Gunco Forums banner

Imbel Semi-auto Receiver...."NO MORE"

7K views 22 replies 16 participants last post by  Slugger 
#1 ·
Perhaps someone could answer my question on the dissapearance of the receivers from the USA market....I've never actually heard the cause of their dissapearance.Was it political------their's,our's,the UN? I'd been considering picking up a kit & receiver a few years back,but circumstances took me elsewhere. Now the receivers seem to be no longer available/allowed in the USA.Perhaps a history lesson would be of interest to others besides myself....anyone got a simple answer?
 
#2 · (Edited)
Yep, banned from import by US law. Same reg that keeps bbls out. For a few years they let in some receivers and bbls for "replacement or repair" purposes but finally cut out that exception a year or two back.

18 U.S.C. ? 925(d)(3):

(d) The Attorney General shall authorize a firearm or ammunition to be imported or brought into the United States or any possession thereof if the firearm or ammunition -

(3) is of a type that does not fall within the definition of a firearm as defined in section 5845(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and is generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes, excluding surplus military firearms, except in any case where the Attorney General has not authorized the importation of the firearm pursuant to this paragraph, it shall be unlawful to import any frame, receiver, or barrel of such firearm which would be prohibited if assembled; or
 
#10 ·
Yep, banned from import by US law. Same reg that keeps bbls out. For a few years they let in some receivers and bbls for "replacement or repair" purposes but finally cut out that exception a year or two back.

18 U.S.C. ? 925(d)(3):

(d) The Attorney General shall authorize a firearm or ammunition to be imported or brought into the United States or any possession thereof if the firearm or ammunition -

(3) is of a type that does not fall within the definition of a firearm as defined in section 5845(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and is generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes, excluding surplus military firearms, except in any case where the Attorney General has not authorized the importation of the firearm pursuant to this paragraph, it shall be unlawful to import any frame, receiver, or barrel of such firearm which would be prohibited if assembled; or
Wow, thanks to my government I now feel so much safer now. I know as I send in my taxes this week that the money is well spent and they have my best interest in mind.
The day of building inexpensive FAL's has passed us by. Best bet is to keep an eye out and buy them as they become available. I had 11 of them built when you could do it and the cheapest one I would sell now is $1100.
Like my President Charlton Heston said, "From my cold dead hands".
 
#4 ·
IIRC the imbel gear logo receivers have been selling for $450 +
 
#5 ·
OMG 450 and to think that I paid less than 400 dollars for my whole rifle.
 
#7 ·
bluejack - the other importer was PAC.
 
#9 ·
That's the same way mine is.
 
#12 ·
Not exactly. The "import ban" banned certain semi auto firearms from import, way back around 89. Around a year or so later B-West was making "US AK's" by assembling Chinese parts kits onto US made receivers. Enter the 922(r) regs to require enough US parts that it was no longer cost effective to do so. Over the next decade enough small businesses started making US parts that it was once again practical to crank out "US made" firearms from kits. The purpose of the "10 parts rule" was being circumvented.

Along about 2000 or so a new rule was proposed to ban the import of the frames and bbls for these firearms, which existing law did give them the power to regulate. For some reason it sneaked through the federal register publication and public comment period and became law. I suspect the reason for this is the .Gov guys assured importers there would be a workaround, which they got in the form of the "for repair or replacement purposes only" restriction on the importers. After 5 years or so of this exemption (which had no basis in the law) ATF "suddenly realized" they had been illegally approving kits since the new reg went into effect and stopped allowing them.

Here we are today with no bbls or receivers imported. Eventually someone will see money to be made and provide product. Unfortunately that will price a lot of people out of the hobby. I own several guns I built from parts kits, many in the $100-200 range. When the cost rises to $1000 per build I won't have very many of those.
 
#14 ·
Isn't there a way we could circulate a petition to open the law up to public vote? I'm not talking 200 E-petition signatures, I mean like talking to NRA and getting them to get a petition going on a very large scale, and get this ludicrous barrel/receiver ban lifted...

The receiver and barrel bans totally FAWKED FAL builders over. There's no more of this "cheaper original Mil-Spec receiver built in a specialized factory from blueprints and tooling approved and supplied by FN Herstal themselves" bullshit on the market... Now it's all "reverse-engineered by some dude in his garage" quality stuff... THAT'S what I want! YEAH! -_- (NOT taking into account DSA's receivers, which have been reported as being of VERY good quality, if you can stand the months of waiting.)

And what about barrels?? Fvck, if anything, the precut barrels just encourage more SBR's and Pistols! Easier to clean up the cut mark, slap a gas block on, shorten the gas tube and piston, and have yourself an SBR/Pistol than it is to build yourself an entire barrel system with gas block and time it out correctly (FAL barrels = threaded). :(

[Sarcasm]I mean, if we were allowing people to put together rifles with foreign barrels, well that would mean nothing but MASS MURDER IN OUR STREETS! D: That would mean that "gangbangers" and all the Mafias would be able to get full-auto firearms at the drop of a hat! D: That would mean more school shootings! That would mean more crime!!![/Sarcasm]

(Ever notice how the anti-gun fuckwits are always the least intelligible? ;))


- CK
 
#17 ·
As with any bill, it will have to go through the usual lawmaking process, but there does seem to be a fair number of co-sponsers signing on so we may see a vote this year, hopefully before a new administration has an opportunity to veto it. Right now it's still in committee.
 
#19 ·
I wouldn't expect shrub to give it any help. He's no more progun then Chuck the Schmuck from NY.

I recall buying Imbel's for $179. Now days the receiver alone would cost more than the total price of some of my past builds.
 
#20 ·
I'll see if Conrad/Dorgan/Pomeroy/whoever the f it is in this state won't cosponsor as well. :)


- CK
 
#23 ·
We have allowed our gooberment to hose us for too long. It's time to stand up and make them listen. There is not much difference any more between the two main parties. They are both terrible at actually doing what they say and listening to what the people have to say. The time for peaceable reconciliation is over. They don't listen to that.
Slugger
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top