Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
11/22/2017 10:05:29 PM
Posted: 9/26/2004 1:58:53 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/26/2004 1:59:21 PM EST by Mike_Mills]
After I buy and register my FAB-10 based 50BMG I will want to reconfigure the FAB-10 lower. I want to remove the fixed magazine parts and reconfigure this portion of the receiver to accept detachable magazines.

My question: is there enough aluminum in all the right places to reconfigure it to accept detachable magazines?


NOTE - Once it's registered and accepted as an assault weapon you cannot be charged with manufacturing an assault weapon - the state has already acknowledged, in writing that it already IS an assault weapon.
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 2:47:15 PM EST
I don't know anyone that has milled one out, but I remember way back before the 80% w/milled out magazine came out.....quite a few guys had trouble machining out the magazine well.

I believe you need a "wire CNC" or something to that effect.

I suggest you just get a 80%, engrave it w/caliber markings, and then register it when it comes around. Once you get your DOJ letter, start building it up.

It'll probably cost less than the price of a FAB10.....and you'd probably should get several 80% lowers....as after the 2+ you build, it'll be quite cost effective, compared to the FAB10.




Originally Posted By Mike_Mills:
After I buy and register my FAB-10 based 50BMG I will want to reconfigure the FAB-10 lower. I want to remove the fixed magazine parts and reconfigure this portion of the receiver to accept detachable magazines.

My question: is there enough aluminum in all the right places to reconfigure it to accept detachable magazines?


NOTE - Once it's registered and accepted as an assault weapon you cannot be charged with manufacturing an assault weapon - the state has already acknowledged, in writing that it already IS an assault weapon.

Link Posted: 9/26/2004 2:58:31 PM EST
I belive that the magazine wells on forged lowers are broach cut in some instances, the broach is highly custom and several feet long if I remember descriptions correctly.

EDM wire discharge could probably do the same job, not sure who does that kind of work.

The build it yourself forum could provide a lot of information on this sort of thing.
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 4:02:44 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/26/2004 4:09:17 PM EST by ShadowOne]
I've seen pics somewhere before and it seems there's A LOT of work to do make them into a "standard" receiver.

(1) No mag release slot on the left side and no mag release button on the right side.
(2) The slot for the bolt catch on the inner of the receiver is filled in to accept a stripper clip loader.
(3) The bolt catch latch on the outside is not cut nor drilled to accept the roll pin that holds it in.

That's a lot of work. As mentioned above, it would seem easier to buy an 80% that has the mag release and bolt catch processed already like a standard receiver, but just has the mag well sealed so that it is legal at the time you register it. But of course you need to drill all the holes, etc. But no milling, which would be the hard part.

You could probably get away with just starting with a standard 80% with the mag well opened already and register it because it's gonna be opened up anyway and there's no way to prove when you actually opened it up. Of course you didn't hear that from me.
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 5:17:23 PM EST
+1

80%'s the way to go......



Originally Posted By ShadowOne:
I've seen pics somewhere before and it seems there's A LOT of work to do make them into a "standard" receiver.

(1) No mag release slot on the left side and no mag release button on the right side.
(2) The slot for the bolt catch on the inner of the receiver is filled in to accept a stripper clip loader.
(3) The bolt catch latch on the outside is not cut nor drilled to accept the roll pin that holds it in.

That's a lot of work. As mentioned above, it would seem easier to buy an 80% that has the mag release and bolt catch processed already like a standard receiver, but just has the mag well sealed so that it is legal at the time you register it. But of course you need to drill all the holes, etc. But no milling, which would be the hard part.

You could probably get away with just starting with a standard 80% with the mag well opened already and register it because it's gonna be opened up anyway and there's no way to prove when you actually opened it up. Of course you didn't hear that from me.

Link Posted: 9/26/2004 8:05:20 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/26/2004 8:06:15 PM EST by prisner4jc]
yea i think 80% is what you want. here are some links:

www.tanneryshop.com/
this comes up quite a bit on the boards, i haven't bought from them but they look legit.

www.hicapmagparts.com
this was the dude that was at the cross roads of the west show in orange county. i don't know anything about him or the quality of his eqipment, but he is local (for some) out of huntington beach or around that area. his prices look pretty good and this guy sells the paint for completing your 80% lower. you air brush it on and cook it in the oven.

anyway let me know how it turns out. i've been HIGHLY considering doing this for some time now. if anyone is local to oc/la (more specific like around long beach) and would be interested ina group building project let me know (email is good dan.finkelstein@gmail.com). i'd love to get a chance to meet some of the others on the board as weell as build my own rifle

-dan
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 8:24:32 PM EST
Depending on the ruling's that come out, it looks like I will be registering 5 new 80% .50bmg, sometime in the near future.
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 8:36:10 PM EST
I don't see why you guys think you can register an 80% as a .50BMG then reconfigure it to an AR... Read AB50. I'm fuzzy if .50BMGs will become "assault weapons" it looks to me like they are just banned because of caliber, and thus not an assault weapon, just banned..

