Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 44

Thread: Bent Saiga?

  1. #31
    BANNED nalioth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    1,529
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)

    Default

    Dude, you're fine under the conditions you've mentioned in this thread. The receiver is the firearm =
    Quote Originally Posted by Contract_Pilot View Post
    I relayed that to him he said he cut out the mag well section.. and already shipped it..
    - and it sounds like the gun was legally demilled to me.


    You should NEVER ask a LEO about the law - they are not required to answer you truthfully and some have been caught telling people LIES so they can visit them later and catch them with the fruits of their lies.

  2. #32
    No Hope For Me 1biggun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    13,510
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)

    Default

    I really like the news paper in the back ground. you can also grt pictures stamped by the certifed what ever you call it that stampes court documnets ect most banks have then. certifed witness Cant rememper the name.

    So make sure the receiver was de-milled to ATF standards and take several pictures
    were are the guide lines for a approved destuction of a rifle like a Saiga? Im not talking a Mil surplus full auto were are the destruction gusde lines for normal rifles pistols shotguns ect. Im guessing that the procedures to demill a full auto would be more than enough for a Saiga. Id just like to see it in writting. I personaly lkie to see the gun reported to the DOJ as destroyed then the numbers should not come back as being currently registerd. I suspose it would come back as destroyed and that would raise some questions to the average LEO. like how the hell do you have a rifle that been susposedly destroyed. its pretty bad when gun owners need to know the law better than the LEO,s to navagate this maze required to build guns and work on them.

    I remember first time I saw a AK pistol I thought there is no way in hell that is legal. but I was wrong.

    Bad decision on the part of the ATF to let them in that way!
    I agree if were going to go through all the motions to register this stuff do it right. how easy would it be for a bad guy to swap reciver shells around to deal in stolen Saigas and SARS. the reciver shell should be stamped with a number the most important part of the the firearm and infact the firearm and its possably the only major compnet that dont have a number makes no sence to me. id would not be suprised if this changes in the future. the hundereds of thouands of home built AKs anad modifed Sagias and SARS has not gone unnoticed by law makers. I expect at some point home builds will require registration like any other firearm to own.

  3. #33
    No Hope For Me 1biggun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    13,510
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)

    Default

    You should NEVER ask a LEO about the law - they are not required to answer you truthfully and some have been caught telling people LIES so they can visit them later and catch them with the fruits of their lies.
    I agree and if they do give you advice you choose to follow document it some how.

    it figures trying to do the right think causes you grief. its your rifle you likely can cut it up any way you want and dont need to report it to anyone figures that rying to gon the extra mile and remove the old one from the system causes a problem some how. Id be looking for a normal trunion any way just to make it take stamdard mags and have a bullet guide already in it.. What does a rommy trunion go for these days???

  4. #34
    Gunco Veteran Markp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Somalia
    Posts
    1,840
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1biggun View Post
    I personaly lkie to see the gun reported to the DOJ as destroyed then the numbers should not come back as being currently registered.

    I agree if were going to go through all the motions to register this stuff do it right.
    Let's remember for a moment that despite being "traceable" there is no "registration" of rifles and shotguns in this country. Rifles and shotguns are NOT registered (in most cases) to people but transferred either through FFL's or via private sale which the government has no business documenting at this time. There is no requirement to document a private party sale within a state, there is no requirement to document the destruction or creation of a receiver, and there sure as hell isn't no requirement to serialize a weapon for your own private use that you built from components.

    Law enforcement officers are NOT experts on the law, otherwise they would be making fat ass money like the Lawyers who are experts on the law. Law enforcement officers are technicians, like EMT's, or dental hygienists. They may know quite a bit, but they are not the experts. I have a lot of respect for these technicians, but just like an EMT isn't a surgeon and a dental hygienist isn't a dentist, a law enforcement officer is not a lawyer.

    I wish you the best of luck... When dealing with the sheriff you might not want to compare the sheriff with a dental hygienist, while they both may be technicians with similar levels of education, the sheriff is likely to have a much larger ego.

