Quoted: --snip-- certified legal transactions. Clint can do whatever he wishes, it's his company, I understand that. However, as a business owner, I would have been severely pissed off if he accused ME of theft and threatened to FILE A FALSE POLICE REPORT OF THE SAME. That is my biggest beef with what he did.

If one of your customers told you an selling him "X" was legal (taking his word on the existence of "certification') and the AG of CT told you that doing so was illegal, one might argue that "theft by deception" could apply.  Further, if a contract is made to conduct an illegal act, then there is no contract & never was one.

At least, that's how I understand it.  We never saw a "letter"; what we did see was the CA AG telling us we were committing an illegal act.

Best regards,

Walt

Quoted: Quoted: I just don't get how a company like Fulton would send things like lowers WITHOUT knowing the laws of the state in question. Something very fishy here.... The fact of the matter is this: Fulton checked the law. Fulton's lowers were deemed legal for sale. Fulton shipped lowers to distributers in CA. The CA DoIJ leaned on Fulton to stop the legal sale of legal lowers. Fulton caved. Fulton threatened legal action against distributors who were shipped legal lowers by Fulton. Fulton sucks. But that's just my opinion.

Yes that's all well and wonderfull to blame Fulton, but blame your self for living in a state that has laws that are anti gun...blame yourself for not fighting to have them changed or from going into effect in the first place. Blame yourself for continuing to live there and by giving them your state income tax ...pay check after pay check to support those laws and the people who make and enforce them. And yes, it may be nice to pass the buck off to them(Fulton)...it's so eas.y for everyone to do that, but I dare say that if you were the owner of smaller gun sized manufacturer that didn't have an endless budget to afford legal fees so you could sell a few of your products in one state say versus about 45...you'd do the same....so check your internet balls at the door, before you come in. Have a nice day

Quoted: If one of your customers told you an selling him "X" was legal (taking his word on the existence of "certification') and the AG of CT told you that doing so was illegal, one might argue that "theft by deception" could apply.  Further, if a contract is made to conduct an illegal act, then there is no contract & never was one. At least, that's how I understand it.  We never saw a "letter"; what we did see was the CA AG telling us we were committing an illegal act.

This is taken directly from Clint's letter:

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.

Walt, don't claim the transaction was illegal.  Clint KNEW, directly from the DoInJ, that the lowers were *legal* for sale. If it's *legal* then it cannot be illegal. His letter confirms he KNEW it was legal, directly from the DoInJ.

You guys might do good work, and for that should be commended, but your handling of this matter blows serious chunks. If I got that letter from you, accusing me of theft, and now are claiming you "didn't realize it was an illegal sale" WHEN IN FACT IT WASN'T...AND YOU KNEW IT WASN'T ILLEGAL, I'd say someone over at Fulton has some serious character issues.

Lying is serious business. So is accusing someone of theft based on a known lie.

Quoted: Basically, Fulton was pussy-whipped for obeying the law and they turned on fellow gun-owners to appease The Man. Like I said, Fuck'em.

I agree. Screw Fulton Armory.  It is clear they put $$ above the 2nd ammendment.

Quoted: Contacting Fulton Armory... I'm never sure whether I should laugh hysterically or sob inconsolably whenever I see "I can't contact Fulton Armory." Whenever I call 1-301-490-9485 between 9AM and 5PM EST and press "1," I get Andy.  Oh, once in a great while she's juggling a couple of calls & I go to voice mail, but that's maybe once a month.  BTW since I'm in Ohio I depend on the same phone to call the shop as our customers do, so my comment is empricially based. Further, anyone can write "[email protected]" or "[email protected]" if he or she can't remember "[email protected]" and get an answer.  Sure, sometimes I get swamped & so far behind I lose a mail, but that's once a month or so again.  Generally a second message with a polite reminder gets my burro in gear. So be of good cheer, and Happy New Year to all! www.fulton-armory.com/nightsky.gif Warmest regards, Walt

I have sent 3 emails from one account and two from another, plus I have been trying to call about an order I placed last week.

The time I did get ahold of someone I was told everything is in stock and the order should be pulled on Tuesday.

