Cal DOJ ambushes CA fixed-mag lower owners

[Mr.V.]

Any thing else you want to apologize for

Good...keep your principles without accepting reality. This state is on it's way to banning single-shot break action .22s. Just the other day I heard on the TV someone talking about how "the .308 was a machine gun round that fit belt-fed fully-auto military weapons and worse you can buy it in boxes off the internet."

You think Phil Angelides (probably our next governer unless arnold shapes up) is going to stop a bill banning internet purchasing of bullets or stop a bill requiring registration of each box of 20 rounds? bye bye wolf surplus for your soon to be SKS "assault rifle" There is little evidence to support Arnold supporting such a bill.

Hate Ronald Reagan before you hate Arnold. Arnold, at worst, passed a law he didn't push for that required all 200 or so people in the state that even have one to register a gigantic and expensive gun.

Ronald pretty much is the reason we aren't allowed to carry concealed weapons here without our blessed Sheriff's approval because he was afraid of Black people carrying guns.

The majority of people in california support an anti-gun platform. The governer can only veto so much before he gets elected out.

The .50 is a non issue, the anti's just wanted to ban something else.

The 50 would have been an issue had he vetoed it. He would have been "the governer in the pocket of terrorists and wacko gun-nuts" The vote was close to a 2/3 majority required to override the veto. That rifle was billed as a giant gun capable of shooting explosive ammunition that would blow up a city block at 6 miles out. Even Barrett himself used the "it's a sporting rifle" as the only argument against.

There aren't enough shooters left in this state to sway the argument in favor of guns. Next stop, anything in .308 "the machine gun round"

 

[Creeping Incrementalism]

The 50 would have been an issue had he vetoed it. He would have been "the governer in the pocket of terrorists and wacko gun-nuts" The vote was close to a 2/3 majority required to override the veto.

I seriously doubt that. AB50 was all but dead when it was resurrected at the last minute, as he signed it. I don't think the liberals would even have noticed. It was just coming on their radar screen at the time. And I also think there's way more than 200 registered now.

 

[Mr.V.]

I don't think the liberals would even have noticed.

I disagree. Koretz is a master of generating media-hysteria when it comes to firearms. His first attempted ban of the .50 cal, AB 2222, died the first time but was resurrected as AB 50 by the democratic legislature thanks to Koretz. There was already stuff in the LA times about shooting planes down with a .50cal from that idiotic Rand corporation study...
http://www.rand.org/pubs/documented_briefings/2004/RAND_DB468-1.pdf
I may have the timing down wrong...but I thought that the bill swept through the assembly on the heels of the rand study.

Now this Koretz guy is trying for ammo/firing pin serialization. It died the first time...but he'll be back at it after the next election and if history repeats with a Steve Wesley or Phil Angelides...we may have to kiss ammo goodbye as well.

 

[ArmedBear]

Think this through...

I'm liking this outcome. I know that many might disagree, but hear me out.

It's consistent with AB23.

It affirms that there's nothing illegal about owning all the parts to build as many AR's as you want, with whatever features you want. The law comes into play when you assemble them. That's important.

It affirms that anyone, not just a few manufacturers anointed by the DOJ, can build a CA-legal AR.

It affirms that there's nothing illegal about owning off-list lowers that have open magwells, even fully-assembled, as long as they don't have the features listed in AB23. It affirms that there's nothing illegal about owning lowers with permanently-attached magazines, even with those features.

I don't have to register anything. Registration chaps my hide even more than a "features ban."

If this memo becomes the "law of the land," then I can have the following in my car, without a locking case, without any registration required:

1. Fully-equipped EBR with a fixed mag, but with forward grip, flash hider, collapsible stock.
2. AR with fixed stock and without flash-hider or pistol grip.
3. Buttstock wrench, pin push tool, and screwdriver.

I can train, plink, hunt, etc. with the fixed-mag EBR. I can even let kids try it out without committing a crime. I don't have to get a plastic Bushie, FAB-10 or Vulcan, or worse yet a "CA-legal Bushmaster" from the guys in OC; I can build a quality gun with top-quality parts, for less money.

I can drive across the state line and legally swap lowers, stocks, grips, or uppers, or whatever, in a few minutes. I can drive home with all of the same parts, screwed together in a different configuration, without a locked case, and without committing a crime, or without having to get the government's approval. All those same parts can sit in my safe, and I'm doing nothing wrong.

