The FAL Files  

Go Back   The FAL Files > Weapon Specific Forums > The L1A1, inch-pattern, and Indian Files

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old August 10, 2015, 19:02   #1
slothman
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 72415
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: fresno ca
Posts: 4
Century- help with ID?

hey guys....just bought this Century. Can you please help ID it? I believe it is a British Franken FAL lol. I can't tell what the upper is. Any idea on the year? Also- where can I buy a new Stock and grip ?! And what kind do I need? Thanks for the help !

slothman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 10, 2015, 19:04   #2
slothman
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 72415
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: fresno ca
Posts: 4




slothman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 10, 2015, 19:29   #3
Vulcanator
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 76076
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 251
Getting a proper stock and pistol grip grip will be no problem. Just post a thread on the Marketplace forum, or do an internet search for L1A1 parts. You will need to get a replacement stud/nut for the lower to attach the pistol grip as Century remove those to put that awful thumbhole stock on it. As for the receiver, it looks like an Imbel to me, are there any markings on it? if it's Imbel, it's a good receiver.
Vulcanator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 10, 2015, 19:44   #4
RPBII
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 19720
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,580
Argentine upper with mixed Brit parts.
RPBII is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 10, 2015, 19:59   #5
gunplumber
Arrogant Bastard
Gold Contributor
 
gunplumber's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 96
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Surprise, AZ
Posts: 23,169
Ah - you're the one who beat me to it by 15 minutes from that store in Yuma. I was trying to get it to strip for parts.

Yeah, Argy receiver imported 1989-1992 (Bell & Carelson fiberglass thumbhole, switched to their own maybe 1992 to cutoff in 1994)

And I think that's a $125+ QD Bipod on it, by the way. Which isn't designed to fit that rifle, and why you have no front sling swivel.

Also, your receiver is NOT cut for the folding cocking handle, so may be of particular interest for someone doing an argy build.

Looks like an Indian rear sight.

Here's my blog on the conversion. http://www.arizonaresponsesystems.co...humbhole.shtml
__________________
T. Mark Graham
Master Gunsmith
Arizona Response Systems, LLC

Posts by Daniel Lombard, R1shooter, DS Arms.
gunplumber is a domestic terrorist, selling out his country . . . .IMBEL = import crap. . .FN has no barrel timing spec! . . . gunplumber may be an asshole, but at least he tells the truth
gunplumber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 11, 2015, 10:32   #6
slothman
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 72415
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: fresno ca
Posts: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunplumber View Post
Ah - you're the one who beat me to it by 15 minutes from that store in Yuma. I was trying to get it to strip for parts.

Yeah, Argy receiver imported 1989-1992 (Bell & Carelson fiberglass thumbhole, switched to their own maybe 1992 to cutoff in 1994)

And I think that's a $125+ QD Bipod on it, by the way. Which isn't designed to fit that rifle, and why you have no front sling swivel.

Also, your receiver is NOT cut for the folding cocking handle, so may be of particular interest for someone doing an argy build.

Looks like an Indian rear sight.

Here's my blog on the conversion. http://www.arizonaresponsesystems.co...humbhole.shtml
gunplumber, sorry I beat ya to it lol...I saw it on gunsamerica and bought it ASAP...I have been wanting a FAL for a REALLY long time, and couldn't afford $1400 for a DSA FAL. I bought this rifle without test firing so I HOPE all is well.

So is the Argy upper more desirable? I am assuming this is one of the "better" Century builds ?? Will my metric mags be OK in this rifle ?
slothman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 11, 2015, 10:37   #7
gunplumber
Arrogant Bastard
Gold Contributor
 
gunplumber's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 96
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Surprise, AZ
Posts: 23,169
They tend to be better than later ones. Parts are good. Thumbhole means (at that time) that no US parts were required.
__________________
T. Mark Graham
Master Gunsmith
Arizona Response Systems, LLC

Posts by Daniel Lombard, R1shooter, DS Arms.
gunplumber is a domestic terrorist, selling out his country . . . .IMBEL = import crap. . .FN has no barrel timing spec! . . . gunplumber may be an asshole, but at least he tells the truth
gunplumber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 11, 2015, 11:14   #8
lysanderxiii
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 70039
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: West Harlow, NC
Posts: 414
If you remove the thumbhole stock you will start requiring US parts to be 922R compliant...

