Saiga IZ 340 from Atlantic Firearms

[rob-cubed]

You got lucky, I haven't found a single FFL within driving distance of Baltimore that will transfer a Saiga rifle as unregulated. As Scott said, the handguard has nothing to do with it, nor does a pistol grip or folding stock for that matter. It's all about the action which is clearly all AK regardless of how you dress it up.

An argument could be made that the IZ340's ability to accept a '74 flash hider/comp out of the box makes it a little less "sporting"... but it still passes Federal import scrutiny.

 

[Scott7891]

You got lucky, I haven't found a single FFL within driving distance of Baltimore that will transfer a Saiga rifle as unregulated. As Scott said, the handguard has nothing to do with it, nor does a pistol grip or folding stock for that matter. It's all about the action which is clearly all AK regardless of how you dress it up.

An argument could be made that the IZ340's ability to accept a '74 flash hider/comp out of the box makes it a little less "sporting"... but it still passes Federal import scrutiny.

I disagree with you right there rob. The pistol grip and folding stock are features that do make it regulated and not the fact that it is an AK action. The IZ340 has the muzzle cap welded on so as to not expose the threads for immediate use. The Egyptians used to do that with their Maadi's before Century started imported them doing away with threading and hiding completely. The '96 MSP bulletin states that rifles that generally would be considered regulated but do not have the "evil" features are considered normal rifles to them. The bulletin even mentioned the Arsenal SA-93 specifically as being exempt and it is an AK. However that was back in 1996 when the ability to take military capacity magazines was not a feature that barred them from being imported. With the Clinton '98 ban that feature has been deemed a no-no for import which now would make the Arsenal mentioned regulated because it can take military capacity mags.

Sporter versions of these firearms in which the firearm does not meet the definition of an "Assault Weapon" as defined in Title 18, section 921 (a)(30) of the United States code, and can be imported into the United States, may be sold without a background investigation.(77R Maryland paperwork not ATF Form 4473)

That bolded statement is the key caveat as to what makes a foreign firearm regulated or not including AK's. Saigas are examples since they are imported as is which would mean they are not regulated based on U.S. firearm import regulations which Maryland follows as the basis for declaring a foreign firearm an "assault weapon" or not.

I'm with you 100% , i'm just going on what my local FFL said. I went with the IZ-240 because i didn't want to push my luck which turned out to be the right thing to do. When I went to pick it up yesterday I asked if he would have gone unregulated on it if I had gotten the IZ340 and he said he would have probably ran it regulated.

See above.

 

[chris12138]

Some good info here

 

[rob-cubed]

I was referring specifically to the MD regulated list which says "AK-47 in all forms". All of the FFLs I've talked to say the Saiga rifle is regulated based upon its parts interchangeability. It's the same argument the AG used recently to rule .22 copies as unregulated (to our benefit). I'm not saying folding stocks don't make a difference in paperwork in some instances, like a Mini-14, but that in this case it's generally regarded as a regulated firearm so what it's wearing is irrelevant.

I am aware of the bulletin Mark P dug up with his FFL, I've xferred through him and he is a great guy willing to read for himself. But a 16-year-old bulletin has little standing these days, even with a guy anal enough to retain paperwork for that long. Even he was not willing to xfer an S-12 as unregulated which I know others have done without retribution. Unfortunately, what generally matters is the FFL's personal opinion, or more commonly whether a call to the MSP gets you a "yes" or a "no". No one wants to lose their license.

You bring up some excellent legal points and I agree with you in principle... I wish more FFLs were willing to read the laws for themselves.

 

[chris12138]

I was referring specifically to the MD regulated list which says "AK-47 in all forms". All of the FFLs I've talked to say the Saiga rifle is regulated based upon its parts interchangeability. It's the same argument the AG used recently to rule .22 copies as unregulated (to our benefit). I'm not saying folding stocks don't make a difference in paperwork in some instances, like a Mini-14, but that in this case it's generally regarded as a regulated firearm so what it's wearing is irrelevant.

I am aware of the bulletin Mark P dug up with his FFL, I've xferred through him and he is a great guy willing to read for himself. But a 16-year-old bulletin has little standing these days, even with a guy anal enough to retain paperwork for that long. Even he was not willing to xfer an S-12 as unregulated which I know others have done without retribution. Unfortunately, what generally matters is the FFL's personal opinion, or more commonly whether a call to the MSP gets you a "yes" or a "no". No one wants to lose their license.

You bring up some excellent legal points and I agree with you in principle... I wish more FFLs were willing to read the laws for themselves.

I hate to derail this thread in the opposite direction but i've never heard of a Mini14 with a fixed stock being regulated

 

[rob-cubed]

If it's a folding stock Mini-14 in .223, it's regulated. Fixed stocks are not, go figure. Just like an AR lower is regulated but if sold as an HBAR gun it is not. Maryland law is as clear as mud which is why we have these discussions on a regular basis.

I'm not saying I'm right, but the FFL always is... YMMV

 

[chris12138]

If it's a folding stock Mini-14 in .223, it's regulated. Fixed stocks are not, go figure. Just like an AR lower is regulated but if sold as an HBAR gun it is not. Maryland law is as clear as mud which is why we have these discussions on a regular basis.