Does it bother me that I grabbed some lowers? Hell no.

Would I rather have the stupid bans in CA repealed? Hell yes. Would I like to see most of the legislators in CA given early retirement on Mars? Well, yeah.

BTW, they screwed up in the memo, one way or another. You can also remove a gun from the state. You don't HAVE to sell it. California has no power to stop you from building or modifying, and storing, all the guns you want just across the state line in Arizona.

And I don't think there's any way they can enforce the part that says that a magazine that can be re-modified to receive a detachable magazine cannot be built with AB23 features, as long as the mag is fixed while the features are on the gun. That's just not in the law as it is now written. That's where this can be easily fought.

 

[SIGarmed]

Outcome? There is no outcome. It's just a memo designed to scare people into not buying lowers. Do you see a signature on it? It has no legal standing.

Look at the last memo's and you'll realize that they all have been poorly written and were pretty unbeleivable as far as the actual law is written in Calfornia.

No wonder we're loosing gun rights California. Some fighters we have here conceding defeat and things haven't even started yet.

Relax people if you want lowers go buy them and attach fixed mags. Nothing has changed.

 

[ArmedBear]

Relax people if you want lowers go buy them and attach fixed mags. Nothing has changed.

I'm not "conceding defeat." What I'm saying is that, in this memo, which isn't the law, as you say, the DOJ reaffirms that I can have all the AR's I want, as long as they're partially disassembled, legally.

In a state where AR's are supposedly banned in two different and separate ways, that, too, is a victory, because it opens up a lot of possibilities. And that's worst-case.

And it's ludicrous that they think they can create a regulation saying that a fixed-mag reciver that can possibly be modified to take a detachable mag can't be assembled with AB23 features, since AB23 addresses features a gun is assembled with, not features it could possibly be modified to include. They're making it up. Easy pickins', actually.

 

[Sgt Stevo]

Mine is not built, yet

Mine is only a finished lower. How should I make it legal?

I dont have it at my house. Just in case there is an ATF mole on our site.

 

[DevLcL]

My only question is this:

Who brings up the charges when the government breaks the law?

 

[DevLcL]

My only question is this:

Who brings up charges when the government breaks the law?

I guess thats what that 2nd Amendment thing was written for?

I'm going out on a limb here but I think most LEO's (the guys that would actually be doing the arresting if this thing becomes a reality) would not be willing to arrest their fellow law abiding citizens. I work security in a hospital and I have alot of contact with LEO's. We discuss the AR-15 (the one's they have next to their 870 in their cruisers, aswell as my fixed mag) for hours on end and I just don't think they would really try very hard to enforce a rediculous law. They realise that 'gang-banger' types like to stick to things they can conceal. As stupid as criminal are, most are smart enough to not get into the AR situation.

-Dev

 

[Creeping Incrementalism]

I'm going out on a limb here but I think most LEO's (the guys that would actually be doing the arresting if this thing becomes a reality) would not be willing to arrest their fellow law abiding citizens

I'm guessing that your fiends are older cops, and not guys in their twenties?

I've heard of three incidents of cops in CA dealing with fixed-mag lowers. The only one where the cop just let the guy go was with a stripped lower. Of the two incidents with addembled rifles, one took about an hour to resolve while a supervisor was called out and they were shown copies of the legal code, which the shooter had wisely brought with him. The cops eventually let them be. In the third incident, while the owner was not arrested, the rifle was confiscated because the cop, who I believe was a younger guy, couldn't find it in the AW registry.

So so far, while no one has been arrested that I know of, there's been at least one confiscation from an owner. And this is separate from the stripped lowers that have been confiscated from FFLs by the Firearms Division of the Cal DOJ.

AB23

I believe it is SB23.

 

[ArmedBear]

So so far, while no one has been arrested that I know of, there's been at least one confiscation from an owner. And this is separate from the stripped lowers that have been confiscated from FFLs by the Firearms Division of the Cal DOJ.

I thought they were confiscated because the FFL in question didn't have a safe to put them in. Is there another case?

Hey, we knew it was a game when we threw our money in the pot. The game continues.