(unless it was imported before November 30, 1990)

Last edited by lysanderxiii; August 11, 2015 at 11:20.
lysanderxiii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 11, 2015, 11:19   #9
slothman
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 72415
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: fresno ca
Posts: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by lysanderxiii View Post
If you remove the thumbhole stock you will start requiring US parts to be 922R compliant...
how many US parts?
slothman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 11, 2015, 11:59   #10
lysanderxiii
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 70039
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: West Harlow, NC
Posts: 414
http://thegunwiki.com/Gunwiki/BuildFalVerifyCompliance

You cannot have more that ten imported parts, so for a FAL, you have to have at least 7 US parts, to be compliant with 922r, six if you leave the muzzle brake off.

Last edited by lysanderxiii; August 11, 2015 at 12:04.
lysanderxiii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 11, 2015, 21:47   #11
andresere
Master of Gunnery
Silver Contributor
 
andresere's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 6598
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: La Grande, OR
Posts: 1,743
Quote:
Originally Posted by slothman View Post
gunplumber, sorry I beat ya to it lol...I saw it on gunsamerica and bought it ASAP...I have been wanting a FAL for a REALLY long time, and couldn't afford $1400 for a DSA FAL. I bought this rifle without test firing so I HOPE all is well.

So is the Argy upper more desirable? I am assuming this is one of the "better" Century builds ?? Will my metric mags be OK in this rifle ?
AHA! I wondered who got that.
__________________
"what the world has always needed is more heretics and less authority." Louis L'Amour
andresere is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 11, 2015, 21:48   #12
andresere
Master of Gunnery
Silver Contributor
 
andresere's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 6598
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: La Grande, OR
Posts: 1,743
Quote:
Originally Posted by lysanderxiii View Post
http://thegunwiki.com/Gunwiki/BuildFalVerifyCompliance

You cannot have more that ten imported parts, so for a FAL, you have to have at least 7 US parts, to be compliant with 922r, six if you leave the muzzle brake off.
Did he build the rifle? Quick, yes or no answer.
__________________
"what the world has always needed is more heretics and less authority." Louis L'Amour
andresere is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12, 2015, 08:56   #13
lysanderxiii
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 70039
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: West Harlow, NC
Posts: 414
Quote:
Originally Posted by andresere View Post
Did he build the rifle? Quick, yes or no answer.
Doesn't matter if he originally built it. As the rifle sits, it is compliant with 922r.

However, if anything is done to change the rifle from its "as imported" configuration, to a new non-importable configuration (pistol grip, bayonet lug, flash hider, etc), it becomes subject to Title 18 Chapter 44 Section 922(r) of the U.S. Code, and further defined by Title 27 Part 478.39 of the Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) - ASSEMBLY OF NON-SPORTING SHOTGUNS AND SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES FROM IMPORTED PARTS, which ambiguously restricts semiautomatic rifles and shotguns to no more 10 imported parts from a list of 20 parts.

18, S 922(r) states:
Quote:
It shall be unlawful for any person to assemble from imported parts any semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun which is identical to any rifle or shotgun prohibited from importation under section 925(d)(3) of this chapter as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes except that this subsection shall not apply to -

(1) the assembly of any such rifle or shotgun for sale or distribution by a licensed manufacturer to the United States or any department or agency thereof or to any State or any department, agency, or political subdivision thereof; or

(2) the assembly of any such rifle or shotgun for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Attorney General.
And 27 CFR 478.39 states:
Quote:
(a) No person shall assemble a semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun using more than 10 of the 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.

(b) The provisions of this section shall not apply to:

(1) The assembly of such rifle or shotgun for sale or distribution by a licensed manufacturer to the United States or any department or agency thereof or to any State or any department, agency, or political subdivision thereof; or

(2) The assembly of such rifle or shotgun for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Director under the provisions of Sec. 178.151; or

(3) The repair of any rifle or shotgun which had been imported into or assembled in the United States prior to November 30, 1990, or the replacement of any part of such firearm.

(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) Butt stocks
(16) Pistol grips
(17) Forearms, hand guards
(18) Magazine bodies
(19) Followers
(20) Floor plates
So, the act to removing the stock is "disassembling" the rifle and the act of putting new stock on is "assembling" a rifle, and if that new stock makes the configuration "non-importable" then 27 CFR 478.39 applies, and must be adhered to for the new configuration to be legal, as the parts that make up the original rifle are imported, as none of those parts were manufactured in the US*. (Unless he can show that sub-paragraphs (1) or (2) apply.)

_______________________
*With the possible exception of the thumbhole stock, but since the stock left the country to be put on the rifle for it to be imported, the stock is technically "imported".

Last edited by lysanderxiii; August 12, 2015 at 09:11.
lysanderxiii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12, 2015, 09:02   #14
gunplumber
Arrogant Bastard
Gold Contributor
 
gunplumber's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 96
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Surprise, AZ
Posts: 23,169
Except - in 1994, ATF changed their interpretation of thumbholes from "not an assault weapon" (because it does not have a pistol grip extending conspicuously below the rifle), to "still an assault weapon, but the thumbhole counts as 2 US parts."

The above rifle is NOT 922 compliant under ATF's re-interpretation (although it was at the time of import), and the buyer did not "manufacture" it that way. 922 applies to the manufacturer. Constitutional ex-post-facto law prohibition notwithstanding, he would be changing a non-compliant rifle to a non-compliant rifle, not manufacturing a new category of rifle.

ATF's very weirdly written letter on changing parts on an existing rifle, seems to me to say, that changing parts is not a violation.
__________________
T. Mark Graham
Master Gunsmith
Arizona Response Systems, LLC

Posts by Daniel Lombard, R1shooter, DS Arms.
gunplumber is a domestic terrorist, selling out his country . . . .IMBEL = import crap. . .FN has no barrel timing spec! . . . gunplumber may be an asshole, but at least he tells the truth
gunplumber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12, 2015, 09:16   #15
gunplumber
Arrogant Bastard
Gold Contributor
 
gunplumber's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 96
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Surprise, AZ
Posts: 23,169
ATF reply:

Dear MX. XXXXX:

This is in response to your recent correspondence to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives(ATF), Firearms Technology Branch (FTB) asking several questions with respect to 18 U.S.C. 922(r) and its implementing regulation, 2TC FR 478.39. (Please note that your letter was forwarded to FTB's new location in Martinsburg, West Virginia.) Your questions are listed below in italics, each followed by our answers, which are in bullets.

1. What is ATF's definition of "assembly" as it applies to 922(r)?


The meaning of "assemble" or "assembly''as it applies to 922(r) shall be the same as the word is generally known and used.


GP's comment: A non-answer, since ATF themselves define it differently, to include an unassembled collection of parts being considered assembled for excise tax purposes


2. Does ATF consider routine maintenance, such as the removal and replacement of parts for cleaning, or the removal and insertion of magazines to constitute "assembly"?

The removal and re-installing of parts for cleaning and routine maintenance would not constitute assembly for the purpose of $ 922(r), as long as none of the original parts are substituted with replacement or additional parts.

GP: Again, and evasion - my stock is scratched up, as part of routine maintenance, I am going to replace it with a different one.

3. Would a person incur criminal liability by the purchase and possession of a second-hand firearm which was determined not to be in compliance with 922(r), even though the assembly of said firearm was performed by, someone other than the buyer, and the buyer had no way to verify the legality of that assembly?

18 U.S.C. 5 922(r)applies to the act of assembly per se, not mere possession of the assembled firearm.


4. If a person were to be criminally charged with a violation of $ 922(r), on whom would the burden of proof lie, and what standard of proof would be required to establish guilt or innocence?


All persons are considered innocent until proven guilty; therefore, the "burden of proof" in any criminal case lies with the Government. The burden of proof to establish "guilt" has long been codified by legal precedent in U.S. Courts. We recommend you seek the guidance of legal counsel for a detailed explanation of this standard.


