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: 10/3/2004 3:48:28 PM EST
I have wanted to buy an AR-15 or similar rifle for quite a while, and after reading through many topics, I have some questions. Some of these questions have been addressed in other topics, but I want to make sure I follow the law to the T. Ok here we go:

1. The only lowers I can legally purchase are lowers with non-detachable mags or single shots with no mag wells. Right? Do you have to lift the upper off the lower to reload the mag? How are the single shots loaded?

2. What are the best CA legal lowers? For a .223 target shooter what would you recomend?

3. 80% lowers. What, if anything, can I do with them? I have some experience with metal, and I'm pretty sure I have access to machines to finish the lowers, but how difficult would it be and on average how much time would it take?

4. Is there any non legal way to make a lower with an attached mag able to accept mags?

5. What exactly IS the law regarding the difference between legal AR-15s and non legal AR-15s? Originally I thought they could have the pistol grip and that was it, so as long as they didn't have flash suppressors or anything like that, they were ok. Obviously I am wrong (I sure am glad I came here), but is there ANY way to get a normal AR-15 lower, from Bushmaster for example, in California?

Thanks for any and all response you can give.
Link Posted: 10/3/2004 3:59:44 PM EST
to answer question number 3 check out this web page
80% lowers
scooter
Link Posted: 10/3/2004 4:14:14 PM EST
I meant more of what can I legally do with them.
Link Posted: 10/3/2004 4:34:20 PM EST
Given that you're in the PRK.....NOTHING.

Its just an expensive paperweight.......unless you come here, then the sky's the limit.


Originally Posted By NeoWeird:
I meant more of what can I legally do with them.

Link Posted: 10/3/2004 6:53:42 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/3/2004 6:55:42 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/3/2004 9:58:35 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/3/2004 9:59:05 PM EST by leelaw]

Originally Posted By Paul:
Heck - given another hour I could make my own SBR and suppressor.



Agents are en-route.


er, I mean
Link Posted: 10/4/2004 5:37:34 AM EST

Originally Posted By Paul:

Originally Posted By MisterSuzuki:
Given that you're in the PRK.....NOTHING.

Its just an expensive paperweight.......unless you come here, then the sky's the limit.



Silly you. Of course he could make his own FAB or single shot lower out of them.

MisterSuzuki are you saying it's legal in Nevada to manufacture your own fully automatic in Nevada? Might be interesting to make the three hour drive and have some fun for a weekend. It takes me about four hours start to finish to compete a lower from 80%. Chuck the gig and drill press in the truck and get a free room at Whiskey Pete's I've got a few 80%'ers laying around that I wouldn't feel at all bad about shit canning under a rock after a three day weekend of fun



The more I hear about 80% builds the less I believe they are "legal" with DOJ. The Fab-10 has the mag well blocked as part of the receiver. This is what DOJ allows. If you build a 80% open mag well and rivet the 10rd mag into place, DOJ might consider this illegal.

I thought the original Fab-10s had a removable mag well cap, is this true?
Link Posted: 10/4/2004 7:50:45 AM EST

I thought the original Fab-10s had a removable mag well cap, is this true?


Nope, it was never milled out from the original blank.

To put my .02c to the original thread:

1-Yep, FAB-10 or similar is the only AR-type I've found. Yes, you have to crack open the receiver to reload.

2-FAB-10 unless you're military or LE.

3-Jury's out on this one, but if you ask me it's trouble waiting to happen, and having a potential felony arrest looming, it's just not worth it.

4-why would you want to know if there's a non-legal way? You could mill the FAB-10 to accept mags, but this would be a big no-no and see number 3 for the result.

5-Only way is to get an assault weapons permit, which they only issue to LE and military as far as I know. Or to have owned one prior to Jan of 2000. The law(s) basically have banned the AR by name, not by feature. If you get the FAB-10, you can have all the evil features (save the detach. mag) you want. Mine's got pistol grip, brake, bayonet, collapsible stock and it's all legit. The mag isn't an evil feature, it's a qualifier. There's a difference. The ban states that rifles with detach mag can't have any of the features, and semi-autos can't have detach mag and pistol grip. Go to the DOJ's site and confuse yourself with the laws for a while, even if you're still confused it will start to make sense as your questions are asked/answered because you'd have at least read it.
Link Posted: 10/4/2004 12:25:49 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/4/2004 12:26:17 PM EST by NeoWeird]
Sorry, I meant legal, not non legal. That "non" slipped in when I tried to re word my sentence and didn't proof read it afterwards.