I just won't put my stuff together right now, because I'm not going to epoxy in a magazine just to find out I don't really have to. But I had contingency plans when I bought the things, and like I said, even if this stuff were to hold water -- which it doesn't, from what I can tell -- it still looks better than anything that any of us knew in November 2005, if we want to build rifles and stay legal.

 

[R.H. Lee]

I'm surprised anybody is surprised at this. It's the same lying bait-and-switch tactic they used back in 1999/2000. The CA government won't be happy until firearms are legislated out of existence here. So in the meantime, go where ya wanna wanna go, do what you wanna wanna do, and OWN what you wanna wanna own. You really don't need permission because the 2nd Amendment is a RIGHT, not a government granted privilege.

In other words, let them pretend to regulate, and we will pretend to be regulated.

 

[30Cal]

The memo brings up some interesting questions. If they redefine "detachable magazine" they will almost certainly be required to open another registration. I think that is the exact opposite of what they want to do.

 

[Kevlarman]

In the meantime, BUY MORE LOWERS!

The price has been hovering arounf $100-$150 nowadays, so there really isn't any reason not to buy one. Buy a lower, wrap it in plastic, and store it in a safe place. You don't have to build it up just yet. Heck, if you wanted to, you could buy a lower now and assemble it when you move to a free state.

You just don't want to get caught without one, you know, just in case.

I'm 24, and did have a chance to buy an AR-15 before the ban. Being a high school kid then, I thought I had better things to do with my money (girls, cars, etc). I should have just borrowed money from my folks, but alas. :banghead:

 

[Sgt Stevo]

I am selling mine. Make me an offer. I have way to much to lose, Pension, permits etc. To mess with it. It is all complete.

 

[Creeping Incrementalism]

Update: the Cal DOJ is now sending out mass faxes to every law enforecment agency in California, telling them that mags that aren't permanently attached (epoxy/weld) are illegal. http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=34259

I thought they were confiscated because the FFL in question didn't have a safe to put them in. Is there another case?

It's the same case. The issue now is not the size of the safe, it's whether or not the people who organized the group buy were wholesaling, and I believe the BATFE is agency looking into that now.

If they redefine "detachable magazine" they will almost certainly be required to open another registration.

No, that's the point! First they said they were legal, everyone went out and bought them, and now they are saying that they are illegal and aren't allowing the ability to register!

 

[SnakeEater]

If I were in Cali I'd simply arrange to meet someone face to face in a friendly state and buy an AR off the books. Take it home and stash it for a rainy day, along with plenty of mags and ammo. I wonder how much would be different if the colonists had obeyed all of the British laws?

Who here agrees that the 2nd Amend. is on my side?
Who here believes that the "laws" invented by socialist scumbags have priority over the Constitution?

I carried concealed while it was illegal. I pay no attention to 922r and I didn't give a whim what the deceased AWB said. Am I a criminal? Depends on your perspective I suppose. When do we draw a line in the sand and say "that's it". I love being a husband and father. I have 3 little girls that mean the world to me. I'm sure if daddy was killed because he wouldn't allow himself to be arrested they'd be devasted. My only consulation is the hope that one day they'd understand.

Of course in todays America the vast majority are more concerned with being good little subjects, free to acquire more worthless material goods and eat at fast food joints whenever they please. Unfortunatly, being a patriot isn't always a legal indeavor.

What a fool for spouting this nonsense on the internet you say. I say I'm sick of hiding in a corner, afraid to live free, afraid to speak free, because some pc metrosexual might be offended. I simply don't care anymore.

 

[neoncowboy]

I say I'm sick of hiding in a corner, afraid to live free, afraid to speak free, because some pc metrosexual might be offended.

Here here!

I've got your back SnakeEater.

When do we draw a line in the sand and say "that's it".

From the way things are going, I think it's coming soon. Oddly, I would've guessed California crossed it with this move, but I guess the men there are willing to take a little more abuse from their masters before they rise up.

 

[Manedwolf]

Update: the Cal DOJ is now sending out mass faxes to every law enforecment agency in California, telling them that mags that aren't permanently attached (epoxy/weld) are illegal.

What's it going to take, people? This, the likely ammo restrictions, a total statewide SF-like gun ban?

