Legal SKS with arch angel stock Legality

[Gawernator]

You're ignoring the question.

You first man. False.

 

[Deleted member 6005]

You first man. False.

Now you make no sense. I'll answer for you. You suggested members of this site ignore federal law. You should be banned.

 

[tenemae]

You do you boo. Admin on this site doesn't give a if you personally tell people to violate federal law.

*sigh*

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

Please explain to me how putting an archangel stock onto an already completed and lawfully acquired SKS is a violation of 922(r).

 

[Deleted member 6005]

*sigh*

Please explain to me how putting an archangel stock onto an already completed and lawfully acquired SKS is a violation of 922(r).

Not the point. Certain people in this thread said it doesn't matter if you violate 922(r).

But to your question, see post #20.

 

[tenemae]

Not the point. Certain people in this thread said it doesn't matter if you violate 922(r).

But to your question, see post #20.

No, this is the point. Because I don't read swapping a stock on an ALREADY COMPLETED rifle as violating 922(r). So please, you seem to understand the law since you are arguing it so viciously. How does putting an archangel stock on an already complete and legally acquired SKS violate 922(r)? Simply saying "somebody else told me so" isn't an argument

 

[Gawernator]

No, this is the point. Because I don't read swapping a stock on an ALREADY COMPLETED rifle as violating 922(r). So please, you seem to understand the law since you are arguing it so viciously. How does putting an archangel stock on an already complete and legally acquired SKS violate 922(r)? Simply saying "somebody else told me so" isn't an argument

Save your breath man lol he’s just arguing trying to act smart. He can’t explain how it’s illegal and he can’t cite any case law or cases. I tried good faith and he does not have good faith.

Certified FUDD moment

 

[Deleted member 6005]

No, this is the point. Because I don't read swapping a stock on an ALREADY COMPLETED rifle as violating 922(r). So please, you seem to understand the law since you are arguing it so viciously. How does putting an archangel stock on an already complete and legally acquired SKS violate 922(r)? Simply saying "somebody else told me so" isn't an argument

Sigh. No. The point is simply that a member suggests that violating federal law doesn't matter. He said as much straight out. That is a thing to suggest to young members.


But since you asked, here is AI'S answer:

Yes, swapping the stock on an SKS can easily violate federal law 18 USC § 922(r). This statute dictates that you cannot assemble a non-sporting, foreign-made rifle using more than 10 imported parts from a specific list of regulated components. [1, 2, 3]

How 922r Applies to the SKS
Because an SKS is imported in its original "sporting" military configuration, the ATF views placing it into an aftermarket stock (such as a folding, collapsible, or pistol-grip stock) as modifying it into a non-sporting configuration. [1, 2]
Once this modification occurs, the rifle legally becomes subject to 922r compliance. [1]

The Regulated Parts List
The ATF regulates 20 specific parts for rifles. If your SKS has more than 10 imported parts from this list, it is illegal. The SKS platform has 17 total restricted parts, which include: [1, 2, 3]

• Receiver
• Barrel
• Barrel extensions (on Yugo models)
• Mounting blocks (trunnion)
• Bolt and bolt carrier
• Gas piston
• Trigger housing, trigger, hammer, and sear
• Disconnector
• Buttstock, pistol grip, and forearm/handguard
• Magazine body, follower, and floorplate [1]

How to Make the Swap Legal
To legally use an aftermarket stock, you must replace enough of the foreign SKS parts with US-made parts so that the rifle has 10 or fewer foreign-made parts from the restricted list. [1, 2]

• For standard SKS variants, you generally need to replace at least 7 imported parts with US-made equivalents.
• Common replacements include the gas piston, operating rod, magazine components (body, follower, floorplate), and the trigger group components. [1, 2]

 

[cali_jazz]

This site is F-ing funny. If a person suggests that unknowing people violate law it's ok. But if those people are called out as the idiots they are, the person suggesting they shouldn't tell people to violate the law get reprimanded.

