AR-15 Accessories

8/3/2008 9:04:07 AM CTbuilder1: har1340: CTbuilder1: Maybe I should clarify – preban rifles that are not banned by name are good to go with no limit on features. Sec. 53-202m. Circumstances when assault weapons exempt from limitations on transfers and registration requirements. Notwithstanding any provision of the general statutes, sections 53-202a to 53-202l, inclusive, shall not be construed to limit the transfer or require the registration of an assault weapon as defined in subdivision (3) or (4) of subsection (a) of section 53-202a, provided such firearm was legally manufactured prior to September 13, 1994. With that being said, can one assume that an HK PSG1, HK43 or an HK41 may still be purchased in CT with zero problems and zero parts removal? I don’t see why not. If they were manufactured before 9-14-94 and are not mentioned by name in the ban then there should be no issues. When you refer to “parts” are you talking about the features mentioned in the AWB or are you referring to 922r compliance? I was referring about “parts removal” if any part needed to be removed to enter CT to make it legal. Though I agree with you that there should not be an issue with those three rifles. Got_Guns 8/3/2008 9:22:39 AM 922r still stands regardless, since it is a Federal law. however, if those rifles were manufactured prior to 94′, the “parts”, (ie, flash hider, collapsable stock, bayo lug) could stay on the rifle. har1340: CTbuilder1: har1340: CTbuilder1: Maybe I should clarify – preban rifles that are not banned by name are good to go with no limit on features. Sec. 53-202m. Circumstances when assault weapons exempt from limitations on transfers and registration requirements. Notwithstanding any provision of the general statutes, sections 53-202a to 53-202l, inclusive, shall not be construed to limit the transfer or require the registration of an assault weapon as defined in subdivision (3) or (4) of subsection (a) of section 53-202a, provided such firearm was legally manufactured prior to September 13, 1994. With that being said, can one assume that an HK PSG1, HK43 or an HK41 may still be purchased in CT with zero problems and zero parts removal? I don’t see why not. If they were manufactured before 9-14-94 and are not mentioned by name in the ban then there should be no issues. When you refer to “parts” are you talking about the features mentioned in the AWB or are you referring to 922r compliance? I was referring about “parts removal” if any part needed to be removed to enter CT to make it legal. Though I agree with you that there should not be an issue with those three rifles. CTbuilder1 8/3/2008 12:22:41 PM Here is where 922r confuses me. An SKS Accessories is WAY preban but I hear that it is illegal to put that Tapco pistolgrip/collapsible stock setup on them in CT. It can’t be anything to do with the AWB considering that these rifles are 40-50 years old so I can only assume it has to do with 922r. Yet I knolw plenty of people down south who have the folding stock or tapco stock on their SKS Accessories. 922r is a fed thing so wouldn’t it apply to them as well or are they just non-compiant? Or is it ok to throw one of those stocks on an SKS Accessories in CT? Anyone got a definitive answer on this one? I want to know because I would drop $200 to get an SKS Accessories so I can shoot cheap 7.62×39, but only if I could pistol grip the thing. Blackhawk101

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>