Get OUT already! If I were there, I'd get the hell out NOW while you can. The ground's coming up fast and there's flames in the cockpit, and the leftists are singing "kumbaya" and holding the stick full down.

There's nothing more you can do, IMO. You're just going to lose your own stuff or get nailed on an arrest for something you didn't know you had when they play musical laws again. There's better places to make a stand.

It's NOT going to change, any more than Cuba would overthrow Castro, because despite what the "freedom fighters" think, the majority of Cubans there LIKE him and his communism. California is the same way. It's trying to stop the tide with your bare hands.

It's a sad thing for people who grew up there, but...you gotta get out before you get arrested for a stupid law change and your life is ruined.

 

[crazed_ss]

Easier said than done man. Most of us cant just up and move to a free state. We have jobs and families and kids in school and such.

 

[Manedwolf]

Yeah, I know, I know...it's hard to get out of a career and move kids and all. I just would really hate to see any decent people arrested and thrown in jail, income gone, life ruined, court costs, now a felon who can't own a gun...because of this absolute stupidity.

 

[SIGarmed]

Update: the Cal DOJ is now sending out mass faxes to every law enforecment agency in California, telling them that mags that aren't permanently attached (epoxy/weld) are illegal. http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=34259

Well it's not really true. Please read the full link. Apparently the new "memo" has not been officialy sent out. Many of those in law enforcement are saying that it has not happened. It's also just a memo like the last memo and has no force of law.

You can't be held accountable for a law that doesn't exist.

 

[Mr.V.]

Manedwolf--

After the SF gun ban there were plenty of people who said "well they did it to themselves...just so long as they don't try to ban my guns." But in reality a decent percentage of people voted no. A majority stole the rights of a minority in San Francisco. A republic is supposed to defend the minority against the majority when basic rights are being trampled isn't that so?

I personally would be very upset if someone in Idaho was arrested and convicted without a jury of his peers or if Nebraska suddenly decided it was okay to quarter troops in homes. Fundamentally isn't the constitution supposed to protect American's no matter what state they end up in or choose to live their lives?

So why then given our republican house, republican senate, republican judiciary, and republican president...have we not passed a national law guaranteeing the right to keep and bear arms is a right of citizens regardless of state? I suppose one could argue that between the 2nd and the words "equal protection under the law" in the 14th amendments should be sufficient philisophically...but it clearly is not enough in reality.

Is it the worry that such a thing would be encouraging expansion of the federal government? Is the reason that it simply is unfeasable and would never pass? Does defending individual liberties in states who have chosen to violate them (even if a majority in that state support the violation) still not warrant crossing the sacred states' rights boundry?

I'm curious to the reasons because I like others can't leave CA and feel somewhat helpless against the anti-gun tide. I don't want to end up arrested but I still think guns are cool and shiny and awesome (and a right).

 

[Manedwolf]

So why then given our republican house, republican senate, republican judiciary, and republican president...have we not passed a national law guaranteeing the right to keep and bear arms is a right of citizens regardless of state? I suppose one could argue that between the 2nd and the words "equal protection under the law" in the 14th amendments should be sufficient philisophically...but it clearly is not enough in reality.

Probably because to a number of people, myself included, those currently claiming that title while holding the reins of power are not really "Republicans" at all.

I don't see any smaller government, fiscal responsibility or national border security happening. So it doesn't really surprise me that they've just been sitting on their hands for years regarding 2A as well. No sweeping law changes that they COULD do, wiping out everything from the 90's, 80's, back to 1968 or 1934. They just...um...haven't enacted any new restrictions. Yay.

Is it the worry that such a thing would be encouraging expansion of the federal government?

Wiping OUT restrictive laws and disbanding bureacratic hell agencies like BATFE? I think it'd be the opposite. Early in this century, you could buy a Thompson at a hardware store. Everything that's been enacted since then to restrict sales has been larger and larger and more invasive goverment. Wiping that all out would be like anti-bureaucracy Drano as regards firearms. Less government, not more. But like I said, I don't see any "less government" going on. BATF became BATFE in 2002, and Homerland Insecurity has been bloating into more and more departments and agencies and government employees every week.

Headline I would love to see: "BATFE Disbanded, Agents Sent to Iraq to Attempt to Take Weapons From Insurgents".
But that's not gonna happen anytime soon.