the way i understand it, ANY reciever will work.

we are no longer talking "assault rifles". we are building "sbr's"

two different animals with two sets of rules.

a brand new ar-15 can become a legal "machinegun" with a rdias in it.

[bsims]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by CAMPYBOB:
the way i understand it, ANY reciever will work.

we are no longer talking "assault rifles". we are building "sbr's"

two different animals with two sets of rules.

a brand new ar-15 can become a legal "machinegun" with a rdias in it. </font>

I can't find anything to back this up right now, but there is a difference between a machine gun and an SBR regarding what regulations they are exempt from. A machine gun is exempt from BOTH 922(r) and 922(v). That is why you can put an rdias in a new ar15 and hang whatever you want from it, or get a new SW-5 hk94 replica, drop in a registered sear and then legally chop the barrel, put on a folding stock, etc. I don't even think it's really so much that a machine gun is exempt from 922(v), rather that the auto sear, registered full auto bolt, whatever is considered the gun when married to the "host". Since the gun (sear) was manufactured before 86, it is obviously grandfathered under 922(v). Bardwell says right in that post than an SBR is indeed subject to 922(v), which is the 94 crime bill. So, any post 94 gun - regardless of whether or not it is an SBR - cannot have all the evil features.

Brian

[CAMPYBOB]

i see no reference to evil features...am i in the wrong section of the document?

below is the g.c.a. of '68, art. 922, section "v".

am i missing something here???

(v)(1) It shall be unlawful for a person to manufacture, transfer, or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon.


(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of the enactment of this subsection.


(3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to --


(A) any of the firearms, or replicas or duplicates of the firearms,

specified in Appendix A to this section, as such firearms were manufactured on October 1, 1993;


(B) any firearm that --


(i) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action;


(ii) has been rendered permanently inoperable; or


(iii) is an antique firearm;


(C) any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than 5 rounds of ammunition; or


(D) any semiautomatic shotgun that cannot hold more than 5 rounds of ammunition in a fixed or detachable magazine.


The fact that a firearm is not listed in Appendix A shall not be construed to mean that paragraph (1) applies to such firearm. No firearm exempted by this subsection may be deleted from Appendix A so long as this subsection is in effect.


(4) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to --


(A) the manufacture for, transfer to, or possession by the United States or a department or agency of the United States or a State or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State, or a transfer to or possession by a law enforcement officer employed by such an entity for purposes of law enforcement (whether on or off duty);


(B) the transfer to a licensee under title I of the Atomic Energy Act of

1954 for purposes of establishing and maintaining an on-site physical

protection system and security organization required by Federal law, or

possession by an employee or contractor of such licensee on-site for such

purposes or off-site for purposes of licensee-authorized training or

transportation of nuclear materials;


(C) the possession, by an individual who is retired from service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited from receiving a firearm, of a semiautomatic assault weapon transferred to the individual by the agency upon such retirement; or


(D) the manufacture, transfer, or possession of a semiautomatic assault

weapon by a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer for the purposes of

testing or experimentation authorized by the Secretary.

[CAMPYBOB]

damnit! now i'm getting conflicting info on the 1994 crime bill ruling!

i wish these idiots would agree on the dang laws!!!

basically, the SBR is still a title one gun, not a machine gun, so you still have to follow the 94 ban rules, If you gun didn't have a folding stock on it before 94, Which a SAR-2 couldn't, they you have to have fixed stock, no flash hider etc.
If in doubt, write a letter to the Tech branch or email James Bardwell.
If You build a krink on a post ban receiver, and still have the folding stock, don't you think alot more people would have been building them, and they would have been alot cheaper than $2500 or so?

[bsims]

Doesn't 922(r) specifically deal with imported guns, while 922(v) is a catch-all? I understand that 922(r) does not apply, so you could essentially build an import SBR in the same configuration as new domestic semi-auto, but since 922(v) still applies, I don't see how you could have a folding stock or flash hider. Even though an SBR is an NFA weapon, it is still a RIFLE, not a machine gun or AOW, so all the "evil features" restrictions still apply - if not as strict as import restrictions, still the same as a US rifle.