Thanks USCGK9, That answers all of my questions, and with those types of laws I can pretty much imagine what they would be for some of the other ideas I had floating in my head.



I do have a couple more questions:

1. Because the magazine isn't removable, I can have as many of the 'evil' features as I want?

2. I know that frequent removale of parts in some guns can cause the fittings to become loose, will this happen if I change the upper receiver, buttstock, pistol grip, etc a lot?

3. Is there any way to modify the Fab-10 so I don't have to open it up to reload? I had an idea of a mag wall with a hinge on one side and a swing latch on the other. You pull off the swing latch, and the well can then turn on it's hinge and you can reload with a stripped clip from the side of the gun. Could anything like this be done?

Once again, Thanks.
Link Posted: 10/4/2004 1:13:47 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/4/2004 1:16:02 PM EST
From what I hear, building from an 80% is considered creating an AR-15. Illegal.

FAB-10s are legal. Yes, you pull the takedown pin out and open the gun, then load the rounds in the mag that way. http://www.fabten.com/ is one site to look at.

You can have as many evil features as you want. Although aren't Flash supressors illegal here in thier own right? I could be wrong.

I don't think chaning things out a lot will wear stuff out. And you can always replace buy replacement parts for everything.

Magwell with a hinge sounds like more work than is worth it. Cutting apart a FAB-10 and adding a pivot method. Possible though, if you are that adventurous.

My advice is move to a different state. Washington will be my new home soon...

Rayn
Link Posted: 10/4/2004 2:02:22 PM EST
A quick question: This question has not been answered yet.

How to load a round for the DPMS single-shot lower equipped rifle (with an AR-15 upper)?

1) Open the upper to load a round.
or 2) Pull the charging handle all the way back and insert a round through the ejection port?

TIA
Link Posted: 10/4/2004 2:23:42 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/4/2004 2:25:30 PM EST by MisterSuzuki]
Hola Paul,

Well, of course not, MG are NFA regulated items, and then there's the 1986 FOPA that further limited production for us civvies.

Of course, there is still the Stewart ruling, so a few of us are still crossing our fingers on that, and personal production of MG.

But if you did want to complete the lower, you can still make it into a MG, you just need a DIAS, or LL....both of which are legal here, and pop up for sale every once in a while.

Once you have that, then the sky's pretty much the limit on what you can do to your AR.....

"Silly Rabbit, NFA's are for US!"
Link Posted: 10/4/2004 2:26:54 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/4/2004 2:27:43 PM EST by MisterSuzuki]
Check the Nevada boards, every 3rd Saturday, a bunch of guys get together, and bring out their NFA registry weapons......:)

Supressors, SBR/SBS, AOW are okay too....just need a Form 1, and CLEO sign-off.....if you plan on making one.


Originally Posted By Paul:
Heck - given another hour I could make my own SBR and suppressor.

Link Posted: 10/4/2004 6:25:28 PM EST

Originally Posted By NeoWeird:
Sorry, I meant legal, not non legal. That "non" slipped in when I tried to re word my sentence and didn't proof read it afterwards.

Thanks USCGK9, That answers all of my questions, and with those types of laws I can pretty much imagine what they would be for some of the other ideas I had floating in my head.



I do have a couple more questions:

1. Because the magazine isn't removable, I can have as many of the 'evil' features as I want?

2. I know that frequent removale of parts in some guns can cause the fittings to become loose, will this happen if I change the upper receiver, buttstock, pistol grip, etc a lot?

3. Is there any way to modify the Fab-10 so I don't have to open it up to reload? I had an idea of a mag wall with a hinge on one side and a swing latch on the other. You pull off the swing latch, and the well can then turn on it's hinge and you can reload with a stripped clip from the side of the gun. Could anything like this be done?

Once again, Thanks.



1-Yes, aside from a suppressor, those are banned individually. The flash hider I believe is totally legal, since it's listed as a feature and not a qualifier, and I've never seen it mentioned anywhere else.

2-changing the upper out a lot shouldn't cause much of a problem, so long as you have some dexterity and do not rough the uppers onto the common lower. As for the pistol grip, why would you wanna change it out all the time? This will affect your accuracy, marksmanship elements, and not to mention it would just be a little weird to keep swapping it out. Furthermore, when you remove the grip, you're also letting the safety selector detent and spring fall out each time, then you have to line them back up each time, it'd be a real pain to keep swapping them out. As for the buttstock, it shouldn't affect anything much other than similar things like the upper swapping, just be careful and don't strip your castle nut (if collapsible) or the receiver extension threads. You might see some premature wearing of the lower's extension threads, which might loosen the tolerance of the buttstock fit. I'd find one you like and leave it. Matter of fact, I'd find the trigger, grip, stock, etc. that suits you best, and leave them in place, just swap uppers which is what I do. Works fine for 3 uppers on one lower in my case.

