User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/13/2005 6:10:03 PM EDT
[#1]
Here's a letter from the Fulton Armory detailing what they were told by the DOJ (Fulton Armory receivers are legal to buy in CA, the DOJ has admitted this).
Basically, the DOJ called them and told them that they could be prosecuted for selling a legal product. I wonder why, if the Fulton Armory is this gutless, they sell anything else in CA? All of their other products are just as legal as their AR lowers, but according to the DOJ, you can be prosecuted for selling anything, legal or not. So why take a chance selling M1A's? or slings? or springs? Why sell anything... to anybody? You never know when the DOJ is going to prosecute. Thanks CA Department of INjustice. ****begin copied message**** Hi XXX, We [Fulton Armory] called UPS today and requested that they return back to us the shipment of 100 receivers we sent out last week to you. If for any reason UPS delivers them in error, Fulton Armory demands that you return all 100 of them back to us. We will credit your credit card the moment the receivers are received by us, as well as reimburse you for standard ground shipping, handling and insurance. If they are not returned, we will call the CADOJ and list them as stolen. ATF allows that any licensee may refuse to sell to anyone, for any reason. I so now refuse to sell our lowers to you. The California DOJ called me today and informed me that even though our receivers are technically legal for sale in CA, we __could__ still be prosecuted by any of the over 100 DA's in California. An essential fact that you withheld from me in our communications. Had I been aware of this critical information, and that there was some legal dispute, I would have never shipped these receivers to California. As mentioned earlier today via our phone con, the second 100 receivers that you ordered will not be shipped. It seems these days, there is legal, and then there's "legal". Who knew. Who can know these things? A copy of this email will be faxed/mailed to the CADOJ. W. Clint McKee Owner Fulton Armory [email protected] http://www.fulton-armory.com |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2005 6:28:47 PM EDT
[#2]
sux
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2005 6:40:22 PM EDT
[#3]
Cockgobblers.
 The doj needs a watchdog not the other way around.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2005 6:41:33 PM EDT
[#4]
I'll take a dozen P-90 recievers since thay aren't listed with CAL DOJ
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2005 7:17:54 PM EDT
[#5]
Whos selling them? 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2005 7:19:09 PM EDT
[#6]
If the P-90 recievers were built to DOJ Legal Specs then you SHOULD be able to buy as many as you want right? Who's side are you on again? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2005 7:50:40 PM EDT
[#7]
Just ignore him. He's the same sort of bitter complainer that ran around during 2004 saying that congress was definitely going to renew the Clinton ban. The pessimists were wrong then, and they're wrong now. Some things never change. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2005 8:08:03 PM EDT
[#8]
I'd like to find an FFL in my area that would transfer a receiver to me. blackrazor, or anyone, drop me an email if you know one!!!
Regarding getting AWs registered moving to CA, when I got orders here I found out there is a specific Military Assault Weapons Permit (MAWP) process that they've got in place for guys like me who get orders here but have to bring our stuff along. caag.state.ca.us/firearms/ab991.htm Under their FAQ section, the DOJ lists this:
Kind of misleading, since there's a process for military to get MAWPs and according to blackrazor there have been permits issued to other people moving to the state. By the way, good job keeping this post on topic and not CA-bashing. Now, I just wrote that after posting a dissertation on the MAWP...  |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2005 8:11:05 PM EDT
[#9]
By the way, I understand that Fulton's got to worry about his business, but as far as I'm concerned, another reason to...
Screw Fulton. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2005 9:02:33 PM EDT
[#10]
+1 for backing out! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2005 9:54:22 PM EDT
[#11]
So they are saying the receivers were bought, shipped, and now they are going to report them stolen if they don't get it back? Wouldn't that be false reporting of a crime, since the receivers no longer belonged to them? AND they faxed/mailed a copy of this admission to the DOJ? Maybe Fulton should hire another legal consultant, they don't seem to be getting good advice so far. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2005 9:57:21 PM EDT
[#12]
I see that some of you may want to buy a CA legal DSA ZM4 receiver in California. I am putting one up for sale. Here is the link to the auction on GunBroker. The receiver is ready to go, and I have an FFL dealer lined up to do the transfer. We must work fast, as the DoJ has already cut off the supply, and will soon ban these receiver outright. They claim within two weeks.