Brian

[CAMPYBOB]

an sbr is proscribed under the n.f.a. of '34. it is not treated the same as a high capacity, semi-automatic "assault rifle".

see james bardwell's sight. he has stated that sbr's are not subject to 922r, nor the usa parts count issue. i'll get you a link,

[CAMPYBOB]

the quote from mr. bardwell: "It could also be assembled
if registered as a short barreled rifle; short
barreled rifles are not subject to section
922(r), although they are subject to sec-
tion 922(v),"


the link to the entire thread: http://www.ak-47.net/akcgi/Forum15/HTML/000248.html

[CAMPYBOB]

looks like i'll build this thing up as a "post-ban". (welded folder, altered flash suppressor). i just can't see wrecking a perfectly good pre '89 to build on.

perhaps one of those pre '94 hungarians would make a good donar?

[Ugh!]

Campy,

If you are thinking about using a Hungarian, why not get one of the new Hungarian AK-74 receivers from Global Trades? Why spend all the money for an SA-85, when all you need is the receiver. Just a thought.

[decoy]

hello, I'm new here and after reading this thread I'm very confused. My question is can I use my MAC-90, which is pre 94, to build a sbr on with a folding stock, or do I need to find a pre 89 doner?

you can use your MAK -90 but you will have to have a fixed folder, If you want a Folder, you need to chop up a preban...

[CAMPYBOB]

decoy, as i understand it, it your mac was as "assault rifle" prior to sept. 13, 1994 (let's say you added a flash suppressor and pistol grip), it is "legal" to build a folding krink with functional flash suppressor on your rec..

the tough part is "proving" your mak "was" an assault rifle prior to that date.

[negative1x]

Guys MAK90 came into the country in 1990 if you look close the bayonet lug was ground, threads on the muzzle removed and it came with a Butthole stock. Further depending on the Importer you may be able to see on the lower left front of the receive a slight grind depression this is where it used to say AK-47. So a MAK90 is post 89 ban but pre 94 ban. NO MAk90 or NHM91s came in the country before feb 89, these types are all post 89 and subject to their restrictions.

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

[bsims]

To even further confuse matters, Bardwell says that a pre-94 gun in sporting configuration (ie, butthole stock, no f/s) can still be grandfathered as long as you had the parts in your possession to make it into an (illegal) assault rifle at the time.

It was also suggested that since 922(r) only banned the _manufacturing_ of an imported assault rifle, and not the possession, that an illegally assembled post 89 gun could still be grandfathered under 922(v) as long as it was illegally assembled before sept 13 94. The statue of limitations is five years for the manufacturing, so at this point in time, it seems like you could have such a firearm and not be prosecuted. Of course, there still may be confiscation to worry about.

However, if you now SBRed it, it would then be exempt from 922(r), and it is almost like a "clean" gun. Imagine the ATF coming to your door to get you for an illegal assault rifle, and you explaining it is now legal because you illegally converted it back in 91 - hehe. My guess is that it wouldn't go over very well even if they couldn't prosecute you.

Oh - what a tangled web THEY weave. Even if it could possibly be legal, my guess would be that any competent smith would not want to touch it with a 10 foot pole, so you'd probably need the facilities and skills to do it yourself, which leaves me out.

Brian

[This message has been edited by bsims (edited 02-02-2001).]

[CAMPYBOB]

brian..that is why i'm just going to build mine up with a fixed stock and doctored suppressor. i'm not risking my freedom on some shmaltzy short, worthless rifle. hell, i've got two folders, but i refuse to chop 'em up to build an innacurate, short range blaster on.

[bsims]

I was originally going to go the postban route as well, but as I mentioned before, I will need to have someone build it for me regardless. So for me, with the cost of the kit, tax stamp, gunsmithing fees, the extra $$$ for a preban isn't too much compared to the whole.