    Mark

  5. #35
    Gunco Maniac sjohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    7,452
    Feedback Score
    15 (100%)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Markp View Post
    Well if you have them printed commercially, you have pretty hard proof to ignore. That is probably the best way, upload them to a webservice that lets you print. Third party storage and printing of the image is hard to ignore.

    Mark
    All that proves is when they were printed. That may be enough, but the current newspaper deal is easily verified and shows the date the work was done.
    I have a daughter. I tell her, "911 is what you dial after you're raped. 1911 is what you should have before they try."

  6. #36
    Gunco Veteran Markp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Somalia
    Posts
    1,840
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)

    Default

    So what prevents you from grabbing a paper from 1968 to show your AK is a vietnam battlefield pickup. The paper only shows you did something after the date on the paper, not before... We want to show we did it before a given date. That's why you print them commercially. If you do both you prove that it fell between the publication date and the printing date.

    Mark

  7. #37
    Gunco Maniac sjohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    7,452
    Feedback Score
    15 (100%)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Markp View Post
    So what prevents you from grabbing a paper from 1968 to show your AK is a vietnam battlefield pickup. The paper only shows you did something after the date on the paper, not before... We want to show we did it before a given date. That's why you print them commercially. If you do both you prove that it fell between the publication date and the printing date.

    Mark
    Not the point. You want to show when the receiver was destroyed, not when the NVA gave it to you as a credit to your Rambo-ness. A current date is the important aspect, not some past date. A "before" on today's date and an "after" on the same date.

    The BATF won't care when the NVA gave you the Saiga, only when the receiver was destroyed. By tying before and after destruction pictures to a publication you establish provenance of the destruction.
    I have a daughter. I tell her, "911 is what you dial after you're raped. 1911 is what you should have before they try."

  8. #38
    Gunco Veteran Markp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Somalia
    Posts
    1,840
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sjohnson View Post
    Not the point. You want to show when the receiver was destroyed, not when the NVA gave it to you as a credit to your Rambo-ness. A current date is the important aspect, not some past date. A "before" on today's date and an "after" on the same date.

    The BATF won't care when the NVA gave you the Saiga, only when the receiver was destroyed. By tying before and after destruction pictures to a publication you establish provenance of the destruction.
    I'll let you think about this a little more.

    If you have a picture with a newspaper and the cut receiver, that ONLY means that the receiver was destroyed AFTER the newspaper was printed, not anytime before. You could have done it with photoshop after you were arrested even.

    Take for instance these two pictures. I got these receivers the other day, not in January, 2009.

    The picture doesn't prove anything except that it happened between January, 2009 and NOW.

    Mark

    PS - As someone else stated a notarized copy of a picture and statement of fact would be the strongest evidence.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  9. #39
    Gunco Maniac sjohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    7,452
    Feedback Score
    15 (100%)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sjohnson
    Forget date and time stamps, they can easily be altered. Take a picture with a local newspaper showing the date, before destruction and after. Yes, that too can be forged but not as simply as changing the date on a camera.
    Think some more.

    Lay the uncut receiver on today's newspaper. A REAL newspaper, not a photoshopped picture. Take a picture. Make sure the date is visible.

    Destroy the receiver.

    Lay the destroyed receiver on the same newspaper. Take a picture. Make sure the date is visible.

    You just established provenance that a receiver was destroyed and the date on which it was destroyed. Deliver the destroyed receiver and copies of the pictures to local LEO on that same say. Done.
    I have a daughter. I tell her, "911 is what you dial after you're raped. 1911 is what you should have before they try."

  10. #40
    BANNED nalioth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    1,529
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)

    Default

    There is no law requiring you to report firearm destruction or disposition to anyone.

    Pardon me, if I've missed a California or New Jersey law.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Search tags for this page

There are currently no search engine referrals.
Click on a term to search our site for related topics.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •