DoJ ca, Made me turn in my ar lower


PDA






Sgt Stevo
June 28, 2006, 01:09 PM
weird one guys, I decided to get rid of my off list ar lower. I have a friend who owns an LE supply store.

I took it in, He too k the lower already built with Bushmaster parts and some other stuff for trade on Sig 226 in 40.

I had called DOJ with the number my friend gave me from my cell. The guy at doj I talked to asked me were I was turning it in. he said it would be fine. then he called back My friend and said, "The lower is contraband." MY Friend had to turn it into the PD. I lost all that money. Plus what he gave me for the trade.

I am pissed. The DOJ guy also said. "Anyone with one of these is in trouble."


Then he said, " If want a M-16 join the reserves." I did not bother to tell him I am retired Army.

Now I am really pissed. This guy was a disrectful fool. Not to mention, he lied and put my friend on the spot. Just FYI, stevo........:cuss:

If you enjoyed reading about "DoJ ca, Made me turn in my ar lower" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Malum Prohibitum
June 28, 2006, 01:13 PM
Is he right? Legally, I mean . . .

:confused:

DoubleTapDrew
June 28, 2006, 01:27 PM
Was it actually a M-16 receiver or is he too stupid to know the difference between select fire and semi auto?
Does off list mean preban? Good thing they have those laws in CA to keep law abiding citizens outgunned. They aren't 'profeshinal' enough. :barf:

HankB
June 28, 2006, 01:43 PM
MY Friend had to turn it into the PD. Tell me, did your "friend" turn in the whole rifle including all the internal parts, or did he do the "friendly" thing, strip the lower, and return all the internals to you?

Did your "friend" get a receipt for the turn-in and provide it to you?

Did CA DOJ provide you with a cite of the law defining your specific lower as contraband?

And you weren't even offered a chance to take it out of state?

This all sounds very strange . . . I'd say there's a better than even chance that someone in CA DOJ is now the proud owner of that lower.

ProficientRifleman
June 28, 2006, 02:24 PM
**********? Sane and rational people still live there?

Ronnie Barrett said he will not sell his .50 cal. rifles to any governmental agencies.

If the stupid ammo fiasco becomes law in **********, I'm looking for companies like Black Hills and Cor-Bon to say the same.

How about this: the entire firearms industry should boycott the Peoples Republik of Kalifprnia. They don't want more guns, so the industry should supply them with none!

billwiese
June 28, 2006, 02:33 PM
What brand of AR lower was it? - specific make and model on the side panel please.
What gun shop was this?
What DOJ employee gave you & the shop this info?

(If it was a regular Bushmaster lower, it was not off-list - but I am assuming it's not as you specifically used the term 'off-list'.

PM me if you don't feel like telling publicly.

The DOJ dispenses wrong information regularly. Many DOJ folks may not know that 2000 Kasler decision was superseded by the 2001 Harrott decision, which requires specific listing to be regarded as banned.

If it was:

(1) not listed by make and model as either a Colt AR15 or a specifically listed series member on the Kasler list (Calif Code of Regulation sec 979.11), and:

(2) it were not illegally configured with a pistol grip and/or telestock and/or flash hider (i.e., evilf features along with an open magwell, or if it were in legal gripless configuration (fixed stock, no flash hider, no pistol grip)

... it is indeed legal.

You may be able to get it back and/or seek relief.

Calguns.NET has the best discussion of off-list AR/AK situation. You'll be able to discuss things rationally there without all the anti-Californian BS from out-of-state posters common to here and AR15.COM

Gun stores in San Jose are actively selling off-list lowers. They wouldn't, if they were illegal - gun shops selling off-list lowers have been audited aggressively and are still in business and are not charged with anything. One of them in SJ has a noted gun lawyers on retainer whose office is just down the road from them.

How come you didn't fight, protest, assert your rights, assert legality?

Autolycus
June 28, 2006, 02:37 PM
I apologize. I know you feel to have to obey stupid laws.

Thylacine
June 28, 2006, 02:45 PM
If it came down to it, I would butcher the the lower so bad it could not be used for anything other than a paper weight. What is the penalty for not complying with their unconstitutional requests?

ryoushi
June 28, 2006, 02:46 PM
If you built your rifle with a non-fixed magazine and a pistol grip, well yes it is illegal. The whole point of buying an OLL was to either secure the magazine or leave off any evil features such as flash suppressors, collapsable stocks and pistol grips.