3-This is something I wouldn't consider, because you're altering the lower to a degree that the DOJ may or may not interpret as a qualifier for an AOW (any other weapon) in which case there are some other paperwork items you'd have to take care of, let alone that they might deem it illegal. Just crack it open like the rest of us that have them. In the military we've got a saying for everything as you may have known/heard. For this one I use the acronym KISS. Keep It Simple Stupid.

Link Posted: 10/4/2004 9:18:14 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/4/2004 9:18:45 PM EST by NeoWeird]
I was asking about the pistol grip/buttstock mostly because I wanted to make a target shooter and a general walk around shooter. The target shooter I wanted to have a 24 inch free floated barrel with a special formed grip for stationary shooting, while I wanted a seperate upper for an M4 clone. I think I will take your advice and find one set that works for both, and stick with it.


One last question that I can think of.
1. With the new laws in regards to the .50 rounds, can I still make a rifle to shoot them? If so, are there any way to legally make a semi-auto .50 in California? I was thinking of something similar to the Fab-10, but with a 5 or so round mag. Would that be possible legally or physically?
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 7:21:58 AM EST
I guess I have a question too, I was under the impression that CA has it's own law pertaining to Flash hiders. There are certain muzzle breaks for the Mini-14 that are legal elsewhere but not here due to thier shape or design. Something about slotts vs. holes. Anyhow know about this?
Link Posted: 10/6/2004 7:47:14 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/6/2004 8:25:36 AM EST by wyv3rn]

Originally Posted By Chaingun:
The more I hear about 80% builds the less I believe they are "legal" with DOJ. The Fab-10 has the mag well blocked as part of the receiver. This is what DOJ allows. If you build a 80% open mag well and rivet the 10rd mag into place, DOJ might consider this illegal.

I thought the original Fab-10s had a removable mag well cap, is this true?



How can something be legal/illegal with the DOJ? They don't set policy, they enforce it.. well that's the way it's supposed to work anyway.

Creating and AR15 lower is illegal by name. Building an "assault weapon" is illegal by feature. A completed AR15 lower cannot be converted to make it legal, once an "assault weapon" always an "assault weapon".

However, there is no law saying you can't complete your own firearms in California as long as you follow the process properly.

Creating an AR15-type lower with an open mag well but no ability to install a magazine catch and riveting a magazine in place would not be creating an AR15. Without a magazine catch there is no provision to accept a detachable magazine on the firearm. If you RIVETED AND WELDED a 10-rounder in place AND there is NO MAGAZINE CATCH or even A PROVISION TO ACCEPT A MAGAZINE CATCH on the lower there is no way you could call that an AR15. In it's 40-year history it's ALWAYS accepted a detachable magazine on it's own via magazine catch device.

Nor would it be violating the "assault weapon" by features ban as it would not accept a detachable magazine without the use of a tool.

That's not to say an overzealous gun-grabbing DOJ wouldn't try anyway. There's no way it would hold up in court.. it would be quite the hassle though.
Link Posted: 10/6/2004 8:55:08 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/6/2004 8:57:16 AM EST by Chaingun]

Originally Posted By wyv3rn:

Originally Posted By Chaingun:
The more I hear about 80% builds the less I believe they are "legal" with DOJ. The Fab-10 has the mag well blocked as part of the receiver. This is what DOJ allows. If you build a 80% open mag well and rivet the 10rd mag into place, DOJ might consider this illegal.

I thought the original Fab-10s had a removable mag well cap, is this true?



How can something be legal/illegal with the DOJ? They don't set policy, they enforce it.. well that's the way it's supposed to work anyway.

Creating and AR15 lower is illegal by name. Building an "assault weapon" is illegal by feature. A completed AR15 lower cannot be converted to make it legal, once an "assault weapon" always an "assault weapon".

However, there is no law saying you can't complete your own firearms in California as long as you follow the process properly.

Creating an AR15-type lower with an open mag well but no ability to install a magazine catch and riveting a magazine in place would not be creating an AR15. Without a magazine catch there is no provision to accept a detachable magazine on the firearm. If you RIVETED AND WELDED a 10-rounder in place AND there is NO MAGAZINE CATCH or even A PROVISION TO ACCEPT A MAGAZINE CATCH on the lower there is no way you could call that an AR15. In it's 40-year history it's ALWAYS accepted a detachable magazine on it's own via magazine catch device.

Nor would it be violating the "assault weapon" by features ban as it would not accept a detachable magazine without the use of a tool.

That's not to say an overzealous gun-grabbing DOJ wouldn't try anyway. There's no way it would hold up in court.. it would be quite the hassle though.



I agree, DOJ intreprets the laws. Illegal!

I need clarification but I believe DOJ currently defines an AR "series" by the receiver. Once the 80% is finished it becomes an AR "series", by their supposed definition is illegal based on RR "series" not SB-23. Pinning the mag on a "series" may not be okay, but DOJ must state this.

I have some DOJ questions:

1) If the court (Kasler Decision) removed the "series" part requiring all banned receivers to be specified by name, can we legally build an 80% receiver without it being considered a "series" AR.

2) If we can legally build an 80% AR receiver, can we configure it based on SB-23?

3) Is the thumb grip considered a pistol grip? If no, can we then build an AR style rifle, following SB-23 compliance, using a thumb grip?
Link Posted: 10/6/2004 1:36:44 PM EST

Originally Posted By Chaingun:

Originally Posted By wyv3rn:

Originally Posted By Chaingun:
The more I hear about 80% builds the less I believe they are "legal" with DOJ. The Fab-10 has the mag well blocked as part of the receiver. This is what DOJ allows. If you build a 80% open mag well and rivet the 10rd mag into place, DOJ might consider this illegal.

I thought the original Fab-10s had a removable mag well cap, is this true?



How can something be legal/illegal with the DOJ? They don't set policy, they enforce it.. well that's the way it's supposed to work anyway.

Creating and AR15 lower is illegal by name. Building an "assault weapon" is illegal by feature. A completed AR15 lower cannot be converted to make it legal, once an "assault weapon" always an "assault weapon".

However, there is no law saying you can't complete your own firearms in California as long as you follow the process properly.

Creating an AR15-type lower with an open mag well but no ability to install a magazine catch and riveting a magazine in place would not be creating an AR15. Without a magazine catch there is no provision to accept a detachable magazine on the firearm. If you RIVETED AND WELDED a 10-rounder in place AND there is NO MAGAZINE CATCH or even A PROVISION TO ACCEPT A MAGAZINE CATCH on the lower there is no way you could call that an AR15. In it's 40-year history it's ALWAYS accepted a detachable magazine on it's own via magazine catch device.

Nor would it be violating the "assault weapon" by features ban as it would not accept a detachable magazine without the use of a tool.

That's not to say an overzealous gun-grabbing DOJ wouldn't try anyway. There's no way it would hold up in court.. it would be quite the hassle though.



I agree, DOJ intreprets the laws. Illegal!

I need clarification but I believe DOJ currently defines an AR "series" by the receiver. Once the 80% is finished it becomes an AR "series", by their supposed definition is illegal based on RR "series" not SB-23. Pinning the mag on a "series" may not be okay, but DOJ must state this.

I have some DOJ questions:

1) If the court (Kasler Decision) removed the "series" part requiring all banned receivers to be specified by name, can we legally build an 80% receiver without it being considered a "series" AR.



I would not recommend building an AR15 lower. The court case you are referring to is ONE INSTANCE of ONE COURT saying that the term "series" as in AK series or AR series is NOT CLEAR ENOUGH and therefore invalidates the "umbrella-series" ban. The whole "series" argument is still up in the air in the courts. Plus, we are talking about TWO different things. The "series" ban IS IN THE TEXT of the law, regardless of judicial interpretation it IS THERE.

I never said completeing an 80% lower would be acceptable. I said NOT COMPLETEING it and pinning/welding a 10-round magazine in it would be acceptable. How would that be any different than a FAB-10? You can't get into either weapon from the bottom, you can't attach and detach a magazine at will, you still have to open it from the top to load it. There is NO difference.


2) If we can legally build an 80% AR receiver, can we configure it based on SB-23?

3) Is the thumb grip considered a pistol grip? If no, can we then build an AR style rifle, following SB-23 compliance, using a thumb grip?



2) no and no
3) yes, no the AR lower is banned by name/"series" designation which as I pointed out before has hit some turbulance but the law HAS NOT BEEN STRUCK DOWN.

Your ONLY OPTION for an AR in California is a fixed magazine of 10 rounds or less.
Link Posted: 10/8/2004 9:32:08 PM EST
Ok, aside from the AR/AK series; what other semi-automatic centerfire receviers are there?

I want to build a centerfire rifle with a pistol grip, but something about the Fab-10/DPMS receviers doesn't sit right with me. What other reliable models are there that are centerfire and semi-automatic?
Link Posted: 10/9/2004 4:42:11 AM EST

Originally Posted By NeoWeird:
Ok, aside from the AR/AK series; what other semi-automatic centerfire receviers are there?

I want to build a centerfire rifle with a pistol grip, but something about the Fab-10/DPMS receviers doesn't sit right with me. What other reliable models are there that are centerfire and semi-automatic?



I keep flip/flopping since I just found out the Turners AK pump is using a standard SAR-1 AK receiver, not considered a "series" under RR. I wonder if this rifle could be modified to semi-auto following SB-23. The AK can be fired without a pistol grip using the standard stock. A slightly modified stock will allow easier grasping and still follow the "hand above the trgger line" DOJ rule.

This means all non-listed receivers are legal, all 80% receivers are legal. I would like to ask DOJ first.
Link Posted: 10/9/2004 7:28:32 AM EST

Originally Posted By NeoWeird:
Ok, aside from the AR/AK series; what other semi-automatic centerfire receviers are there?

I want to build a centerfire rifle with a pistol grip, but something about the Fab-10/DPMS receviers doesn't sit right with me. What other reliable models are there that are centerfire and semi-automatic?



You could do a fixed 10 round FAL.
Link Posted: 10/9/2004 10:10:15 AM EST
I still like the Fab-10 over the Fal. The Fal is nice, but at least with the Fab-10 I can easily buy quality parts to change it into any style I want. I guess it does have that going for it.

What if someone out of the state made one with a permanently attached, no pistol grip allowing, butt stock? Could they then sell it to me through a FFL?

On a side question, I noticed while looking at the laws that thumbhole stocks are illegal for semi-autos with detachable magazines. What if I cut out above the thumbhole so that it was open? It would still function and feel the same but it would follow the law. The laws after all did block cosmetic features, not actual functionality.
Link Posted: 10/9/2004 11:12:54 PM EST

Originally Posted By NeoWeird:
I still like the Fab-10 over the Fal. The Fal is nice, but at least with the Fab-10 I can easily buy quality parts to change it into any style I want. I guess it does have that going for it.

What if someone out of the state made one with a permanently attached, no pistol grip allowing, butt stock? Could they then sell it to me through a FFL?



No, it would be banned under the AR15 & AR series designations (banned by name).

Other rifles, such as the Robinson Armament M96 are not listed on the banned by names list and thus can be sold with detachable magazine capability so long as the rifle does not have any features banned by California law for rifles with detachable magazine capability. The California model of the Robinson Armament M96 does not include a pistol grip.


On a side question, I noticed while looking at the laws that thumbhole stocks are illegal for semi-autos with detachable magazines. What if I cut out above the thumbhole so that it was open? It would still function and feel the same but it would follow the law. The laws after all did block cosmetic features, not actual functionality.


My bet is it would still be considered a pistol grip/thumbhole stock.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 4:49:10 PM EST

Originally Posted By NeoWeird:
Ok, aside from the AR/AK series; what other semi-automatic centerfire receviers are there?

I want to build a centerfire rifle with a pistol grip, but something about the Fab-10/DPMS receviers doesn't sit right with me. What other reliable models are there that are centerfire and semi-automatic?



DSA Inc has fixed-magazine FAL clones. It's top-loaded by using stripper clips. The rep. I met at gun show said "If you move out CA one day, you may send the rifle back to DSA and DSA will remove the fixed mag for you at a small charge $50.00." Such rifles look nice but a little bit pricy.

Good luck on rifle-hunting.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 11:47:43 PM EST

DSA Inc has fixed-magazine FAL clones. It's top-loaded by using stripper clips. The rep. I met at gun show said "If you move out CA one day, you may send the rifle back to DSA and DSA will remove the fixed mag for you at a small charge $50.00." Such rifles look nice but a little bit pricy.

Good luck on rifle-hunting.




Does that mean that you could have a couple magazines that you could change in and out at home that would be permanently fixed?

