Notes on a Shitty Chinese SKS

questions, comments , film clips and pictures on guns and weapons and HEST.

Moderator: Hitoru

Postby yorick » Mon May 05, 2008 9:37 am

Mind Riot wrote:Hope you got the compliance kits in those.



Heya MindRiot, WTF is "compliance kit?"

Lemme guess some kinda silly california routine that makes the Siminov not look so scarey? Y'all gotta understand SKS wrote the dopey Assault Weapons Ban that since been overturned.

SRR, haint no such thing as cheap piece of shit firearm. Originally imported for peanuts, Russian 53 w/blonde laminated furniture fetched $450 at Louahville gunshow just coupla yrs ago. Am still kickin myself in the arse for tradin the SKS Romanian 59 for beat-up Persian mauser 24/47.

Hell, if you can still buy Norinco 'paratrooper version' with 16 1/2" barrel up ther at Canukistan for $139 then yer damned lucky. Haint no finer collectable lightweight shootable firearm than SKS says me.


(:=
User avatar
yorick
malum discordiae
 
Posts: 2044
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 2:51 am

Postby OneLungMcClung » Mon May 05, 2008 5:05 pm

yorick wrote:
Mind Riot wrote:Hope you got the compliance kits in those.



Heya MindRiot, WTF is "compliance kit?"

Lemme guess some kinda silly california routine that makes the Siminov not look so scarey? Y'all gotta understand SKS wrote the dopey Assault Weapons Ban that since been overturned.



I think he means the 922 compliance act. Its Federal: you can have a foreign manufactured firearm, but if you modify it in anyway (like putting a new stock on it) you have to make it "922 Compliant", which means that a certain % of the parts have to be of American Manufacture. For once, it's a regulation not about gun control, but US businesses - US gun makers didn't want to compete with cheaper foreign guns and lobbied for this. They used gun control as the cover, and got Dems and other hand-wringers behind them. This is why AKs that come into this country now will have a US manufactured variety of parts. Mine has a Century receiver, Tapco Stock, and I think the Fire Control mechanism is US also.

Someone correct me if Im wrong.
User avatar
OneLungMcClung
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 2177
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 12:26 am

Postby Hitoru » Mon May 05, 2008 5:38 pm

$139 for a Norinco Para model is pretty cheap, I've been seeing them go for up to $350.

As for the compliance with 922 R My Yugo SKS's have the correct parts count as required by this asinine law. And the Norinco Para is grandfathered.

Title 18 United States Code (USC) § 922(r) prohibits assembly of certain semiautomatic rifles and shotguns from imported parts. The implementing regulations in title 27, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 178, § 178.39, provides that no person shall assemble a semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun using more than 10 imported parts listed in paragraph (c) of this section, if the assembled firearm is prohibited from importation under section 925(d)(3) as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes.

(c) For purposes of this section, the term imported parts are:

(1) Frames, receivers, receiver castings, forgings or
stampings
(2) Barrels
(3) Barrel extensions
(4) Mounting blocks (trunions)
(5) Muzzle attachments
(6) Bolts
(7) Bolt carriers
(8) Operating rods
(9) Gas pistons
(10) Trigger housings
(11) Triggers
(12) Hammers
(13) Sears
(14) Disconnectors
(15) Buttstocks
(16) Pistol grips
(17) Forearm handguards
(18) Magazine bodies
(19) Followers
(20) Floorplates

This ruling does not affect what is probably the easiest way
to avoid section 922(r), replacing enough parts on the imported
weapon with U.S. made parts so as to have it no longer be
considered "imported". There is a list of parts that count toward
this in the ATF regulation at 27 CFR 178.39. As long as the
firearm has an imported parts content of ten or fewer of the listed
parts, it is not considered to be imported. Several makers,
including Tapco , offer kits of U.S. made parts for
imported semi-automatic rifles, so that the completed firearm is no
longer considered to be an imported firearm, and is thus not
subject to section 922(r).
What are you? Some short sighted trigger puller? - RR3 .
Mr.wRong.
User avatar
Hitoru
Arbol Basura
 
Posts: 3549
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 8:49 pm
Location: Tejas

Postby crotalus01 » Mon May 05, 2008 10:56 pm

I really really hate the BATFE, and I know they don't play, but seriously....has ANYONE ever been fucked with for not being in compliance with 922(r) over a cheap ass SKS??
That seems like it would be a stretch even for BATFE...
Remember, Salad is NOT food. Salad is what food EATS...
User avatar
crotalus01
Professional Skydiver
 
Posts: 1457
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 4:02 pm
Location: Memphis, TN USA

Postby OneLungMcClung » Mon May 05, 2008 11:07 pm

crotalus01 wrote:I really really hate the BATFE, and I know they don't play, but seriously....has ANYONE ever been fucked with for not being in compliance with 922(r) over a cheap ass SKS??
That seems like it would be a stretch even for BATFE...