Fulton has been great about sending me stuff I have ordered from them and letting me know that it's on its way.

This time I figure that my order has fallen through the crack.

With the given information I'll now attempt to contact Fulton Armory and ask about my order.

So, can you tell me about my order??
I have gotten both the receipt and order confirmation email from Fulton Armory, I have yet to receive a shipping notification or any kind of an explination on why I have not received it nor any answers to my emails and calls.

Thanks!!


ORDER CONFIRMATION
Mon, 26 Dec 2005 01:28:46 -0500

Confirmation Number: 113557852517358
Reference Number: 11e8003b75
Order Number: 216.162.224.6-1135578422-825482-4577-36

Order Information:
$149.95   Qty. 1 #FA-AR-300-105SS: Bolt Carrier Group, complete w/ slick side bolt carrier
$11.90   Qty. 2 #FA-AR-200-401A1: Pistol Grip, A1, Used, Excellent
$24.95   Qty. 1 #FA-AR-28-5C1: Flash Suppressor, Phantom, Closed End
$149.95   Qty. 1 #FA-AR-300-M16-Small: Upper Receiver, M16, Slick Side, no FA, no CD, Small Hole (std mil-spec)
----------
$336.75   Subtotal
$20.00   Shipping
---------
$356.75   Total

My dealings with Fulton Armory were only one email several years back. I had a problem with an Olympic cast lower (that Olympic made wrong...the mag well wouldn't line up with any AR upper) and I contacted Fulton about some smith work on it, to see what my options were, since they were well regarded. I got chewed out by them in the reply for me wanting them to take a look at another company's product...but keep in mind this was before they made any lowers. I wanted to see what my gun smith options were, and all I found out was not to deal with them. LOL. Oh well, maybe he was having a bad day...

The Operative Word is "technically."

The AG takes us to court, says no, they're not.  We say, "But you said!"  The AG says, "We must have been wrong, because they always were illegal."

$25K + and up we may in fact win.

I'm still waiting for the letter.

I may be wrong, but I don't lie.

Let's not lose sight of the problem.  The Citizens of California have decided to ban .50's, and "AWs," and God knows what else.  It's not our role to fight city hall when the Citizens have spoken, alas.

Regards,

Walt

Quoted: One day a firearm sold might be used in a crime so someone might sue the manufacture (DC sniper anyone) so Walt better just stop selling firearms all the way to be safe. Damn now I've got to put Fulton Armory on the list with ASA and Hesse. They were a good place to get stuff for my weapons.

Paul

Bushmater on your list too....

Quoted: Quoted: After what they did to the good citizens of California this year, fuck'em. we have good citizens in california?

Hey now, hey now!  That just ain't right...many of us are just gun lovin', beer-slayin' good folk!

Quoted: walt, sadly your not going to win a debate with these guys no matter what the facts are.  As is the arfcom way, don't do business they way they want it done and your a bad man. you have to do what you have to do to keep your business viable. I can't understand why ANY firearms vendor will do business in california. The red tape and bullshit is just overwhelming.

Quoted: sadly your not going to win a debate with these guys no matter what the facts are.  As is the arfcom way, don't do business they way they want it done and your a bad man. you have to do what you have to do to keep your business viable. I can't understand why ANY firearms vendor will do business in california. The red tape and bullshit is just overwhelming.

Fulton crossed the line when they resorted to threatening accusations of thievery by customers who LEGALLY PURCHASED Fulton's product.

And then tried spinning lies ("the customer never told us it was an illegal sale") to justify the accusation.

As a business owner, if one of my suppliers did that to me and my company, I'd sure as shit be pissed to no end.

As I said, this is as much an issue of character as it is anything else. Or lack of it.

Well, it's been over 3 hours since I posted my response to "Walt" and replied to him in an IM and email, not to mention that I sent all of the email addresses he listed an email.
No response.

Which leaves me where I started.

I sense an order cancellation and a jump to the "other side" of Fulton, which is a fucking shame since they have given me excellent customer service in the past.

Walt, you want to lose me as a customer?