5. What is ATF's procedure for determining whether a given firearm is in compliance with 922(r), given that the absence of a mark indicating the origin of a part is insufficient to draw any firm conclusion about the part's origin, foreign or domestic?

Every method possible is utilized in identifying the origin of manufacture of a firearm part during an investigation involving a suspected violation of 922(r). Each such
review must be taken on a case-by-case basis and may necessitate evaluation of such things as: design characteristics, markings (or lack thereof), and associate documents and/or statements.


We thank you for your inquiry and turst you find our answers responsive.


GP: I suspect they knew exactly the point of the question, and phrased their reply to avoid answering it.

Sincerely yours,

John R. Spencer
Chief, Firearms Technology Branch


ATF's reply is a little mangled, since I OCR'd it rather than retyped, but the key words are there.

Still looking for input on the burden of proof issue...
__________________
T. Mark Graham
Master Gunsmith
Arizona Response Systems, LLC

Posts by Daniel Lombard, R1shooter, DS Arms.
gunplumber is a domestic terrorist, selling out his country . . . .IMBEL = import crap. . .FN has no barrel timing spec! . . . gunplumber may be an asshole, but at least he tells the truth
gunplumber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12, 2015, 09:41   #16
lysanderxiii
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 70039
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: West Harlow, NC
Posts: 414
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunplumber View Post
Except - in 1994, ATF changed their interpretation of thumbholes from "not an assault weapon" (because it does not have a pistol grip extending conspicuously below the rifle), to "still an assault weapon, but the thumbhole counts as 2 US parts."

The above rifle is NOT 922 compliant under ATF's re-interpretation (although it was at the time of import), and the buyer did not "manufacture" it that way. 922 applies to the manufacturer. Constitutional ex-post-facto law prohibition notwithstanding, he would be changing a non-compliant rifle to a non-compliant rifle, not manufacturing a new category of rifle.

ATF's very weirdly written letter on changing parts on an existing rifle, seems to me to say, that changing parts is not a violation.
Whether or not the thumbhole stock is now considered an assault weapon part, the rifle in its original configuration was deemed "importable" by the AG (from 922(r), it was not "prohibited from importation under section 925(d)(3)"). As such, it does not require US parts to be compliant with 922(r) and 478.39.

18 U.S.C section 925(d):
Quote:
(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—
(1) is being imported or brought in for scientific or research purposes, or is for use in connection with competition or training pursuant to chapter 401 of title 10;
(2) is an unserviceable firearm, other than a machinegun as defined in section 5845(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (not readily restorable to firing condition), imported or brought in as a curio or museum piece;
(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;
As to the letter...

Whether you like this answer, or not:

Quote:
The removal and re-installing of parts for cleaning and routine maintenance would not constitute assembly for the purpose of $ 922(r), as long as none of the original parts are substituted with replacement or additional parts.
It does seem rather straight-forward. You replace a part (the thumbhole stock) with two parts (stock and grip), you have both substituted and added parts. That would not be "routine maintenance".

Proving some things, in this case, wouldn't be all that hard, the rifle was imported in a certain configuration which is recorded somewhere (unless that file cabinet burned down or something), and showing that the same serial number is now in a non-922(r) configuration, would prove that someone illegally modified the rifle. Proving it was the current owner that illegally modified it might not be easy (or possible), but in any case the current owner would probably not be allowed to keep the rifle...

Last edited by lysanderxiii; August 12, 2015 at 09:51.
lysanderxiii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12, 2015, 09:59   #17
gunplumber
Arrogant Bastard
Gold Contributor
 
gunplumber's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 96
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Surprise, AZ
Posts: 23,169
(sigh)

The letter is contradictory, and answers nothing. It is what I expect from ATF. Member, Malikovski, by the way.

I am merely illuminating inconsistencies.

A literal interpretation, based on your assessment: Since thumbholes are no longer exempt from 922, removing the thumbhole stock, and replacing it with a different, but identical thumbhole stock, would be manufacturing a non 922-compliant rifle. Because although the thumbhole was exempt from 89 to 94, it no longer is.

