Is the Yugo Zatstava M59/66 really classified as an SKS?

[Swagman00]

This is a question that makes a lot of difference to Yugo M59/66 owners in California. The reason I have to ask this is for the sake of owning and using detachable magazines because the Roberti-Roos list specifically targets "SKS with detachable magazine" as an illegal CA firearm.

The Zatstava M59/66 does not have the letters "SKS' stamped anywhere on it so can I use detachable 10 round mags on a featureless M59/66? Can I also use older hi-cap mags over 12 years old?

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Aragorn243]

To the best of my knowledge it is an SKS. I don't live in California but I did purchase a Yugo SKS that at one time was California legal. The bayonet had been removed and the grenade launcher removed and a flash suppressor welded in place. As these two items were addressed, I would suspect that it is covered under the California statute but as I don't live there, I'm no expert.

I have since re-installed the bayonet but have not addressed the flash suppressor yet, I don't have the ability or knowledge of getting it off and while the spot weld is small, it's probably too large to easily get rid of. Extensive grinding of the suppressor might be one way to get it off but it doesn't bother me that much yet.

[Swagman00]

From what I've read on blogs and other forums, a general set of rules is followed that seems to favor the gun owner if followed appropriately:

1: By modifying any part of the gun (Going from fixed to removable magazine, synthetic stock, etc.) it has lost the C&R status that allowed it into the state in the first place and then falls under section 922r which states that it must have no more then 10 foreign made parts. This is a federal compliance.

2: For California, it seems any firearm that falls under the Roberti-Roos list such as a Yugo M59/66 cannot be legal with a detachable magazine in state. I thought this was the case under code 122276.1, but amendment CCR 5495 (the Kasler list) says the Harrott decision changed the situation. A firearm cannot considered illegal by "Brand" alone. It has to be by "Make" and "Model".

With the PDF http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/awguide.pdf it clearly identifies the SKS as "Markings: SKS is usually found of the left side of the receiver" The Yugo M59/66 does not have these markings.

"(e) The term "series" includes all other models that are only variations, with minor differences, of those models listed in subdivision (a), regardless of the manufacturer."
That was overturned by Harrott and gave us the second list. Since the Yugo M59/66 LOOKS like an SKS, people THINK it's an SKS when it is NOT. Right?

One last bit of information I've kicked around is that the M1A, M1 Carbine, SVT-40, M1941 Johnson, and AVS-36 (with 10 round mag) all have the detachable magazine without "evil" features. I've talked with a local dealer and he stated that all of the aforementioned rifles are perfectly legal for sale provided the guns are paid for. An SKS with a 10 round mag sold in state is (for the most part) no different then the rifles listed prior.

If any of this is incorrect, please feel free to alter it for the sake of staying legal.

[Aragorn243]

I'm not a lawyer so take my advice with that in mind.

The Yugo M59/66 IS an SKS. It was built under license from the Soviet Union. It's main difference from the Soviet model being the grenade launcher, the sights, bayonet and the non-chrome lined barrel. It also was built with a hinged/permanent 10 round magazine.

When reading a description such as that given in the link you provided, it is NOT clearly identified. The word "USUALLY" does not mean "ALWAYS" so the absence of said designation in the location mentioned does not exclude it from being an SKS. The designation as to model is in the import stamp which may or not be in that location. Mine is on the barrel and it also is identified as a Yugo M59/66 with no mention of it being an SKS but there is no doubt in my mind in that is exactly what it is for legal purposes.

Now if your law states it must be listed by make and model, it is a Yugo M59/66 and if they excluded that from their list, you may have a loophole but I personally wouldn't count on it and I would be contacting the California Attorney General, not seeking opinions on a firearms forum.

You can also research in what you can and can't do to the firearm after you purchase it with no intent to re-sell. Some laws only apply to the initial sale but again, I'd be checking with your AG.

[Swagman00]

Just checking to see if I have a leg to stand on. I can now work things from here and it moves to the next level. I'm not trying anything until I know for sure I'm in the clear.