Perhaps you'd enjoy another less draconian site where you can call people names and hurl insults when you don't agree?

Knowledge base article 'How do I Delete/Disable my account?'

ACCOUNT DELETION & DATA ANONYMIZATION POLICY Effective Date: 2.12.2026 Overview:At CAguns.net, we prioritize the security of our platform and the integrity of our platform. We understand that you may wish to leave the community; however, due to the nature of firearms-related transactions and...

• Feb 12, 2026
• 2 min read
• Category: FAQ's

 

[Deleted member 6005]

Perhaps you'd enjoy another less draconian site where you can call people names and hurl insults when you don't agree?

Knowledge base article 'How do I Delete/Disable my account?'

ACCOUNT DELETION & DATA ANONYMIZATION POLICY Effective Date: 2.12.2026 Overview:At CAguns.net, we prioritize the security of our platform and the integrity of our platform. We understand that you may wish to leave the community; however, due to the nature of firearms-related transactions and...

• Feb 12, 2026
• 2 min read
• Category: FAQ's

It's not about "not agreeing." It's about members telling others it's ok to violate federal laws. How is that difficult to understand? But if that's what @ikeo1 wants for his site, knock yourself out. Seems like a ty policy to accept.

 

[cali_jazz]

It's not about "not agreeing." It's about members telling others it's ok to violate federal laws. How is that difficult to understand? But if that's what @ikeo1 wants for his site, knock yourself out. Seems like a ty policy to accept.

Did you file a report informing staff of your issue or to ask about our policy? You are trying to justify disrespectful behavior that DOES violate site policy and then complaining because staff didn't preemptively take action on someone else's post that we may not be aware of and that may or may not violate site rules.

 

[Gawernator]

It's not about "not agreeing." It's about members telling others it's ok to violate federal laws. How is that difficult to understand? But if that's what @ikeo1 wants for his site, knock yourself out. Seems like a ty policy to accept.

Who are you trying to appeal to? You actually think the DEA is coming after CAguns internet forum because someone mentioned that there is no enforcement federally against cannabis companies?

 

[tenemae]

Once this modification occurs, the rifle legally becomes subject to 922r compliance. [1]

Did you even bother to read those citations or do you just read the AI summary and assume it knows what it's talking about. A Quora thread is not a legal citation. All of the legal codes they cite read like they are specifically addressing importers manufacturing a rifle for the first time from parts kits. How do I know this applies to an individual modifying or repairing his own property?

This is very reminiscent of 32310(b) discussions that happened after it was passed. By the strict text of the law:

For purposes of this section, “manufacturing” includes both fabricating a magazine and assembling a magazine from a combination of parts

But nobody is going to argue that disassembling a LCM I already own for cleaning it and then reassembling it violates 32310(b) because I "assembl[ed] a magazine from a combination of parts". Let alone that the law would be applied that way.

So we get to the relevance of the question that BontaLicious asked: "Find me a case where an individual gets bent over for 922(r) compliance".
Because if nobody has, that's how you know even the prosecutors don't interpret the law they way you are interpreting it.

​

 

[Gawernator]

Did you even bother to read those citations or do you just read the AI summary and assume it knows what it's talking about. A Quora thread is not a legal citation. All of the legal codes they cite read like they are specifically addressing importers manufacturing a rifle for the first time from parts kits. How do I know this applies to an individual modifying or repairing his own property?

This is very reminiscent of 32310(b) discussions that happened after it was passed. By the strict text of the law:

But nobody is going to argue that disassembling a LCM I already own for cleaning it and then reassembling it violates 32310(b) because I "assembl[ed] a magazine from a combination of parts". Let alone that the law would be applied that way.

So we get to the relevance of the question that BontaLicious asked: "Find me a case where an individual gets bent over for 922(r) compliance".
Because if nobody has, that's how you know even the prosecutors don't interpret the law they way you are interpreting it.