Suppose one purchases a rifle that is only partially 922 compliant. It has 4 of 7 parts. The flash hider and furniture, for argument sake. You remove the US pistol grip, and replace it with another US pistol grip. According to the letter, that is a substitution or replacement. The literal interpretation is that doing so is illegal, as the one doing so is now "assembling" under 922.

I've seen another letter, but cannot find it at this time, that I believe asked a similar question, and the answer was that using a different magazine was a not a violation - there was no clarification as to whether the different mag was 922.
__________________
T. Mark Graham
Master Gunsmith
Arizona Response Systems, LLC

Posts by Daniel Lombard, R1shooter, DS Arms.
gunplumber is a domestic terrorist, selling out his country . . . .IMBEL = import crap. . .FN has no barrel timing spec! . . . gunplumber may be an asshole, but at least he tells the truth

Last edited by gunplumber; August 12, 2015 at 10:10.
gunplumber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12, 2015, 10:24   #18
gunplumber
Arrogant Bastard
Gold Contributor
 
gunplumber's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 96
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Surprise, AZ
Posts: 23,169
With regard to it being a 922 violation to exchange a thumbhole stock for a thumbhole stock

1998 letter

A MAK 90 style rifle having a thumbhole style stock with a pistol
grip, but none of the other features listed in the definition of
a semiautomatic assault weapon in 18 U.S.C. section
921(a)(30)(B), would not meet the definition of a semiautomatic
assault weapon.

The "grandfather" exemption in 18 U.S.C. section
922(v)(2) applies only to a semiautomatic assault weapon which
was lawfully possessed on the date of enactment of the statute.

A rifle which did not meet the definition of a semiautomatic on
September 13, 1994, does not qualify for this exemption.

A firearm which became a semiautomatic assault weapon after
September 13, 1994, is subject to the prohibition in section
922(v).


Therefore, replacing a then-exempt thumb-hole, with an identical thumb-hole post-exemption, requires complete 922.

Again, I am not encouraging anyone to do anything that makes them uncomfortable. I'm just analyzing what's out there.
__________________
T. Mark Graham
Master Gunsmith
Arizona Response Systems, LLC

Posts by Daniel Lombard, R1shooter, DS Arms.
gunplumber is a domestic terrorist, selling out his country . . . .IMBEL = import crap. . .FN has no barrel timing spec! . . . gunplumber may be an asshole, but at least he tells the truth
gunplumber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12, 2015, 10:40   #19
lysanderxiii
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 70039
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: West Harlow, NC
Posts: 414
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunplumber View Post
A literal interpretation, based on your assessment: Since thumbholes are no longer exempt from 922, removing the thumbhole stock, and replacing it with a different, but identical thumbhole stock, would be manufacturing a non 922-compliant rifle. Because although the thumbhole was exempt from 89 to 94, it no longer is.
No.

922(r) does not stated that the firearm must be made from "non-assault weapon" or "exempt" parts, it states that it is/was in a configuration that is/was not "...prohibited from importation under section 925(d)(3)..."

Putting a new wood thumbhole stock, would maintain its "importable" status, as the thumbhole stocks was part of it "importable" configuration. A correct stock and pistol grip would not be "importable" as the AG considers them "un-sporting".

Quote:
Originally Posted by gunplumber View Post
Suppose one purchases a rifle that is only partially 922 compliant. It has 4 of 7 parts. The flash hider and furniture, for argument sake. You remove the US pistol grip, and replace it with another US pistol grip. According to the letter, that is a substitution or replacement. The literal interpretation is that doing so is illegal, as the one doing so is now "assembling" under 922.
Yes, it would be.

But since the rifle is non-compliant to begin with, it really doesn't matter. Proving the actual person that did the first illegal assembly is difficult and showing that there were further illegal modifications by the present owner would be next to impossible, the most probable outcome would be the confiscation of the rifle. (Assuming they ever find out.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by gunplumber View Post
I've seen another letter, but cannot find it at this time, that I believe asked a similar question, and the answer was that using a different magazine was a not a violation - there was no clarification as to whether the different mag was 922.
Are you talking bout the constructive possession of magazines?

This letter: page 1 and page 2?