Any insight into this? I'm reading over it right now and all it's doing is increasing my headache..
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 8:41:03 PM EST

Originally Posted By colossians323:
Depending on the ruling's that come out, it looks like I will be registering 5 new 80% .50bmg, sometime in the near future.



What ruling?
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 9:19:25 PM EST
well as mentioned, the .50bmg is just an evil feature that would make a weapon an AW I believe under the bills definition.
Its the same reason why the DOJ has been saying over the phone (and also stated in the bill) that prior registered AW's do not need to be re-registered as a .50bmg
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 9:27:52 PM EST

Originally Posted By gunsmithdude:
well as mentioned, the .50bmg is just an evil feature that would make a weapon an AW I believe under the bills definition.
Its the same reason why the DOJ has been saying over the phone (and also stated in the bill) that prior registered AW's do not need to be re-registered as a .50bmg



From my reading of the bill they never mentioned "assault weapon" being inclusive of .50 BMG. Whenever they made mention of the .50BMg it was always "machinegun, or Assault weapon, or .50BMG"

It leads me to believe that they are not one in the same, but that .50 BMGs, like AWs, must be registered.

From what I can see the sections with regards to Assault Weapons (12276, 12276.1) remain untouched by AB50.

If I'm wrong and someone gets the DOJ to confirm it in writing, please let me know ASAP so I can get some 80%ers registered.. until then, I dont think it's an option for us to get ARs....
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 9:44:55 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/26/2004 9:45:20 PM EST by TKoProductions]
I think that some of you are mistaken, and I would hate to see you commit a crime thinking that what you were doing was completely within the law.

AB50 ammends California's assault weapons ban, which means that increases the scope and content of the pre-existing law.

The bill states:

12278. (a) As used in this chapter, a ".50 BMG rifle" means a
center fire rifle that can fire a .50 BMG cartridge and is not
already an assault weapon
pursuant to Section 12276, 12276.1, or
12276.5, or a machinegun, as defined in Section 12200.

The important part from above is that you CANNOT register a .50 BMG rifle that is already considered an assault weapon.

Sections 12276 and 12276.1 already banned assault weapons. One of the sections did it by name (model and manufacture of weapon) and the other by characteristic (a semi-automatic centerfire rifle with a detachable magazine and a protruding pistol grip). You must comply with those laws in registering a .50 caliber. That means that those of us who intend to register a .50 BMG CANNOT have a semi-automatic .50 caliber that has a detachable magazine and pistol grip (because those characteristics are ALREADY illegal). Thats why you can't purchase a Barrett 82A1.

Once you've regsitered your .50 BMG, that's exactly what you have: a registered .50 BMG. Having it registered as a .50 caliber assault rifle does not give you the right at that point to manufuacture something that is already outlawed. In order to register for AB50 you had to comply with the pre-existing laws. Just because you now possess a registered .50 caliber doesn't mean that you no longer have to comply.

What I'm trying to say is that at the point of registration, you have you to comply with California's AWB, and just because you now have a " .50 caliber assault weapon" on the books doesn't mean that you no longer have to.

What you guys are talking about would be the equivalent of me trying to register an AK47 or Uzi under SB23 in 1999. Those two weapons had already been outlawed 10 years earlier. All that SB23 did was serve to extend the scope of weapons that the previous law (the Roberti-Roos Act) covered.

Just because the new law (AB50) extends the defintion of what the state considers to be an assault weapon, doesn't mean that you no longer have to comply with previous laws.

Those of you who are thinking that you can purchase a blocked well lower, register it as a .50 BMG, and then mill out the well to accept a detachable magazine are going to find yourself in a whole heap of legal trouble.

For those of you who plan on purchasing a DPMS single shot, or FAB-10 and registering it as a .50 BMG, I see no problem. Those two lowers already comply with the pre-existing law, and unless you were to open up the Fab-10's magwell, you're well within the law.