YMMV

totally misread your post. Were all on the same page now

 

[Scott7891]

I was referring specifically to the MD regulated list which says "AK-47 in all forms". All of the FFLs I've talked to say the Saiga rifle is regulated based upon its parts interchangeability. It's the same argument the AG used recently to rule .22 copies as unregulated (to our benefit). I'm not saying folding stocks don't make a difference in paperwork in some instances, like a Mini-14, but that in this case it's generally regarded as a regulated firearm so what it's wearing is irrelevant.

I am aware of the bulletin Mark P dug up with his FFL, I've xferred through him and he is a great guy willing to read for himself. But a 16-year-old bulletin has little standing these days, even with a guy anal enough to retain paperwork for that long. Even he was not willing to xfer an S-12 as unregulated which I know others have done without retribution. Unfortunately, what generally matters is the FFL's personal opinion, or more commonly whether a call to the MSP gets you a "yes" or a "no". No one wants to lose their license.

You bring up some excellent legal points and I agree with you in principle... I wish more FFLs were willing to read the laws for themselves.

I guess the question remains though have their been any new bulletins since then to make the '96 one null and void? If not it is still valid. Like you said it is up to the ffl to decide but it is what it is in the end and the msp's own bulletin states what is and isn't an assault weapon. Besides ak-47 in all forms is a stupid expression to those who actually know about ak's and would realize that the ak-47 was the original 7.62x39 variant with a milled receiver, the wasr's are akm variants, and the new saiga's are ak-100's. Semantics is everything.

 

[rob-cubed]

You're right, the age of the bulletin should have nothing to do with it as long as the MSP didn't issue anything else afterwards that directly contradicted it.

Just like the BATFE has issued rulings/letters saying something was OK, then flip-flopped on it a few months to years later, I figure the MSP will play the exact same game if cornered on the issue.

FFLs I've shared it with have all had the same response: "Interesting, but not going lose my license over one sale." Heck it's hard enough finding an FFL who will transfer a VZ as unregulated...

I guess the question remains though have their been any new bulletins since then to make the '96 one null and void? If not it is still valid. Like you said it is up to the ffl to decide but it is what it is in the end and the msp's own bulletin states what is and isn't an assault weapon. Besides ak-47 in all forms is a stupid expression to those who actually know about ak's and would realize that the ak-47 was the original 7.62x39 variant with a milled receiver, the wasr's are akm variants, and the new saiga's are ak-100's. Semantics is everything.

 

[chris12138]

You're right, the age of the bulletin should have nothing to do with it as long as the MSP didn't issue anything else afterwards that directly contradicted it.

Just like the BATFE has issued rulings/letters saying something was OK, then flip-flopped on it a few months to years later, I figure the MSP will play the exact same game if cornered on the issue.

FFLs I've shared it with have all had the same response: "Interesting, but not going lose my license over one sale." Heck it's hard enough finding an FFL who will transfer a VZ as unregulated...

Don't quote me but I could have sworn someone mentioned an '02 letter than contradicted the '96 one.

 

[Scott7891]

You're right, the age of the bulletin should have nothing to do with it as long as the MSP didn't issue anything else afterwards that directly contradicted it.

Just like the BATFE has issued rulings/letters saying something was OK, then flip-flopped on it a few months to years later, I figure the MSP will play the exact same game if cornered on the issue.

FFLs I've shared it with have all had the same response: "Interesting, but not going lose my license over one sale." Heck it's hard enough finding an FFL who will transfer a VZ as unregulated...

It is true the msp could pull an ATF but if they have nothing else to back up what is stated in the '96 bulletin like a newer firearms bulletin with updated information then it would still be defendable based on what it says. Like you said it is up to the ffl to decide and lawyers are not cheap. Then again the only time i have heard of a regulated ffl getting royally screwed and losing his license in maryland was that sandy abrams guy in parkville next to just guns but he was not keeping his records straight. I have not heard of any other dealers in maryland getting screwed like that as of late or msp on a crusade to shut down dealers.

The guy who does transfers for me down when I am visiting parents is very open to proving if something is not regulated as long as you show him. He transferred my vz-58 and saiga 12 cash and carry no problem.

Don't quote me but I could have sworn someone mentioned an '02 letter than contradicted the '96 one.

I'd love to see it if it is available to see if they changed "the rules."

 

[chris12138]

It is true the msp could pull an ATF but if they have nothing else to back up what is stated in the '96 bulletin like a newer firearms bulletin with updated information then it would still be defendable based on what it says. Like you said it is up to the ffl to decide and lawyers are not cheap. Then again the only time i have heard of a regulated ffl getting royally screwed and losing his license in maryland was that sandy abrams guy in parkville next to just guns but he was not keeping his records straight. I have not heard of any other dealers in maryland getting screwed like that as of late or msp on a crusade to shut down dealers.

The guy who does transfers for me down when I am visiting parents is very open to proving if something is not regulated as long as you show him. He transferred my vz-58 and saiga 12 cash and carry no problem.



I'd love to see it if it is available to see if they changed "the rules."

Been doing some digging around the forums and haven't found any hint of it's existance so I think it's fair to say it doesn't.