If you built your rifle to comply with current law however, it sounds like you just bought what DOJ was telling you and caved in. No new laws have been passed since you purchased your OLL but this hasn't stopped the CA DOJ from publishing several contradictory memos but they have no bearing yet as they are not law. CA Legislature is trying to pass a new bill but it is still hung up in committee.

It would be helpfull in the future to give the name of the dealer and any DOJ personnel as there is so much BS being spewed on the internet over this issue.

As for good solid info listen to billweise and your local DA.

Ira Aten
June 28, 2006, 03:00 PM
Department of "Justice"?

Right.

Car Knocker
June 28, 2006, 03:18 PM
I do believe you got snookered.

billwiese
June 28, 2006, 04:09 PM
He may have confused the situation by saying it has a Bushmaster lower parts kit (like that's relevant to anything) and somehow the DOJ doofus thought it was a Bushmaster.

Bill Wiese
San Jose CA

Sgt Stevo
June 28, 2006, 04:24 PM
I PM bill. I dont want to put the name on the internet of the Police supply store in san Jose. As this would be rude. If you want it. PM me. The guy I talked to at doj was a tool. but i dont remember his name. I even tried to be nice. he did not.

Fletchette
June 28, 2006, 04:48 PM
Then he said, " If want a M-16 join the reserves."

Sounds a lot like, "if you want a book join the government approved library". :barf:

stevelyn
June 29, 2006, 12:27 AM
Bummer........But I'll bet the weather is nice.

Draven32
June 29, 2006, 05:51 AM
*BAM*

look up 'ripeness' in a legal dictionary

you now have it.

roo_ster
June 29, 2006, 09:09 AM
Lesson learned.

Next time, sell it to someone from one of the remaining free states.

Malum Prohibitum
June 29, 2006, 09:13 AM
Sgt Stevo wrote, "Now I am really pissed. This guy was a disrectful fool. Not to mention, he lied and put my friend on the spot."


Okay, so what are you going to do?


:cuss: Will accomplish nothing. Neither will :banghead: Once you are finished doing this :fire: , you need to lay down a plan of action and then execute it. And I would not delay, or there may be nothing to recover or no way to trace it.

Master Blaster
June 29, 2006, 09:24 AM
Call the local ATF office and speak with the agent in charge.
Let him know that its a legal lower, and that you fear the guy at the DOJ is going to put it to an illicit use, since he should know this as well.

Since the lower was legally transferred to you and there is a yellow form with your name on it you dont want it to end up being sold to criminals.
Ask them to investigate and let you know what the DOJ is doing with your legally owned receiver. Remind them of the Rampart case, and tell them you are afraid and need the federal govt to enforce federal law.:evil:

AirForceShooter
June 29, 2006, 10:31 AM
No good deed goes unpunished.

Why can't people just shut up.

AFS

gunsmith
June 29, 2006, 01:39 PM
all over CA a lot of it on purpose and a lot because no one knows all the laws.

I thank God I finally moved.

I miss all my cool gun buddies at Jackson Arms in the Bay Area, and all the comraderie that comes with being a persecuted minority.

Whenever I need the smell of stale urine and need to get hassled by bums
I can visit SF:barf:

Sgt Stevo
June 29, 2006, 01:49 PM
I am just gonna let it go. I never should have been stupid enough to trade it in , in the first place.

BUT, I wanted to make sure anyone else, who might think about doing this does not.

This was my bad.:barf:

billwiese
June 29, 2006, 03:24 PM
OK folks, relax, there may have been some configuration issues. It apparently wasn't a bare lower receiver (!!) and Steve may have gotten "a bit wild" with its configuration :)
Stevo...

Sounds like you're lucky, actually - losing a lower is way better than a felony charge.

Your problem wasn't trading it in, your problem was (apparently) how you set it up.

But these things won't happen if you comply with the strictures outlined in the FAQ on Calguns.NET.

Anyone not familiar w/details of AW law and dealing with off-list lowers in CA and that hasn't read the FAQ is asking for trouble - and shouldn't be dealing w/OLLs.


Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

Creeping Incrementalism
June 29, 2006, 03:34 PM
Bill, I'm guessing the guy had an open mag well?

The guy I talked to at doj was a tool

They pretty much all are. Their answers to any ambiguous questions (which are most of them, in CA) are usually either wrong, or non-commital ("the decision is up to the individual cop/DA".

CalGuns.net is the best place to ask your California gun questions.

billwiese
June 29, 2006, 05:06 PM
Bill, I'm guessing the guy had an open magwell?


