Relative needs to be a either a grandparent, parent, son/daughter or grandson/granddaughter in order to qualify for the interfamily gift exmpetion.roscoe said:Have a relative from out of CA give you one as a present... Giving a pistol is completely legal, if you can legally own a firearm.
Not exactly true.roscoe said:... It is legal to own them in CA, they just can't be sold...
Yes, it is okay. Because it's an interfamily gift from father to son.guajiro said:Let me get this straight. If my father (lives in Florida) buys one and gives it to me, thats OK? If so, how does he go about sending it to me?
After CA DOJ denied the Ruger SR9, saying Ruger's LCI (Loaded Chamber Indicator) did not pass, Ruger has no intention of modifying (needs to add a magazine disconnect) and submitting the LCP for testing.
Many parts are interchangeable.icebones said:is it just me, or does the ruger lcp look A LOT liek a kel-tec p3at?
Not at all, they're virtually identical, the gun is of keltec design without a doubt.is it just me, or does the ruger lcp look A LOT liek a kel-tec p3at?
I doubt it was ignorance but perhaps just pragmatism, assuming there is something unique about it that would make it patent worthy. KT is a small company, how much money could they devote to a legal battle? Glock probably spent a tidy sum of money going after s&w, it took years, they had to resort at points to strong arming dealers into chosing between carrying S&W or glock. Could kel-tec successfully battle a company that is as of right now worth $176M? I think it might be difficult. If you don't want to waste your money going after small companies that rip you off like skyy and you don't have the resources to fight larger companies that do...why bother? Make the best product you can and hope your product and price will speak for itself.Kel-Tec forgot to patent one of the most innovative handgun designs ever.
Not really, pick a big company with money that you can't afford to fight, the name of the company is irrelevant. It happened to be ruger, but could have just as easily been s&w or beretta. The end result is the same. Pick a small company that isn't worth the money to fight even if you win, once again the name is irrelevant and the end result is the same.Your concept assumes Kel-Tec knew they would be up against Ruger before they supposedly decided not to patent their design.
That has been done before too, see skyy pistols.I would have expected it more from a garage operation than a Ruger simply because with a copy
Have you looked at the sales numbers kel-tec has? The unit cost might be low but kel-tec sells an amazing number of guns. Who wouldn't want a slice of that?And at that price-point, it was hard to predict a Ruger or S&W would be interested.
Once again, to what benefit? How many pistols does skyy sell? Have you even heard of them before? What return would you see from suing them?If you hold a patent and don't want to go after Ruger, you can still go after smaller companies.