Yes, they seem to be of the opinion that if you have a firearm that requires some or all of the magazine parts to bring the total imported parts count down to ten, inserting a imported magazine (no US parts) in a firearm that would constitute "assembling", and chances are a jury would agree. However mere ownership of imported magazines does not constitute "assembling".
lysanderxiii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12, 2015, 10:50   #20
gunplumber
Arrogant Bastard
Gold Contributor
 
gunplumber's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 96
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Surprise, AZ
Posts: 23,169
Quote:
Originally Posted by lysanderxiii View Post
No.

Putting a new wood thumbhole stock, would maintain its "importable" status, as the thumbhole stocks was part of it "importable" configuration. A correct stock and pistol grip would not be "importable" as the AG considers them "un-sporting".
No - putting a different, identical thumbhole on it prior to (1994, 1998 - contradicting dates) would be ok. But after that, it is manufacturing a rifle not importable and therefore requiring 922. Not agreeing, just taking the as long as none of the original parts are substituted with replacement or additional parts to it's logical conclusion.

Quote:

This letter: page 1 and page 2?

Yes, they seem to be of the opinion that if you have a firearm that requires some or all of the magazine parts to bring the total imported parts count down to ten, inserting a imported magazine (no US parts) in a firearm that would constitute "assembling", and chances are a jury would agree. However mere ownership of imported magazines does not constitute "assembling".
No - the one I remember seeing (I typically have a good memory) was very much like the one above, and stated that exchanging parts such as the mag was NOT assembling.

I usually save all these things when I run across them, but I often neglect to rename them to something that makes sense to me, so it probably has a file name of DSC-img-00005.jpg and I won't find it again except by accident. But I do remember thinking - oh, here's another contradictory statement (like SBR = NFA not AW and so no 922, and SBR-AW so yes 922).

If I were writing it, I'd specify -

A. You can replace whatever you want on a 922 compliant rifle, so long as doing so retains it's 9221 compliance
or
B. 922 applies only to the manufacturer/importer & initial transfer. Subsequent to that, 922 does not apply

I mean, pick one - I can provide a rational argument for either - ATF letters are administrative, not law. They only outline the position of one guy at ATF, at one point in time. And as we have seen, are whimsical and change

FNC upper is firearm. No, FNC lower is firearm. Same with AR180. TheAtchkissson 10/22 bumprie stock is not a machinegun - oops, now it is. An Arm brace is not a stock - oops, now it is. M856 is not AP, but today it is. Oops, it's not anymore. 40mm TPT is not a DD, now it is, unless we change our minds again.
__________________
T. Mark Graham
Master Gunsmith
Arizona Response Systems, LLC

Posts by Daniel Lombard, R1shooter, DS Arms.
gunplumber is a domestic terrorist, selling out his country . . . .IMBEL = import crap. . .FN has no barrel timing spec! . . . gunplumber may be an asshole, but at least he tells the truth

Last edited by gunplumber; August 12, 2015 at 10:58.
gunplumber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12, 2015, 11:12   #21
lysanderxiii
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 70039
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: West Harlow, NC
Posts: 414
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunplumber View Post
With regard to it being a 922 violation to exchange a thumbhole stock for a thumbhole stock

1998 letter

A MAK 90 style rifle having a thumbhole style stock with a pistol grip, but none of the other features listed in the definition of a semiautomatic assault weapon in 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(30)(B), would not meet the definition of a semiautomatic assault weapon.

The "grandfather" exemption in 18 U.S.C. section 922(v)(2) applies only to a semiautomatic assault weapon which was lawfully possessed on the date of enactment of the statute.

A rifle which did not meet the definition of a semiautomatic on September 13, 1994, does not qualify for this exemption.

A firearm which became a semiautomatic assault weapon after September 13, 1994, is subject to the prohibition in section 922(v).


Therefore, replacing a then-exempt thumb-hole, with an identical thumb-hole post-exemption, requires complete 922.

Again, I am not encouraging anyone to do anything that makes them uncomfortable. I'm just analyzing what's out there.
This letter dates from within the AWB period and any information is probably dated, and should not be used to address current issues.

Section 922(v) was repealed, as has Section 921(a)(30). These concerned manufacture of semi-automatic assault weapons, and the definition of "Assault Weapons". These two sections were part of the AWB of 1994.