Quoted: Contacting Fulton Armory... I'm never sure whether I should laugh hysterically or sob inconsolably whenever I see "I can't contact Fulton Armory." Whenever I call 1-301-490-9485 between 9AM and 5PM EST and press "1," I get Andy.  Oh, once in a great while she's juggling a couple of calls & I go to voice mail, but that's maybe once a month.  BTW since I'm in Ohio I depend on the same phone to call the shop as our customers do, so my comment is empricially based. Further, anyone can write "[email protected]" or "[email protected]" if he or she can't remember "[email protected]" and get an answer.  Sure, sometimes I get swamped & so far behind I lose a mail, but that's once a month or so again.  Generally a second message with a polite reminder gets my burro in gear. So be of good cheer, and Happy New Year to all! www.fulton-armory.com/nightsky.gif Warmest regards, Walt

Wob, you need to re-read Clints original letter to the CA dealers. he stated that had refunded their money and if they didnt return the lowers he would report them stolen. which is correct. if the CA dealer has the lowers, AND he has the money he paid for them then guess what, the lowers are stolen. that is how the ATF would view it when Clint reported the fact that he had refunded the money and never recieved the lowers. so by your logic you want him to stand up to the ATF too? thats worked out so well in the past for the Branch dividians, Randy Weaver, MGW, and that guy who sold the Griffin .50's

im really starting to think that anyone asserting that Clint "screwed" the people of CA is just talking out their ass. the people of CA are screwing themselves. CA gun owners are hopelessly outnumbered by liberals and yet they choose to stay there because they have decided that the benefits of living in CA outweigh the infringement on their rights. if they dont like it they have options. CA gun owners have failed to maintain their rights regardless of how hard they fight politically but some of you think that a man with a small business, 3000mi away should shitcan his buisiness and ruin himself financially to fight a losing battle for them.

i have yet to hear anyone say  

"i would throw away my business for this"
"i will help pay Clints legal fees"
"i would ruin myself financially on principle"

you guys want to talk shit about Fulton rolling over but i dont see any of you putting your jobs and homes on the line. bunch of shit-talkers. if you wont pay his legal fee's or support his family when the CA DOJ ruins him then you should STFU. the man made the only decision he could in view of his responsability to his family and his employees and you all want to run him down for it. shameful

Quoted: Well, it's been over 3 hours since I posted my response to "Walt" and replied to him in an IM and email, not to mention that I sent all of the email addresses he listed an email. No response. Which leaves me where I started. I sense an order cancellation and a jump to the "other side" of Fulton, which is a fucking shame since they have given me excellent customer service in the past. Walt, you want to lose me as a customer?

Man, it's New Year's Eve and our Anniversary!

I've been out to dinner with my wife.   She comes first.

The office opens again on Tuesday.  Andy will be back with you with an order status then.

Sheesh.

I should add,

I'M OUTTA HERE 'TILL NEXT YEAR!!

HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!!

Wwarmest regards,

Walt

. he stated that had refunded their money and if they didn't return the lowers he would report them stolen. which is correct. if the CA dealer has the lowers, AND he has the money he paid for them then guess what, the lowers are stolen. that is how the ATF would view it when Clint reported the fact that he had refunded the money and never received the lowers

Sorry, try again.  Just because you give a unauthorized refund, it does not give you your property rights of the lowers back.  Clint had already sold the lowers when they were paid for. No one asked for a refund.

Quoted: Wob, you need to re-read Clints original letter to the CA dealers. he stated that had refunded their money and if they didnt return the lowers he would report them stolen. which is correct. if the CA dealer has the lowers, AND he has the money he paid for them then guess what, the lowers are stolen. that is how the ATF would view it when Clint reported the fact that he had refunded the money and never recieved the lowers.

Here's the deal. If Fulton's customer *paid* for the lowers, Fulton *shipped* the lowers, the customer *owns* the lowers, ESPECIALLY if the customer *received* the lowers. Fulton can refund 150% of the purchase price, but if the customer DOES NOT want to get rid of the LEGALLY PURCHASED and RECEIVED lowers, Fulton claiming THEFT is BULLSHIT. BULLSHIT.