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=41519535 www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=41519535 |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2005 10:03:28 PM EDT
[#13]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2005 10:11:30 PM EDT
[#14]
Im confused, where do we stand on this?
looking for some clarification...legal but not aval.? soon to be non legal, not aval.? avalable? not legal, or just forgetabout it 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2005 10:24:12 PM EDT
[#15]
all well, californians will have to stick to Mini 14s for semi auto 5.56/.223 fun
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2005 10:26:45 PM EDT
[#16]
Here's the current standing of the situation. A handful of AR-style receivers (such as the ZM4) are temporarily legal to purchase in CA. The DOJ knows about this and is working to ban them ASAP. If you get the receiver before it's banned, you're set, otherwise, you're screwed. Not many receivers have made it into the state thanks to the DOJ bullying manufacturers and scaring them off. What few receivers that have made it into the state are locked far, far away, with very few (maybe only 1?) exception, and that seems to be the ZM4 receiver listed for sale on gunbroker. Hell, the DOJ may ban the ZM4 before that auction even ends, in which case, no one can get one (although I doubt they will work that fast... at the gunshow last weekend they reported that they might get the new models banned in 2 weeks).
I'm glad I got my hands on these babies before everything went nuts 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 8:44:17 AM EDT
[#17]
How can one be prosecuted for selling legal firearms?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 10:16:30 AM EDT
[#18]
Can CA folks make their own using the 80% (or whatever they are) recievers? Does this "loophole" mean the CADOJ would have to list "%Every Subject's Name% Manufacturing" to stop home finished builds?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 2:22:26 PM EDT
[#19]
Forget about false reporting, it's been a while and I could be mistaken on the definition here in CA, but using the threat of accusing someone of a crime in order to obtain property that does not belong to you is usually called Extortion. And the retard at Fulton even put it writing. If anything 10% is the one who could be reporting a crime. Plus, any of you lawyers or holiday inn express customers help me out here but if UPS returns them and Fulton refunds the money I'm fairly sure Fulton can still be sued for breach of contract for the profit 10% lost. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 2:32:13 PM EDT
[#20]
10% said he didnt want any problems with Fulton and wanted to stay on his good side. Im with most folks here, I wont buy a single screw from them and will probably buy a LRB14 just to stick it to em.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 2:58:06 PM EDT
[#21]
I think us guys in the other 49 should abstain from buying for a few months so that prices will drop a little and the CA boyz can rack up like mad.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 3:12:12 PM EDT
[#22]
Here's what I think.
What a shitbag move by Fulton Armory. Never going to get any business from me. And you people who call yourselves "pro-gun" and "pro-2A" ought to step back and take a look at yourselves. The reason the 2A is so stepped on, and the reason that are rights are trampled at every turn, is the APATHY of gun owners, like yourselves, who are willing to accept a little sop from the government. LOOK AT YOURSELVES! Getting all happy because you found a "loophole" that will be closed shortly, and which will get you prosecuted anyway, I bet you money. I can already see some pictures here of things that will get you prosecuted - maybe not legally, but hey, the CA AWB isn't legal either - and that hasn't stopped anyone. Those pictures of DSA lowers with buttstocks? Hey, to be a registered AW (per the federal ban) the lower had to be an assembled rifle, similar to the CA .50cal ban. And that wire frame handle? How many inches is that pistol grip below the action? Do you think you'll be left alone? Shit, the second you hand in your registration paperwork you'll get ARRESTED! Why not take a stand? Why not agitate to overturn illegal laws? Why not disobey illegal laws? Why not get the hell out of the state? Jesus, it makes me sick. You're like a bunch of six year olds who are told to go to bed without supper, then called back down to eat dessert. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 4:27:46 PM EDT
[#23]
You are so full of shit, I can hardly stand it.
So I'm apathetic, huh? I've spent god knows how much time figuring out how to do this, but I'm apathetic? I wrote several letters to the DOJ, research multiple court rulings, got the DOJ to admit the ZM4 was legal, but I'm apathetic? Do you even know what that word means?!
