Bi-pod rail ... non-compliant ???

[foxtail207]

On a purely stock Saiga 7.62 "sporter" .... if a rail is bolted to the bottom of the fore end grip for a bi-pod ... does that make the rifle non-compliant?

[Hairy Cat]

My two cents... Not a layer and I'm no law expert. Hell I don't even spell well. You aren't building a rifle and therefore are not responsible for 922R. You aren't putting a forward grip on a pistol and therefore aren't running afoul of making an AOW. I think you're good to go.

[nalioth]

Can't anyone read? The 922r law is stickied on most every gun forum I'm aware of. Here at the 'Files, it's the FIRST sticky in the RKBA & Legal forum: BATFE list of parts on semi-automatic rifles (http://www.akfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1592)

The 922r law is very clear.

If the part you think will cause trouble isn't listed, it's not going to cause trouble.



Why some people insist on restricting themselves further than the law requires is beyond me.

[nalioth]

My two cents... Not a layer and I'm no law expert. Hell I don't even spell well. You aren't building a rifle and therefore are not responsible for 922R. You aren't putting a forward grip on a pistol and therefore aren't running afoul of making an AOW. I think you're good to go.
Ahh, the key word in the law is "assembly".

If one replaces or adds a part on their rifle, they are "assembling".


This is how the feds can get you if you use a magazine that is non-compliant (if you're one of those that has their rifle set up to depend in US-made mag parts for compliance).

When you insert a magazine, it's "assembling".

[KernelKrink]

Nalioth, he isn't asking if a rail is a compliance part, he's asking if a rail would be an "evil feature" that would put a stock Saiga in a "banned from import" configuration that would trigger the necessity for 922(r) compliance. For example, bayonet lugs are not listed in the parts list for 922(r), yet the presence of one on a Saiga would trigger the US parts requirement. I dunno if a forearm rail does or not currently, but one of the criteria ATF was floating for making "Certain Imported Shotguns" a banned item was the presence of "accessory rails".

[nalioth]

Nalioth, he isn't asking if a rail is a compliance part, he's asking if a rail would be an "evil feature" that would put a stock Saiga in a "banned from import" configuration that would trigger the necessity for 922(r) compliance. For example, bayonet lugs are not listed in the parts list for 922(r), yet the presence of one on a Saiga would trigger the US parts requirement. I dunno if a forearm rail does or not currently, but one of the criteria ATF was floating for making "Certain Imported Shotguns" a banned item was the presence of "accessory rails".
If you ask the right person, every rivet that goes into a gun is an "evil feature".


At this time, rails are not "evil features".