I don't have all the details, but let's just say Steve got 'overenthusiastic' over features and it wasn't a bare lower. And I don't think there was a fixed mag.


Bill Wiese
San Jose

shooter94
June 29, 2006, 05:09 PM
I...

shooter94
June 29, 2006, 05:10 PM
Hate...

shooter94
June 29, 2006, 05:11 PM
This State!:mad:

Sgt Stevo
June 29, 2006, 06:22 PM
Bill is right, I did a dumb thing, but did I thought it was legal as long as the upper was not attached.

I did not want to start a panic. I just wanted other gun guys not to do what I did, I have paid a lot of $ for this mistake. I hope others learn from this.

I still hate the GC in this state. And if we could get new jobs in Nev, arizona, Montana, etc, I would not be here to deal with it.

Geno
June 29, 2006, 06:29 PM
I wish you the best! How is it that the powers that be treat us like criminals because we choose to K&B arms? Take legal action ASAP to get it back if you can!

Doc2005

gh429
June 29, 2006, 06:43 PM
Wait what, let me get this straight, they confiscated your lower that was not attached to an upper? How is that ok? I for one plan to build a single shot A/R with a detachable mag - will they confiscate my lower too?

As for the people at the DOJ firearms div being tools, I personally have found them to be very nice. They return your calls when they say they will, are polite and courteous, and attempt to assist you to the best of their ability. They are after all normal folk, not lawyers...

Sgt Stevo
June 29, 2006, 08:35 PM
Im done with this guys, the point has been made. yes the DOJ dude I talked to was a tool.

He was rude, threatenening and had no respect. Any group that is paid by tax dollers should be public service orientated. Like I said, I am done with this.

It was a heads up. Thats all. And brainiac, If you put a pistol grip and illegal stock on your lower. Your intent to make it a single shot will not matter. Did you Join the THR just to say that. If so troll somewere else.

Car Knocker
June 29, 2006, 09:18 PM
I for one plan to build a single shot A/R with a detachable mag

I'm having a little trouble envisioning this. If it has a magazine, is it not, by definition, not a single shot rifle?

billwiese
June 29, 2006, 09:21 PM
If it has a detachable mag, it ain't a single shot.

Please, if you're building a rifle from an off-list lower in CA, read the FAQ on Calguns. Presence of an upper doesn't matter. A lower w/pistol grip and open magwell is evil.

Go directly to prison unless you're lucky like Sgt Steve.

Bill Wiese
San Jose

KC&97TA
June 30, 2006, 08:06 PM
If you cut the pistol grip off and cover the rear retaining pit spring with a nub about 1/2" thick, you may have a removeable 10 round mag, if you don't have a flash hider and you must have a fixed stock. . . now if you can have a 10 round removeable mag, well one of those 11+ round mags fits, I would think? I don't know, I'm really new at this AR15/M16 thing (jokeing) But if you don't have an Evil Pistol Grip or an Evil Collapsable buttstock or a really evil flash hider ... you are allowed to have a some what evil removeable 10 round magazine :uhoh: This set up isn't as user friendly, but it doesn't change the characteristics of the rifle very much, it's just not as comfortable to shoot.

WORD to anyone else that has run ins with the CA DOJ and AR15's; When the lower isn't assembled in any way, TOTALLY STRIPPED ! It isn't illegal. One inserted pin, one pistol grip screw makes it considered assembled, TOTALLY STRIPPED NOT ILLEGAL.

CA laws are stupid, I got a verbal warning for slipping the vertical grip on my AR onto my buddies Glock, it was on for about 5 min at the public range.

Love the weather in CA, love the people I meet in CA, but when my acitve duty time is over, I'm back to the mid-west... There'll be plenty of Ruby-Ridge's if CA ever decided to start knocking down doors takeing all the "off list lowers", alot of people are into them and there's several pretty creative things wrapped around the mag release being disabled and reenabled with "tools". It would suprise you how many pre-ban AR's are around too, once you know the law, you can work your way around it.

crazed_ss
June 30, 2006, 08:17 PM
WORD to anyone else that has run ins with the CA DOJ and AR15's; When the lower isn't assembled in any way, TOTALLY STRIPPED ! It isn't illegal


Well it depends on the lower. If it's on the banned list, it's an AW whether it's assembled or not.


and there's several pretty creative things wrapped around the mag release being disabled and reenabled with "tools". It would suprise you how many pre-ban AR's are around too, once you know the law, you can work your way around it.