Oh BTW - you haven't by any chance gone by snorkelbob elsewhere? Similar mannerisms, similar name...

Brian

[This message has been edited by bsims (edited 02-02-2001).]

[CAMPYBOB]

no...i'm campy on all the boards...although i like spongebob/spongebobsquarepat's posts over on ar15dotcom. he's a card!

the cheapest pre-ban norinco is 8 bones around here. i i won't chop fine bulgy parts to fit in a chicom rec. i hope to do this krink for 6-7 bones.

$200 tax
$235 kit/sling shipped
$80 $59 krinks+ship+ffl
$40 park job
$100+ i'll let a pro headspace and pin bbl. i value my health!

somewhere in that ballpark, hopefully (and still twice what the pos is worth...heheh!)

I just bought 4 NIB Norincos prebans for $600ea..hehe
Prebans aren't worth shit around here..

Picked up a preban Oly AR for $500, not to long ago..

[CAMPYBOB]

yes, but....

let's just say for sake of arguement that you used some usa parts (i never saw 'em, but ekie and another guy swear they were available in '93) and "restored" your mak-90 to an ak-47...all the evil features (actually, adding only "one" would have made it an assault weapon). this was not "illegal" or "banned". only the "importation" of certain rifles was banned. only the manufacture from imported parts requirement was made law. sticking 5 parts from the usa into your mak had the same effect back then as it does now...only the "evil features" requirement was not made law untill 1994.

thus, you had/have a "pre-sept. 13 1994-ban" rifle that was/is an "assault weapon"....suitable for retaining the evil features built on its' receiver in 2001.

[This message has been edited by CAMPYBOB (edited 02-02-2001).]

[Ugh!]

Hey send some of those cheap prebans our way!

[1 Patriot-of-many]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by d&ts:
I just bought 4 NIB Norincos prebans for $600ea..hehe
Prebans aren't worth shit around here..

Picked up a preban Oly AR for $500, not to long ago..</font>

Where the hell is that????Please email some links to these cheap prebans....
Robert

[CAMPYBOB]

oh yeah!?! OH YEAH!?! well THAT'S NUTHIN'!!!

i just ordered me a $59 HESSE receiver! i'll show you who's cheap!

heheheheh!

[ophor]

My two cents?
Now two my understanding their was no ban on assault rifles just restrictions on how many they would be importing on preban rifles in "89"
Now what the atf did was change the look of rifles at this time making them more politically correct then. Wich they shouldnt have done since the ban didnt go into effect till sept 14 1994. If you want to know more ask ekie he had disscussed this on the assault web in detail. all those 89 guns were changed by the atf discetfully when the ban wasnt ineffect at all like those polytech they are selling with the underfolding bayonet cut off to meet atf standards? wich was BS! they were preban in this country before the ban . so this means they butchered a perfectly good preban for nothing to meet 94 ban standards why?
because people really dont know what to do with these confusing laws . noone really knows what is what anymore except people on this board. if you ask anyone on the street they will say your not suppose to have that they have no clue to the laws ug ! this is why they need to overturn the gun laws, too many, too confusing, too stupid to keep up with and in the end the crime goes up and the law abiding citizen gets hurt and why to just get elected into office!

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

[TP]

Can someone explain to me how i can get
by without doing the SBR, or is this just adding to the already confusing situation.

Thanks TP

[CAMPYBOB]

add 5 usa made parts. (6, if keeping the flash suppressor/booster)

weld the stock open.

weld on a bbl. extension to get 16" min. length.

doctor the flash suppressor.

[mg34ssx]

Warning !! There is no statuate of limitations on illeagaly assembled firearms. If there were, we could all build them, and hide them for 5 years.

[CAMPYBOB]

mg34ss, i thought the gca of '68 stipulates 5 years for prosecution. confiscation probably has no limit.

STAY LEGAL, GUYS!