​

I asked that and he refused to answer, he just insulted us instead

 

[Deleted member 6005]

Did you even bother to read those citations or do you just read the AI summary and assume it knows what it's talking about. A Quora thread is not a legal citation. All of the legal codes they cite read like they are specifically addressing importers manufacturing a rifle for the first time from parts kits. How do I know this applies to an individual modifying or repairing his own property?

This is very reminiscent of 32310(b) discussions that happened after it was passed. By the strict text of the law:

But nobody is going to argue that disassembling a LCM I already own for cleaning it and then reassembling it violates 32310(b) because I "assembl[ed] a magazine from a combination of parts". Let alone that the law would be applied that way.

So we get to the relevance of the question that BontaLicious asked: "Find me a case where an individual gets bent over for 922(r) compliance".
Because if nobody has, that's how you know even the prosecutors don't interpret the law they way you are interpreting it.

​

Putting the stock on the sks can trigger 922(r). Stop.
Violation of 922(r) is a Federal offense. Stop.
As a group, we shouldn't advocate violating Federal law. Stop.

A member in this thread is advocating we should violate Federal law because he's never heard of anyone being charged. How difficult is it to understand we shouldn't advocate breaking the law, no matter the immediacy of prosecution. And you support the concept. Shame on you. I thought better of you.

 

[Gawernator]

Lol why do you keep lying? I never advocated for breaking 922r, I said that's your decision to make. I asked the question of what enforcement is there? You couldn't even find ONE example.

 

[tenemae]

Putting the stock on the sks can trigger 922(r). Stop.

You still have not demonstrated that, despite repeated requests for you to do so

 

[ikeo1]

This site is F-ing funny. If a person suggests that unknowing people violate law it's ok. But if those people are called out as the idiots they are, the person suggesting they shouldn't tell people to violate the law get reprimanded.

You’re convoluting two things

The law is based on interpretation. You’re assuming your interpretation is absolute but it really isn’t. The goal of the post should be your reasoning unless there’s case law to back up your assertion.

The post itself was removed because people don’t like edits and would rather have the entire post removed.

Calling people/members idiots isnt such a bad thing but if people report it, which it was, we can remove it as a member courtesy. Just like un wanted comments on your listings.

As a general rule we stay out of your business unless you make it ours and create a distraction. It’s not like we want your attention but history has shown on your own favorite site that allowing people to bicker only creates a negative spiral that ends up with people being mad and emotional.

As I mentioned to someone else, it’s better to argue the merits of your position vs the intelligence of another. Laws are made to confuse people and it works in CA.

 

[ikeo1]

It's not about "not agreeing." It's about members telling others it's ok to violate federal laws. How is that difficult to understand? But if that's what @ikeo1 wants for his site, knock yourself out. Seems like a ty policy to accept.

I understand where you’re coming from, but unless there’s case law two sides are arguing the possibility which I also understand some people don’t like.

I get reports from supporters who think we should remove such posts, but I think it’s valuable learning tools when people explain their reasoning and people make the choice because the law is interpreted and can change.

Personally I stay clear but I think it’s important for people to discuss not only to hear in depth reasoning but also to create the discussion and to foster thinking. Acting superior is not needed and making people feel dumb is also not wanted. We want to encourage people to think and learn and for newer people to engage without fear of being made a fool out of when seeking information / education. There’s too many people who have strong opinions that are wrong but try to shutdown others just by continually bullying or name calling.

That’s not something we encourage here. If you’re reasonable and share your knowledge and perspective we like to have you here. You don’t need to argue that you’re right let the users who come through and read reason that for themselves.

 

[SlowMoe]

Did the guy who tried to shoot trump with the SKS with a black stock end up getting 922r thrown at him? Not arguing for or against, just curious since that's the biggest vase I can think of where an SKS in a stock was in a public legal thing.

 

[2muchsoysauce4allthisrice]

Would 922(r) be triggered?

No because it’s made in the USA. It’s not an imported part.