The idea of opening and closing it everytime I reload is a bit unsettling. The last thing I want to do is catch/scratch something because some stupid idiot doens't like the fact that a magazine can be changed. Now if the magazine were held in place by a screw, you could change that out for a wing nut or something similar, and it would still be permanent (If I remember right, the law is more about having a magazine catch anyways), but you could have a mag or two back up that you twist the wing nut, let the mag drop out, slide a new one up and hold it in place, then tighten the wing nut.
Link Posted: 10/12/2004 1:32:42 PM EST

Originally Posted By NeoWeird:
Does that mean that you could have a couple magazines that you could change in and out at home that would be permanently fixed?



Most likely. I remembered the rep. said the mag could be removed while dis-assembling. It uses an internal bolt or something alike to fix the mag. Technically, you are able to remove the mag anytime to make it accept detachable mags, JUST DON'T GET CAUGHT in CA.
Link Posted: 10/12/2004 4:51:25 PM EST
I guess someone could be so inclined as to take it out shooting, make it removeable, then as they clean it they could revert it back that way when ever people inspected it, it was legal.

Of course, I don't recommend this, but if someone were so inclined....

Link Posted: 10/14/2004 10:52:33 AM EST

Originally Posted By NeoWeird:

The idea of opening and closing it everytime I reload is a bit unsettling. The last thing I want to do is catch/scratch something because some stupid idiot doens't like the fact that a magazine can be changed.Now if the magazine were held in place by a screw, you could change that out for a wing nut or something similar, and it would still be permanent (If I remember right, the law is more about having a magazine catch anyways), but you could have a mag or two back up that you twist the wing nut, let the mag drop out, slide a new one up and hold it in place, then tighten the wing nut.



No, this is wrong. It's NOT about having a magazine catch. Look up the definition of detachable magazine and it will say it is a magazine that can be readily removed from the firearm without the use of a tool or disassembly of the firearm's action.

Replacing a screw that holds a fixed magazine in place (which requires a tool to remove) with a wing nut or other such device that would allow you to remove the magazine without the use of a tool would be creating an "assault weapon" by California law. I'd advise against doing it.

If you want a removable magazine buy an M1A.
Link Posted: 10/14/2004 11:26:25 AM EST
The best thing you can do.......Move out of California and into a Democratic state.
Link Posted: 10/14/2004 3:16:30 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 5:20:01 AM EST

Originally Posted By Paul:

Originally Posted By charliehorse794:
The best thing you can do.......Move out of California and into a Democratic state.



One that has higher wages, a better job less rate, and better weather



You need to take into consideration economic factors. An engineer friend moved to Utah, having to offers here and one there. Maybe 15% less salary, but cost of living is less and homes are affordable.
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 6:08:59 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 6:25:52 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/15/2004 6:16:55 PM EST by wyv3rn]
.
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 4:41:13 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/15/2004 4:43:03 PM EST by NeoWeird]
I may be talking out of line, but here are some of my cents on the subject this topic has shifted to.


First, I agree that California has it's bad parts, but they are easily out weighed by the good. I HATE when people say "Just move out to a better state." Yeah, I am going to drop my wages in half so I can go shooting on the weekend, but since my wages are in half and I have a stack of bills from moving, I probably won't be able to go shooting. Real smart.

As for cost of living, it is all where you live. Yes, rates here are insanely over priced. I live in a small town, that 15 years ago was a farming town of like 1,000 people. Now there are small 2 bedroom homes going up right next to my family's chicken ranches that are starting at $500,000, so $300,000 in a residential area is a nice deal if you ask me.

I myself was born in '84. About a year before college my family got hit with a major crisis and we almost lost everything. Instead of going to college, I stayed and helped with the farm. I am not going to work on the farm forever, so I am basically screwed. Once I am done with the farm I will have no job experience, no formal education past High School, and be just the same as someone kid who just graduated and lives with his parents, except he will work for less because he doesn't have to worry about rent; this is all despite the fact that I scored over 75%, and more 99% than anything else, on all standarized test for the state. It's not about class or social standings, they may make it easier, but every now and then, everyone eats it hard. As you said, homes cost a crazy amount of money right now, well that means anyone in the house selling business is doing great right now. You just have to find your place.

The state is going to crap, our laws are getting outrageous, and no one likes living here because of it. You know one thing I have noticed, every single person who complains about California has never done a single thing to try and make it better. You hate the laws? Do something about it. If you don't want to, then don't complain. I personally hate the laws, but until I am in the postion to do something, I am not going to waste steam and make myself mad by complaining about it.

It's life. It isn't easy and it's not fun. You just make the best of it.
Top Top