Gunsmith for Threading a Fal Barrel 9/16X24 LH

[ashreg98]

i have a SAR4800 recently purchased but unfortunately when I took the pinned faux flash hider off today its just a bare barrel .

Does anyone know a gunsmith in the PNW area that is accepting barrel threading for FAL's for 9/16X24 LH?

Read More

 

[Nosferatu]

Don't know anyone in the PNW, but www.usmachinegun.com might be your best bet.

 

[kopcicle]

"(G) Threaded barrel designed to attach a flash suppressor, sound suppressor, muzzle break, or similar item; "

You won't find any smith in Washington willing to go to jail for you as soon as 1240 is signed.

In some "legal opinions" simply asking is enough to indite on conspiracy charges via intent.

Not only that but the bill is obvious in its definitions and intent to include " constructive possession and intent".

It may not be such a reach as you may think to found in possession of a muzzle device and the matching threading die.

Am I paranoid or am I paranoid enough?

So yeah, not threaded but screwed.

https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2023-24/Pdf/Bills/House%20Passed%20Legislature/1240-S.PL.pdf?q=20230422114250

 

[ashreg98]

No the Fal is already a "assault weapon" because it has a pistol grip + detachable mag per HB1240 and espically a Springfield SAR48/4800 since is banned/called out by name directly as being too evil- the worst kinda of bad.

Adding more evil features won't change that it's already a "Assault weapon".

Now if this was a stock ranch ruger mini14…. Then it would be illegal cause it's not a "AW" but adding a threaded barrel would make it so. So the bill will ban converting non-AW into AW.

 

[chipotle]

No the Fal is already a "assault weapon" because it has a pistol grip + detachable mag per HB1240 and espically a Springfield SAR48/4800 since is banned/called out by name directly as being too evil- the worst kinda of bad.

Adding more evil features won't change that it's already a "Assault weapon".

Now if this was a stock ranch ruger mini14…. Then it would be illegal cause it's not a "AW" but adding a threaded barrel would make it so. So the bill will ban converting non-AW into AW.

This is true. SBR applications have been coming back approved post-AWB for WA applicants. As OP said, you cant make an assault weapon more "assaulty".

 

[kopcicle]

you cant make an assault weapon more "assaulty".

But the State can prosecute a sender and receiver of parts that can be made into an assault rifle under the importation clause.

This is accomplished by the "How do we know that this part is for an existing weapon" as well as the constructive possession definition.

Additionally, where does this stop? Is a spare bolt carrier group a spare part or constructive possession? When is a .154" drill bit a drill bit and not a device with a constant dimension sufficient to be a fire control component by simply cutting to length? Music wire that can be easily wound into a spring? A model 70 or 700 becomes a deadly sniper rifle if it's painted black and has more than a 4x scope on it? A piece of thin wall tubing or a component for a suppressor? A picture drawn on a metal business card or a machine gun? A pistol brace or a felony?

In the extreme a detail stripped weapon defined as an assault rifle found by law enforcement during a legal search could be termed constructive possession by claiming that the State has no way of proving that it previously a complete rifle.

[sarc]This is because there is no such thing as a universal registry of firearms no matter what anyone thinks of the 4473 form. [/sarc]

There is so much about this legislation, now unconstitutional law, that can be used by the State to place the burden of proof on the citizen.

"I owned the magazines prior to the ban" Sideshow Bob says "prove it"
"I owned the rifle prior to the ban" Sideshow Bob says "prove it"
"I owned the parts prior to the ban" Sideshow Bob says "prove it"
"Those parts were shipped prior to the ban" Sideshow Bob says "prove it"

Sideshow Bob says "prove it" and is well on the way to having an unconstitutional but "legal" method of doing so in each of the above cases.

I've seen this coming for decades and when I spoke to it, I was labeled paranoid.

The State just took away your right to defend yourself with the most effective means in common use. I'm not talking about any rifle or gun. I'm talking about our constitution and bill of rights.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I'm talking about constitution of the United States of America.
The constitution that I swore an oath to support and defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

The Oath of office that our executive branch and legislature swear to is only marginally different.

Fortunately, there is article 92 of the UCMJ. This defines illegal orders.
Its civilian counterpart being impeachment and possible prosecution for treason.

"It will never happen, not here"
TBD...
April 25, 2023
January 1, 2019
September 13, 1994
May 19, 1986


I may yet see the end of the second amendment in my lifetime.

 

[powermad]

The only one I know of is https://www.arizonaresponsesystems.com/

 

[chipotle]

There is so much about this legislation, now unconstitutional law, that can be used by the State to place the burden of proof on the citizen.

SCOTUS case law is clear from the Heller: The burden of proof is absolutely on the govt to prove that any restrictions on commonly used arms are constitutional. If he wants to give GOA/FPC/SAF a victim with standing to sue, so be it. They are flush with cash from their brace rule injunctions and seeking folks to represent.

We are playing a game of chicken-and I think Bob Ferguson knows he will lose it if he pushes too hard. The chilling affect alone helps his goal, but anything more makes the house of cards fall down.