The MAK 90s that are exempt are those made prior to the AWB (13 Sept 1994, for the purposes of this law), you can do as you like with these. put muzzle brakes on them, pistol grips, anything, and you could do this during the AWB period. The MAK 90s that had a thumbhole stock (and no other "evil" features) were not classed as "assault weapons", and therefore never needed exemption, but are now subject to 922(r).

All MAK 90s made after 13 Sept 1994, are subject to 922(r) and 478.39.

The status of the thumbhole stock, as of now, has not changed.

Last edited by lysanderxiii; August 12, 2015 at 11:31.
lysanderxiii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12, 2015, 11:19   #22
gunplumber
Arrogant Bastard
Gold Contributor
 
gunplumber's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 96
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Surprise, AZ
Posts: 23,169
hmmm. You may have something there . The thumbhole = AW was part of the Clinton 94-04 expired ban. I wonder if their interpretation that a thumbhole was an AW also expired, since it was specifically addressing the expired ban.

But I think the principle illustrated - that a thumbhole was not grandfathered because it didn't need to be, applies to these thumbholes too - they were imported in the same 89-94 window. And if it is not grandfathered because it was not an AW, then swapping for an identical stock post-94 is still going to make it subject to 922, because the other letter suggests that a different part becomes assembling - regardless of that part being a different but identical part.
__________________
T. Mark Graham
Master Gunsmith
Arizona Response Systems, LLC

Posts by Daniel Lombard, R1shooter, DS Arms.
gunplumber is a domestic terrorist, selling out his country . . . .IMBEL = import crap. . .FN has no barrel timing spec! . . . gunplumber may be an asshole, but at least he tells the truth
gunplumber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12, 2015, 11:36   #23
lysanderxiii
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 70039
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: West Harlow, NC
Posts: 414
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunplumber View Post
hmmm. You may have something there . The thumbhole = AW was part of the Clinton 94-04 expired ban. I wonder if their interpretation that a thumbhole was an AW also expired, since it was specifically addressing the expired ban.

But I think the principle illustrated - that a thumbhole was not grandfathered because it didn't need to be, applies to these thumbholes too - they were imported in the same 89-94 window. And if it is not grandfathered because it was not an AW, then swapping for an identical stock post-94 is still going to make it subject to 922, because the other letter suggests that a different part becomes assembling - regardless of that part being a different but identical part.
It has nothing to do with parts, it has to do with whether or not the firearm is/was in "importable" configuration.

If the AG determines that an German-made HK 416 is "importable" with the pistol grip, flash hider, etc*, you can modify it as you see fit. Otherwise, it falls afoul of 922(r).

The Century Arms Sporter FAL, with that ghastly thumbhole abomination, was only deemed "importable" with that ugly stock. The only FALs that are free from 922(r)/478.39 restrictions are those still in "as-imported" configuration (like the one shown in this thread) and those sold prior to the AWB.

Quote:
...then swapping for an identical stock post-94 is still going to make it subject to 922, because the other letter suggests that a different part becomes assembling...
Yes, technically replacing is assembling according to the ATF, but if you put another identical thumbhole stock on it, it becomes impossible to tell it has been "assembled" post-importation...

__________________________
Possible, if he/she determines it is "fit for sporting purposes" with all that stuff, but unlikely.

Last edited by lysanderxiii; August 12, 2015 at 11:49.
lysanderxiii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12, 2015, 11:52   #24
gunplumber
Arrogant Bastard
Gold Contributor
 
gunplumber's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 96
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Surprise, AZ
Posts: 23,169
Quote:
Yes, technically replacing is assembling according to the ATF, but if you put another identical thumbhole stock on it, it becomes impossible to tell it has been "assembled" post-importation...
and if you use DSA US parts . . . (nevermind, I can't even tell them apart - even down to the reproduction Austrian proof marks).

but we're not talking about whether anyone will catch any grief for it, but what the letters specifically say.

of course, ATF has also told me that a 1911 is a machinegun, that a letter only applies to the person it was sent to, and even a letter from a field office doesn't mean anything since tech branch may disagree.
__________________
T. Mark Graham
Master Gunsmith
Arizona Response Systems, LLC

Posts by Daniel Lombard, R1shooter, DS Arms.
gunplumber is a domestic terrorist, selling out his country . . . .IMBEL = import crap. . .FN has no barrel timing spec! . . . gunplumber may be an asshole, but at least he tells the truth
gunplumber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12, 2015, 11:53   #25
lysanderxiii
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 70039
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: West Harlow, NC
Posts: 414
To sum it up, as I see it, the AG gets to decide what imported firearms are "good" and what imported firearms are "bad".