OK, how much you want to bet I don't get prosecuted? Put up or shut up. I'll wager $1000 bucks that I don't get prosecuted, and that you're full of shit. Well, how about it, you going to accept, or wuss out?
ummm, dumbass... what do you think this is all about?! The whole point of this "loophole" is that we are overturning illegal laws, THAT'S WHY THE SUPREME COURT MADE THEIR DECISION. Duh!
Ooops! Wrong again! Lots of people registered .50 BMG receivers that were not assembled into complete rifles.
He shoots again... and misses! Sorry, but to be an AW under the federal ban (there was no registration, duh), you just had to have enough features on the lower to qualify, read: pistol grip + collapsible stock. The entire rifle DID NOT have to be assembled. Besides, we're not talking about the federal ban here, which (legally speaking) worked in an entirely different way.
Oh, so now you're advocating we retreat? Coward. BTW, did you leave the country during the federal AW ban? No? Then shut up and keep your hypocricy to yourself. So, you going to take my bet, or are you just going to run away? Or are you just going to sit there and continue to be a nay-saying, know-nothing, full of shit pessimisstic moron? |
|||||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 4:44:23 PM EDT
[#24]
Epeescott you are a little too dramatic don’t you think? You have so much anger against anti-gun people that it is overflowing onto pro-gun California’s who are just trying their best to the best of a bad situation. FMJs
P.S. I am aware that California has its faults, that’s why I am planning my escape in just over a month |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 4:57:22 PM EDT
[#25]
Blackrazor, you're right...There was no registration for the Federal ban. I was applying the statutes of the CA AWB to the federal one, my mistake. However, you are incorrect in saying that it doesn't have to be assembled. It does per California law.
I consider your behavior apathetic, in that you accept that the AWB in CA is legal, and are doing your best to stand by it. May your chains rest lightly upon you. I don't deny you did a lot of research, and it is to be lauded that you drew the line in front of the DOJ. It is your basic premise that I question. This "loophole" that you found does not overturn anything. Your statement of "That's why the Supreme Court made their decision. Duh!" doesn't make sense...can you explain what you meant? The court cases you cited in your letter to the DOJ don't overturn anything. I am not saying that people DIDN'T register 50cal receivers as weapons, just that in order to be in COMPLIANCE with the (illegal) law, it had to be assembled. I don't ask what people do in their own home. My hypocrisy to myself? You don't know me, you don't know what my response to these illegal laws is, so until you do you have no facts on which to base that statement. FMJ's, you are right......I am frustrated to all hell with the laws here. The only thing keeping me here is my children - when he graduates HS I am gone. Sooner if I can manage it. I was just in a free state over the weekend, so that made me feel the laws here more keenly. Blackrazor, chill out - no need to be so offensive. I will acknowledge that my statement was harsh towards people who just accept the laws. Do recall, you still can't have a 30 round mag on it, right? Unless you had it before the ban, in which case you wouldn't really be worrying about CA legal receivers, would you? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 5:05:36 PM EDT
[#26]
I think it changes everything, the fact that the DOJ admits any lower not named is legal means alot means the laws are filled with holes and as good americans were there to take advantage and will keep doing so until the law is changed or we can vote the buttholes out who make stupid laws. Until that happens I will continue to shoot my Fal, SW5, AR15, G3, etc. etc. Oh and I will say hi to the Class 3 guy in the next town over from me as Im sure he wants to know from you how bad we suck.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 5:14:37 PM EDT
[#27]
So any manufacturer who just keeps pumping out new names for AR lowers, we buy them, the DOJ bans them, WE REGISTER THEM.
Yeah, that sounds great. How about I buy what I want, configure it how I want, and don't register jack shit? As we have those "inalienable rights" to do? Class III guy next town over? When did he get a license? A while ago, right? Because I called the DOJ asking for a license and was told that unless I was a dealer to LEOs or a movie propmaster I couldn't get one. I say we suck, because we do - we all live here. Keep shooting your registered FAL, SW5, AR15, and G3 and etc....And when California decides to ban them for good they'll know exactly where to go, right? Or are you agreeing with me that we are not obligated to obey illegal laws? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 5:37:58 PM EDT
[#28]
Do you want a lower or not?