NOTHING is a stretch for the Jackboots at ATF. I think that you get in the shit for 922 if you get caught with it or get caught selling it. And yes, I think they would likely string you for a $139 rifle.

What's funny is that one fo my relatives owns a vineyard/winery and says the ATF agents are just sweet as can be...they aren't in DC, they aren't around dickhead bureaucrats, they get to drive around sunny California and taste wine all day. I guess they're just pricks when it comes to guns.

"Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a Federal Agency..."

Image
User avatar
OneLungMcClung
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 2177
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 12:26 am

Postby Hitoru » Mon May 05, 2008 11:51 pm

1990 18 U.S.C. section 922(r)

Congress reacts to all this funny business by passing a new bill (veto proof) that Bush signs into law. It states that it is illegal to assemble an unimportable firearm from imported parts, or more specifically makes it illegal to assemble any firearm prohibited from importation under 18 U.S.C. section 9235(d)(3). The idea here is to prohibit Importers/Manufactures/Dealers from offering imported firearms to the general public that are not allowed to be imported. There is still no definition of what is unsporting and thus importable in Law, Regulation, or Ruling. Remember guys, wording is important in law, it only makes the act of assembly illegal, possession, and transfer are not covered here. Again, the intent was to prohibit B-West and Springfield Inc type activities. There was much argument about what was meant by "imported parts". One could read the law as did the NRA to mean that as long as there was one nonimported part on a rifle it could not be construed to be made of imported parts. The ATF went as far as to tell Kokalis that mere insertion of a 30 round mag into a MAK-90 was worth some jail time. So anyway we were still free to possess and transfer newly converted rifles, such as say a SAR-4800 with a "compact accurizing package" installed, the supposed illegal act was the actual assembly. Thing was, Federal Law/Regulation/Ruling did not define "unsporting", "imported parts", or "assembly". In other words, 922(r) lacked legal definition, or teeth.

Well since this law is so vague in 1993 ATF writes regulation (178.39) that spells out the "10 parts rule" further defines what assembly of imported parts means. It states that only 10 imported parts are allowed in a unsporting imported firearm. The odd part is that the Federal Firearms Regulation Guide that is circulated by the ATF is put out in 1990 and it is to late to include this in it. Both the new Law and it's corresponding Regulation shows up in the 1995 Guide. During the interim many rifles are assembled at home from imported parts without concern to parts count.

The biggest obstacle for enforcing this law (note there are no known 922(r) convictions even thought the law is now 15 years old) is that it prohibits the assembly of a certain firearms that don't pass the "sporting clause" found in 18 U.S.C. section 925(d)(3) but "unsporting" firearms are not defined in Law, Regulation, or Ruling, and may well never be defined in such manor, because it is much more fun to change the rules as you go along. So how can you prosecute someone for building a rifle that is prohibited in 925(d)(3) from importation when there is no description or definition of these firearms in Law, Regulation, or Ruling? A second obstacle for enforcement is that term "assemble" is not defined in Law, Regulation, or Ruling either. Importers/Manufactures/Dealers are forced to comply with 922(r) in that they are directly regulated by the ATF (remember B-West?)

1994 Policy change, Chinese fun is over

Chinese ugly guns no longer approved for import effective 05-27-94.

1994 Crime Bill; 18 U.S.C. section 922(v) and (w)

No longer the law of the land, so not relevant from a legal standpoint (well, except for the few still in the slammer for violating it). This was a failed next incremental step at "gun control". In part It consisted of a list of prohibited firearms. The list was compiled by picking ugly guns found in gun annuals of the time. The thing was poorly written. The biggest effect of 922(v) was that US firearm production reaches WWII levels, and consequently there is a mass proliferation of semiautomatic firearms in the US. While 922(v) and (w) were law, there were a few semiautomatic firearms and detachable mags manufactured with "law enforcement only" markings. No Federal Law exists that prohibits possession, transfer or manufacture of semiautomatic firearms or mags with the markings "law enforcement only". In fact, you could engrave you firearm with the markings "illegal firearm" and it would still be legal to possess and transfer.
What are you? Some short sighted trigger puller? - RR3 .
Mr.wRong.
User avatar
Hitoru
Arbol Basura
 
Posts: 3549
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 8:49 pm
Location: Tejas

Postby yorick » Tue May 06, 2008 12:22 am

Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a Federal Agency...