And "good" firearms have no more that 10 foreign parts, don't have pistol grips and other "evil" stuff, or were made prior to 1994...
lysanderxiii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12, 2015, 12:35   #26
herd118
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 21720
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 63
"FNC upper is firearm. No, FNC lower is firearm. Same with AR180. TheAtchkissson 10/22 bumprie stock is not a machinegun - oops, now it is. An Arm brace is not a stock - oops, now it is. M856 is not AP, but today it is. Oops, it's not anymore. 40mm TPT is not a DD, now it is, unless we change our minds again."

What boggles the mind is that they have been doing this for years and years; My favorite is the semi auto RPB M10 is not a machingun, then it is, except if you have one made before the cut off date in 1982 - then it's a legal unregistered machinegun.

Their latest bit of legerdemain is now they're claiming that they're not an agency so they can avoid FOIA compliance about all their "rulings": http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...-requirements/
herd118 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old February 15, 2017, 13:47   #27
Lemuel
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 79040
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Slidell
Posts: 55
identify this sporter

CAI sporter
maybe inch upper
308 barrel stamped CAI and made in Canada key cut
thump-hole stock
no groves on bolt

Last edited by Lemuel; February 15, 2017 at 15:09. Reason: having trouble uploading pics
Lemuel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 15, 2017, 15:34   #28
mp
Registered
 
mp's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 654
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 2,648
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemuel View Post
CAI sporter
maybe inch upper
308 barrel stamped CAI and made in Canada key cut
thump-hole stock
no groves on bolt
Ummmmmm.....it's a Century Sporter?
mp is online now   Reply With Quote
Old February 15, 2017, 15:48   #29
Lemuel
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 79040
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Slidell
Posts: 55
Quote:
Ummmmmm.....it's a Century Sporter?
what type of receiver?
how do I post pics?
Lemuel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 15, 2017, 16:15   #30
Lemuel
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 79040
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Slidell
Posts: 55
https://flic.kr/p/RVF6Wo

Last edited by Lemuel; February 16, 2017 at 01:20.
Lemuel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 15, 2017, 16:16   #31
Lemuel
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 79040
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Slidell
Posts: 55
Pictures
https://flic.kr/p/RVF6Wo

Last edited by Lemuel; February 16, 2017 at 01:21.
Lemuel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 16, 2017, 01:30   #32
Roadmarker
Remaining Vigilant 3-7-77
Bronze Contributor
 
Roadmarker's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 63605
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Helena, Montana
Posts: 3,159
Please take some pics of the upper receiver markings. Maybe one of the entire rifle also. To post your pics upload to Flickr like before, then go to each picture you want to share and right click >properties, then copy url, hit OK. Then on this site hit the little picture icon and copy your url. You may have to turn off privacy settings at Flickr.
If that doesn't work you could just link to your Flickr page. I believe you have to change your settings to share.
Roadmarker is online now   Reply With Quote
Old February 16, 2017, 04:18   #33
gunplumber
Arrogant Bastard
Gold Contributor
 
gunplumber's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 96
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Surprise, AZ
Posts: 23,169
__________________
T. Mark Graham
Master Gunsmith
Arizona Response Systems, LLC

Posts by Daniel Lombard, R1shooter, DS Arms.
gunplumber is a domestic terrorist, selling out his country . . . .IMBEL = import crap. . .FN has no barrel timing spec! . . . gunplumber may be an asshole, but at least he tells the truth
gunplumber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 16, 2017, 23:12   #34
Lemuel
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 79040
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Slidell
Posts: 55
Thanks
Lemuel is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:51.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©1998-2015 The FAL Files