I dont enjoy the liberal crap in this state but Im always looking to stick it to em' A small victory as a huge moral booster, ever hear "death from a thousand cuts" Let the DOJ waste time chasing us while we find more vendors and FFLs |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 5:53:17 PM EDT
[#29]
Well, we've already seen what one dealer (Fulton) has for a response.
What I want is a normal, plain jane AR15. It was my misfortune to have gotten out of the Navy in 2000, and I couldn't register my AR at that point when I moved here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 5:56:01 PM EDT
[#30]
Funny, I was getting ready to buy one of Fultons Mark 14 rifles.
They can forget that now, I know others who can make a Mark 14 style rifle just as good. It's also funny since I would have given donations to aid to Fulton if they needed money to fight a court battle. Not going to happen now, if they're too chicken to sell a legal product, then they aren't getting my money. I hate california, and I really don't care what happens over there. But seeing a gun maker back out on pefectly legal sales and threaten to report firearms as stolen if they aren't sent back takes away all my trust in them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 6:24:54 PM EDT
[#31]
I owe you a cold one Murdock 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 6:32:04 PM EDT
[#32]
Nah, I really just don't want to buy from anyone who threatens to report firearms as stolen when they... you know... weren't stolen! Besides, i'd have to wait a few months before I could legally drink it... and then it wouldn't be cold anymore  .
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 6:36:59 PM EDT
[#33]
+ Twelvity-Billion Epeescott - this Californian didn't act with APATHY - I never supported or voted for anybody that supported gun control. I didn't pull off drive-by shootings in LA and exacerbate community concerns about gun violence. Born here, I'm just another gun lover like you being forced to eat someone else's lunch...quite "liberally"...and as stated by FMJs, we're just trying to make the best of a bad situation. I too am only still here because of my kid. Try going without for a while...sheesh...on that note, I saw a fixed lower receiver CA AR15 Carbine at a gun shop tonight. You call that a friggen AR?? What? And all for the low, low price of $999.00 too? Hell, sign me up! Um, not. PS: That M1A scout was sure looking purty tonight though! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 6:38:59 PM EDT
[#34]
epeescott, show us how you bravely disobey unconstitutional laws by posting pics of your unlicensed class III weapon, then you can talk shit. What? You don't have one? Uh-huh.
You say we don't know you? That's right. So if you're so damn good at fighting the law why don't you let us get to know how great a job you're doing by telling us of some of your great feats of civil disobedience? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 6:56:41 PM EDT
[#35]
Yeah, I know what you mean. I saw one of those FAB-10's at a Santa Rosa gun show going for a hell of a lot of money. On a good note, I saw the FAL's that were CA legal and the manufacturer would convert it back to regular for free should you leave the state.... Edit for spelling. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 6:57:40 PM EDT
[#36]
I have nothing class III - I can't afford it. And if I were in violation of the law, it would be an act of supreme stupidity to rise to your challenge and announce to the world that I was doing it, now, wouldn't it? I can't afford guns - I am saving $700,000 for a $200,000 house...you all know how it is here. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 7:21:13 PM EDT
[#37]
This whole thread really scares me! California has always been a few years ahead of the rest of the country and I see what you people are going through and it makes me fear for our future as gun owners in the U.S.. I used to live in the other "peoples republic" of Massholes and have seen what they have done to gun owners and the way they twist the laws slowly to squeese the life out of gun owners like me. Funny thing is that the murder rate has sored to a 10 year high in MA. must be all those butter knives that criminals use beacause lord knows they dont have any of those illegal guns. I always wonder if there was ever an extremely left wing president who decided to make all AW illegal to own and have them confiscated from everyone, what would happen. I think that I would have to go for a tragic fishing trip in wich I capsise and lose everything to the deep blue sea.