Fulton's handling of this matter SUCKS and there's no other way to describe it.

If you purchased some USGI mags from some guy in EE and after he received payment from you, he shipped the mags, then AFTER the shipping occurred, he told you to send them back or he'd file a police report for "theft of property," THAT WOULD BE INSANE.

This is precisely what Fulton has done and it's BULLSHIT.

you guys want to talk shit about Fulton rolling over but i dont see any of you putting your jobs and homes on the line. bunch of shit-talkers. if you wont pay his legal fee's or support his family when the CA DOJ ruins him then you should STFU. the man made the only decision he could in view of his responsability to his family and his employees and you all want to run him down for it. shameful

It's the lying that is shameful, not the pointing out of the lying. Get it right. Fulton tried to pull BULLSHIT on a customer by calling him a THIEF for a simple, legal transaction, and then lied about it to justify it.

That's what's shameful.

telling me to "try again" does not constitute a compelling argument. refunding the money and expecting the lowers was Fultons only course of action given the threats from the CA DOJ. according to my wife (the attorney) refunding the money ex post facto is the only way to have legal grounds to demand they be returned. it is even more effective than driving to CA and refunding the cash in person because it provides Fulton a legal recourse and absolves him of responsability if the lowers are not returned. Fulton played this one very wisely

all i have heard are knee jerk emotional outcry against fulton. not one of you has laid out a logical case for WHY he should risk his livelyhood for this.

Quoted: telling me to "try again" does not constitute a compelling argument. refunding the money and expecting the lowers was Fultons only course of action given the threats from the CA DOJ. according to my wife (the attorney) refunding the money ex post facto is the only way to have legal grounds to demand they be returned. it is even more effective than driving to CA and refunding the cash in person because it provides Fulton a legal recourse and absolves him of responsability if the lowers are not returned. Fulton played this one very wisely all i have heard are knee jerk emotional outcry against fulton. not one of you has laid out a logical case for WHY he should risk his livelyhood for this.

Once I have paid you for goods you then give to me, they are not yours anymore. They are mine. Giving me my money back doesn't make them yours, amigo.

You can attempt to BUY them back, just as I BOUGHT them from you, but writing me a check and saying they are yours again IS BULLSHIT.

typically i would agree if we were buying widgets or doohickeys etc but firearms and the regulation thereof makes this a bit stickier. so lets look at another federally regulated product... drugs.

the Government contacted Merck and said "hey, we're pulling our approval from vioxx, pull it off the market" at that point Merck would be in violation of the law of they did not comply. even though the government did not take action against Merck they would have if Merck had not complied with the recomendation. Merck would have been held responsible by the government. so Merck bought back the remaining stock forcing pharmacies to return their stock of Vioxx.

by your logic Merck buckled to "the man" and your local CVS should have said "we paid for them, theyre ours" and kept refilling prescriptions. then some asshole in goatbang michigan would pop his heart and Merck would be held responsible.

Quoted: by your logic Merck buckled to "the man" and your local CVS should have said "we paid for them, theyre ours" and kept refilling prescriptions. then some asshole in goatbang michigan would pop his heart and Merck would be held responsible.

By my logic nobody dies of a heart attack in some lousy analogy.

The sale was legal. The sale took place. Money was exchanged for goods. Goods that were legal, even per the CA DoInJ.

What you are saying is akin to going up to the counter at Wal-Mart, handing over $399.95 (plus tax, of course) for your favorite hunting rifle, the rifle is then handed to you (along with a receipt showing you in fact paid for it), then, as you are walking out of the store, the clerk trips the alarm, and yells, "Stop, thief, or I'll call the police!"

Fulton conducted LEGAL commerce with a LEGAL consumer over LEGAL goods that were LEGALLY purchased and LEGALLY received. Fulton then saying they want the goods BACK or they'll call the police because their goods were STOLEN is BULLSHIT.

And to top it all off, Fulton LIED about the whole thing when they claimed the DoInJ said the "technically legal" lowers were "illegal."