Yep, BATF as federal agency oughta be dismantled same as DOT was broken down and re-established at State instaed of Federal level. States already have varied gunlaws all over the map so cuttin ties with federal bureaucracy makes perfect sense for cleaner enforcement of whatever the fuck BATF claims to do anyhow.

I will attend the NRA 2008 Convention at Louisville next week and ask the BATF booth why they havent disbanded and re-invented themselves at state and local levels instaed.



(:=
Last edited by yorick on Tue May 06, 2008 12:29 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
yorick
malum discordiae
 
Posts: 2044
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 2:51 am

Postby OneLungMcClung » Tue May 06, 2008 12:24 am

Good stuff, thanks 19 D 20.

Back to the subject at hand - SRR, did you fix your SKS, or finally send it to SKS heaven?
User avatar
OneLungMcClung
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 2177
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 12:26 am

Postby SRR » Tue May 20, 2008 1:17 am

I had another chance to head to the range and fire it this morning.

It's definitely a firing pin problem. Not striking the primer hard enough. I've heard replacing the springs can fix this. I'm a gonna do some more research.
"May these times be the stone that sharpens our steel." - السيد الحصاد
User avatar
SRR
Hippie Dangerous
 
Posts: 4399
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:07 pm

Postby soulohio » Tue May 20, 2008 2:08 am

yorick wrote:
I will attend the NRA 2008 Convention at Louisville next week and ask the BATF booth why they havent disbanded and re-invented themselves at state and local levels instaed.



(:=


an d so?
where are you going? why don't you walk the wheel with us? what is the matter my american friend? what has upset you?
User avatar
soulohio
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 2640
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 1:49 pm
Location: beirutt

Postby yorick » Tue May 20, 2008 4:20 am

.... ther was no BATF booth at the convention

SRR, firing pin on the sks free-floats in the sliding block. Could be you've got bent firing pin or its hanging up at the FP retaining pin. What kinda ammo you using? Milsurp stuff is hard-primer. And Wolf's been known to bend a few firing pins. Meanwhile have you completely disassembled the sliding block and cleaned firing pin chamber entirely of cosmolene? Also a bur on the firing pin groove can cause it to hang on the retaining pin. Emery paper works well for smoothing things out. To remove the FP retaining pin you've gotta hit it with small seldge hammer and nail set at its narrowest end.

Image



(:=
User avatar
yorick
malum discordiae
 
Posts: 2044
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 2:51 am

Postby jakeleg » Sat May 24, 2008 3:20 am

Yorick,
I have read that the free floating pin can cause slamfires with the softer primer on US ammo. Just the opposite problem of what SRR is talking about. This true?

http://www.murraysguns.com/sksown.htm

Disassembly of the pin

http://www.surplusrifle.com/sks/boltdisassemble/hs.asp
jakeleg
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 9:33 pm

Postby Hitoru » Sat May 24, 2008 12:47 pm

Jakeleg, like the article stated the rifle can run away and go full auto if the firing pin is stuck/frozen in the bolt.
What are you? Some short sighted trigger puller? - RR3 .
Mr.wRong.
User avatar
Hitoru
Arbol Basura
 
Posts: 3549
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 8:49 pm
Location: Tejas

Postby yorick » Sat May 24, 2008 6:25 pm

Jake - FP can malfunction one of two ways: either the chamber and hole gits clogged with cosmo etc, and/or burred groove gits caught on the retaining pin and dont let it reach all the way, pent pin too can git trapped inside the block. Or for similar reasons FP gits stuck at other end in the hole and slam fires the entire mag. Healthy SKS free-floating firing pin should shake like a baby's rattle in the sliding block.



(:=
User avatar
yorick
malum discordiae
 
Posts: 2044
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 2:51 am

Previous

Return to Guns, Knives, Gear, Tech and ....STUFF!!!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 81 guests