 But really I must say that we are definately living in hostile times and as gun owners must all stick together and keep on the topic and not let our passions divide us. My heart gos out to everyone in Cali and hope that you can manage this. GOOD LUCK!!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 7:25:42 PM EDT
[#38]
Why don't some of you guys quit crapping in this thread? This isn't the General Discussion forum.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 11:27:29 PM EDT
[#39]
I'am a little happier for the people of cal. and for this country and the the people of this country . We must all stand together or we will all fall separately. I say to the cal. and to others in this country stock up on as many recvrs as you can afford.. I know it's only a little victory but it's better than nothing ..... buy buy buy
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2005 11:59:45 PM EDT
[#40]
Am I the only person who sees through the inconsistency of these two statements?
I have so many 30 and 20 round mags I can't even count them all. I bought them all before the ban, along with the AR I bought before the ban. But there's no such thing as enough AR's.
No, it doesn't. It is clear now that you have missed the entire point of buying the DSA receiver. If the DOJ declares that your stripped DSA receiver is an assault weapon, then it legally becomes an assault weapon. If the DOJ declares your toaster an assault weapon, then your toaster is now an assault weapon.
No no no! The DOJ's own guidelines, published on THEIR OWN WEBSITE, specifically answered this question in their FAQ, and they said that you could (actually, you had to) register any .50 BMG receiver, so long as the receiver was completed before the first of this year. You talk and you talk, but the fact is you don't follow through. When you move to a "free state" what are you going to do about the "illegal law" that is the NFA? My guess is... nothing. You try to incite other people to disobey the law, but you don't do it yourself. You want other people to fight your legal battles, but you don't want to be personally involved. Then, when someone like me comes along, doing more for gun rights in CA than you ever have, do you help? Do you have anything constructive to add? No. Instead, you criticize me, tell me I don't know what I'm doing, bet me that I'm going to be arrested (and then back out), and advise me on a law you don't understand. What gives? Why can't you just help out instead of trying to dash everyone's hopes? Who's side are you on? |
|||||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2005 2:15:09 AM EDT
[#41]
To answer the question, it is my understanding that you can build complete rifles with 80% receivers, and do not have to register them. Similarly, part of the fun of building your own is that you also don't have to serialize them in any way. Here's the kicker though. It is legal if you do not intend to sell it and only intend to keep it for your own collection. Do not quote me on this, but it is my understanding of the law. CA-DOJ update...no word yet, but I'm with blakrazr and feel it is legal. Too, I don't believe DOJ will add anything to the list by the end of the year. I'll post news when I get it. SPC Richard A. White, Senior Medic 249th MP Detachment (EACF) Camp Humphreys, ROK |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2005 2:35:52 AM EDT
[#42]
Most (as in 95%) of the dealers on this site are not helping at all
 RKBA supporters they are
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2005 2:50:03 AM EDT
[#43]
A BIG +1,000,000 |
||||||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2005 4:50:36 PM EDT
[#44]
Owned like a lap dog!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2005 8:34:14 PM EDT
[#45]
Just out of curiosity, wasn't there a law passed recently that protects gun manufacturers from end user illegal activity?
Would that play here? Are there any FFL's in CA that will transfer??? ;)
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2005 10:59:44 PM EDT
[#46]
not sure what the new federal law protects, but I do know it doesn't matter. Manufacturers like Fulton have already stopped shipping even though what they are doing is 100% Legal with a letter to back it up. So I don't think they really give a damn what the law says. They're just pussies, plain and simple.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2005 11:13:55 PM EDT
[#47]
+1 Keep it up guys. Get those lowers. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/16/2005 5:13:02 PM EDT
[#48]
Carl WinslOWNd! http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b237/mikesearson/Winsl0WN3D.jpg |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/16/2005 5:21:27 PM EDT
[#49]
Excellent words. Too few are willing to work or fight together anymore, it's I've got mine too bad for you all too often. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/16/2005 5:45:18 PM EDT
[#50]
One good thing is the lowers are coming in, its the ffL's that dont want to get into it with the assclowns in Sacramento. My dealers a good guy and wont touch a AR15 lower, hes not afriad to bring in other goodies like the Fal, JLD,Vector receivers but wont touch these.
The DOJ has been calling all manufactures/dealers telling them they will be sued if they provide access to the un named lowers, boy am I glad they went on Vacation today. 
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