Currently, as far as AB50 reads, it looks like you can register the DPMS single shot or FAB-10 as a .50 caliber, and swap uppers back and forth, say between a Ferret .50 upper, and a .223 upper. However, all of this is still tentative -- I believe that the DOJ is still discussing whether or not to accept for registration lowers that accept different caliber uppers.

Sorry guys, there is no so called "loop-hole" for you to sneak in an assault rifle.

I'm not a lawyer, and I don't proclaim to be. This is all simply my opinion. Regarding AB50, I highly recommend that you seek legal advice in deciding what course of action to take.
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 10:01:51 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/26/2004 10:02:30 PM EST by Mike_Mills]
TKoProductions,

I came here to post exactly what you did. I just found the text of the bill and read it. The mods should just lock this thread. Your post is as good a way to end this as I can imagine.

I created a separate thread to spread the bad news.
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 10:53:47 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/26/2004 11:16:07 PM EST by ShadowOne]
Get it in writing from the DOJ, then it'll be final. Right now it's simply one opinion vs. another with some room for interpretation of the same law. What still gets me is that all currently registered AWs are allowed to be converted to 50 BMGs with no additional registration. Why is the reciprical not also valid?

All you have to do is ask if you can put a pistol grip on a currently CA-legal semi-auto/detachable mag 50 BMG rifle after registration. Answer is probably a big fat NO! But at least you have it in writing. You sure as heck don't want to be a 'tard and ask "can I reconfigure my 50 BMG rifle into an AR15 after I register it?"
Link Posted: 9/27/2004 2:40:56 PM EST
wtf? are you telling me i can get a 80% lower and it will be legal? or are you just talking about a 50bmg? Id like to get a real lower and get rid of the fab 10 is that possible?
Link Posted: 9/27/2004 2:44:41 PM EST

Originally Posted By gotodengo:
wtf? are you telling me i can get a 80% lower and it will be legal? or are you just talking about a 50bmg? Id like to get a real lower and get rid of the fab 10 is that possible?



Not without a trip to Club Fed.
Link Posted: 9/27/2004 6:09:06 PM EST
Hmm, until then I guess we'll wait on a letter from the DOJ stating that a pre registered AW does not need additional registration to make it a .50.

meanwhile, u can still purchase a barret m82. just without the pistol grip. Barret will sell it in that configuration.
And once its registered, can't u just throw the pistol grip back on?

Link Posted: 9/28/2004 8:55:16 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/28/2004 9:12:46 AM EST by Raynman83]
But the whole debate started because if you have a registered AW, you are allowed to reconfigure it(i.e. You can put a collapsable stock on a registered AW). Caliber changes are also legal. Everyone is wondering if you used an AR lower as a .50BMG and then just reconfigured it as a .223 would it be legal. This would include milling the reciever a little to add the detachable magazine, but that is not manufacturing a new AW. If you have an AW that has a collapsable stock and a pistol grip, you can add a flash supressor, or the ability to accept a detachable magazine(mill out the reciever and add the mag catch.) It's not making a new AW, it's changing the current configuration. Just be sure that the receiver retains the original serial number.

Is there something I've missed?

Rayn

EDIT:

Looked at the bill again. I'm think you guys are right. The .50BMG is NOT an AW, it's just another firearm that needs to be registered. The thing that confuses people at that point, is that if you have a registered AW, you can convert it to a .50BMG and not need to re-register it as such. However, if you have a .50, we are not sure if we can reconfigure it as an AW(i.e. this is the pistol grip thing.) That's a good question to ask the DOJ.
Link Posted: 9/28/2004 9:38:50 AM EST
How do I get this thread locked? I believe we have the correct answer and further discussion is not necessary or desireable, especially if it leads someone into legal trouble.
Link Posted: 9/28/2004 11:35:43 AM EST

Originally Posted By Mike_Mills:
How do I get this thread locked? I believe we have the correct answer and further discussion is not necessary or desireable, especially if it leads someone into legal trouble.



Unless the DOJ issues further and final clarification, this thread is only discussing POTENTIALs until then. Even though this doesn't affect me, I'm still interested in case someone pops in and posts a scan of a letter or link from the DOJ that gives the final verdict.

Link Posted: 9/28/2004 9:10:48 PM EST

Originally Posted By Mike_Mills:
How do I get this thread locked? I believe we have the correct answer and further discussion is not necessary or desireable, especially if it leads someone into legal trouble.



Ask the mod. I really don't see any reason to lock it though. The opinions are here and deciding on what to do or not do is up to the individual.
Top Top