The laws are pretty clear.. you either have a fixed magazine or pistol grip.. Not both.
Anyone who has a AR-15 and didnt register it back in 2000 is in violation of the law.. they can be in a heap of trouble if they get caught.

People trying to skirt the law and trying to figure out "creative" ways to have a pistol grip and detachable mag are gonna end up buying themselves a one-way ticket to felonyville.

Kentak
June 30, 2006, 08:27 PM
Pardon my ignorance. What does "off-list" mean?

Never mind. I figured it out. Means off the list of banned guns, right?

crazed_ss
June 30, 2006, 08:44 PM
Pardon my ignorance. What does "off-list" mean?


In California, AR-15's are banned "Assault Weapons", but due to a court decision, the state is forced to list the model of AR-15 that is banned. There are several on the list.. http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/infobuls/kaslist.pdf .. Obviously there are a bunch of different makers of AR-15's though. So people simply buy AR-15 receivers that arent on the ban list.

The important thing to understand is CA also bans "Assault Weapons" by features. If you have a centerfire rifle with a pistol grip and detachable mag, then it is an illegal assault weapon. http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/genchar2.htm

This means that just because you were able to legally obtain an "off-list" lower receiver, does NOT mean you can build it up into a fully functional AR-15 with detachable mag and pistol grip. You have to fix that magazine or fire it without a pistol grip.

The DOJ has basically told people that their fixed-mag builds are technically legal, but not every DA in CA's 58 counties will necessarily agree. Basically they're passing the buck and saying "build at your own risk"..

Some companies sell pre-made fixed-magazine CA AR-15s.. they have gotten the blessing from the DOJ to do this though. Bushmaster sells one of these rifles.. http://www.impactguns.com/store/AZC-C15RM4FT.html

It seems the DOJ does not approve of the method people are using to fix their magazines for their self-built rifles.. the DOJ is looking to ammend the law so that a fixed magazine is permanent. http://www.ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/awdefnotice0606.html
Everyone is concerned with what the definition of "permanent" will be .

Ira Aten
June 30, 2006, 08:53 PM
Originally posted by Malum Prohibitim regarding "DOJ" guy.

Quote: "Is he right? Legally, I mean . . ."


Malum: Something struck me about that question, (which we ask all the time about all sorts of things) The thought was-isn't "legal" supposed to equal "right" or "fair"? I always thought the purpose of "law" was to establish justice.

More and more these days, the world "legally" seems to mean a method in which a bunch of government agency employees find a manner in which to make sure that an "administrative rule or regulation" results in their ability to arbitrarily tell you "you are in trouble".

Sven
July 1, 2006, 12:21 PM
I think Bill's summary is right. Stevo may have had an over-enthusiastic interpretation of "CA-legal AR". Everyone please check that your tinfoil hats are shiny side out and fitted snuggly.

-steve

PS: CA DOJ still has 6 of my AR receivers, seized illegally in the "Milpitas Debacle", still unresolved but good people are on the case. Hey, the gun laws may suck, but its not like we live on a fault line or anything, surrounded by clueless moonbats... oh... wait... forget what I just said.

PinnedAndRecessed
July 1, 2006, 12:51 PM
As for the people at the DOJ firearms div being tools, I personally have found them to be very nice. They return your calls when they say they will, are polite and courteous, and attempt to assist you to the best of their ability. They are after all normal folk

That was always my experience.

Love the weather in CA, love the people I meet in CA, but when my acitve duty time is over, I'm back to the mid-west

LOL! That was me! I was in the valley for seven years. From my front yard I could see both the Sierras and the Coastal Mountain Range. I loved the Sierras.

Mixed emotions.

But one thing's for sure. There are no taco trucks/taquerias in Tulsa.
And I miss those.

mountainclmbr
July 1, 2006, 10:42 PM
Why do you live in a communist hell hole that severly crimminalizes what is legal for most US CITIZENS? I would not voluntarily move to Cuba. Once there I would not be free to leave. You are free to leave Kommiefornistan. I would be breaking the speed limit to get out. What is wrong with people that live there? I would not give up my liberty for any sum of money.

The wrong biomasses move to Colorado from Komiefirnistan and try to change it to Kommielorado. Send us the other ones! I suppose I am Constitutionally proteceted from the "progressive BS", but they don't stop their whining. And they don't obey the Constitution.

gh429
July 6, 2006, 01:03 AM
The kg/mm of the recoil spring can be modified so that the round will eject but a second round will not feed without the user pulling all the way back on the charging handle for non-semi automatic operation.

Semiautomatic: "the operating mode of which uses the energy of the explosive in a fixed cartridge to extract a fired cartridge and chamber a fresh cartridge with each single pull of the trigger."

I personally do not believe the California penal code prohibits the possession of a fully assembled lower with an open magwell but without an upper. The chances of having to explain it to a judge? Probably reasonably high.

evan price
July 6, 2006, 01:38 AM
Oddly enough we DO have taco trucks and taquerias in Columbus, Ohio. Good food generally too! One of the best Hamburgesas I have had in a while came from a taco truck at a junkyard.

Back on track, would a thumbhole stock with removable mag be legal in CA?

Sawdust
July 6, 2006, 11:59 AM
Back on track, would a thumbhole stock with removable mag be legal in CA?

Nope...

Sawdust

MudPuppy
July 6, 2006, 01:42 PM
"If it has a detachable mag, it ain't a single shot."

What about a pump action? Is that legal for CA with a detachable mag?

But, hey Stevo, I feel for you. I have had many opportunties to double my salary, but no way will I freely move to that state. (I am pleased to see people refrain from suggesting that you tell them "Molan Labe"--not so easy to do when looking at the possibity of a felony or prison time.)

I'm glad it wasn't worse for you.

johnsonrlp
July 6, 2006, 02:57 PM
Pumps are a go in Cali. So long as it's 10 or less in the mag.
Don't think I'll be moving back. On the plus side the knife carry laws are pretty good.

ryoushi
July 6, 2006, 03:01 PM
I personally do not believe the California penal code prohibits the possession of a fully assembled lower with an open magwell but without an upper. The chances of having to explain it to a judge? Probably reasonably high
If it has a pistol grip on it you'd be in big trouble. If you want a pistol grip the mag must be fixed in place and non detachable without the use of a tool.

billwiese
July 6, 2006, 05:55 PM
If it has a pistol grip on it you'd be in big trouble. If you want a pistol grip the mag must be fixed in place and non detachable without the use of a tool.


Yup. The receiver = rifle, and with pistol grip and/or telestock it'd most likely be regarded as a no-no. You might have a possible defense otherwise but don't expect success.

I'm seeing a variety of misinformation on the above posts w/regards to ARs.

AR lower receiver is separate from 'type of action'. So I don't recommend having a bolt or pump upper (i.e., nonsemiautomatic) on an off-list lower because, if separated, you likely would be regarded as having an (illegal) AW if detachable mag were used.


AR lower receiver is separate from centerfire vs rimfire considerations. Putting a 22LR upper on a regular AR lower would, similar to above, not mitigate things if a detachable mag were used. However, DOJ seems to have said multiple times that if "22LR" caliber is marked on an off-list lower, then the 'prime purpose' of the lower is 22LR and 12276.1 generic definitions are not triggered with 22LR upper and pistol grip and open magwell. (I'm sure some idiots will try to re-mark their lowers w/22LR and go straight to jail.)


The above concerns don't apply to off-list AKs and non-FN FALs simply because the serialized receiver and type of action (semiauto vs manual, centerfire vs rimfire) are directly associated with each other (nonseparable without full disassembly, unlike ARs.




Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

nvshooter
July 7, 2006, 02:14 AM
Another reason I am happy to live in NV...

goblues
July 7, 2006, 02:28 AM
I live in Mo, and with CCW law passed now, the really only dumb thing thats left on the books is the stupid ass Permit to Aquire each time you buy a pistol you have to get a permit. Some counties take 10 minutes, some take over a week like here in St. Louis county. Alot of states still have the permit law in effect dating back from teh civil war.

Anyways I can't see how people can live in that state. I mean sure it has Hollywood, and I guess alot of people like living there and seeing the stars, and famous people. It seems most of the wacky laws are made in LA, and San Fransicko. Plus add in the illegal problem, and property vaule out there is plain assanine. Cali seems like a pretty state from what I hear evryone who visits it, but it's ashame that the political climate is a communist Sht hole that has destroyed that very state, and bankrupted it. Not to mention the anti American climate that exist in San Fransiko, LA.

I feel sorry for the people who live outside of LA, and San fran who have sensible gun views, and have to put up with unconstituinal gun laws due to communist liars like Frankenstein.

I really wish the Supreme Court would step in and help people out who live in states such as CA, IL, NY, NJ, MA that try and strip their gun rights away.

I also hear that lot of people who work in California live in Nevada and make a long commute just to have sensible gun rights.

If you enjoyed reading about "DoJ ca, Made me turn in my ar lower" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!