Cut it up, slice it, dice it, and explain it away any way you want. This is what happens when men put money before integrity.

well i dont think he put money ahead of integrity so to speak because he obviously lost some potential profits and burned his bridges with dealers in CA with will no doubt impact him for sometime. but it wont impact him as much as a legal fight against the state of california. i think i would have done the same thing in his shoes and not risked my lifes work that feeds my family.

the bitch of it is.... all of us that are bickering over this are really on the same side and can agree on one critical point of fact here. that the CA law is arbitrary, unfair and unconstitutional. our like minded compatriots in CA have tried voting with their ballots, now its time to vote with their feet.

Quoted: typically i would agree if we were buying widgets or doohickeys etc but firearms and the regulation thereof makes this a bit stickier. so lets look at another federally regulated product... drugs. the Government contacted Merck and said "hey, we're pulling our approval from vioxx, pull it off the market" at that point Merck would be in violation of the law of they did not comply. even though the government did not take action against Merck they would have if Merck had not complied with the recomendation. Merck would have been held responsible by the government. so Merck bought back the remaining stock forcing pharmacies to return their stock of Vioxx. by your logic Merck buckled to "the man" and your local CVS should have said "we paid for them, theyre ours" and kept refilling prescriptions. then some asshole in goatbang michigan would pop his heart and Merck would be held responsible.

Uh, no.  It is as though Merck knew I had some at my house and told me to send it back or they'd report it stolen.  

Reporting something stolen that has been paid for is illegal.

Quoted: typically i would agree if we were buying widgets or doohickeys etc but firearms and the regulation thereof makes this a bit stickier. so lets look at another federally regulated product... drugs. the Government contacted Merck and said "hey, we're pulling our approval from vioxx, pull it off the market" at that point Merck would be in violation of the law of they did not comply. even though the government did not take action against Merck they would have if Merck had not complied with the recomendation. Merck would have been held responsible by the government. so Merck bought back the remaining stock forcing pharmacies to return their stock of Vioxx. by your logic Merck buckled to "the man" and your local CVS should have said "we paid for them, theyre ours" and kept refilling prescriptions. then some asshole in goatbang michigan would pop his heart and Merck would be held responsible.

And if I have Vioxx sitting in my medicine cabinet, can Merck turn around and threaten me with theft for not returning the product to them?

Quoted: Perhaps Clint overreacted. I might too if the CA AG's office called me with unveiled threats.   Broadcasting a private message has its own deserved obbrobrium. Very best regards, Walt

Just as a minor correction...

opprobrium

Putting aside the Fulton bashing I received an email from the staff at Fulton and they apologized to me for the delay and the confusion.
THAT'S what customer service is all about.

You may continue on with the Fulton bashing.  

Fulton Armory was going to have my business in a few years when I had the $$ to buy one of their M14s.

Not anymore.

Fuck Fulton Armory. I'm going LRB.

Quoted: Clint McKee wrote: 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. The part in red seems to be the part that scared him. There is more to meet the eye here that I think most of you fail to understand. That kind of language is SOP for CA DOJ. I've seen the exact same language in just about every response from DOJ I've ever seen, going back well before SB23 was enacted in 2000. The fact that DOJ informed him that Fulton receivers are "technically legal" is way more information than I've seen in many letters. Oftentimes DOJ simply refers you to the legal statute and leaves it up to you interpret, while telling you that depending on where you live, the local DA may prosecute. DOJ did not single out Fulton Armory, that kind of language is their modus operandi. What they're saying is, and what they've been telling Californians for years is..., we're telling you it's legal, but we have no control over politically aspirant prosecutors. Honestly, the same could be said of any local DA anywhere in the United States. A DA can prosecute a ham sandwich if he wants to. Another thing, the DOJ did not threaten Clint with prosecution, though he seemed to take it that way, and many of you have repeated it. Again, DOJ said what they always say, it's legal, but we have no control over local prosecutors. Personally, I think Clint overreacted. Which is sad really, because I would have liked to seen Fulton lowers included among the thousands of Stags, Lauers, and others being shipped into California. hr

This is 100% correct.  The DoJ says that to cover its ass.  Here is a letter I received, be sure to look at the date on it.  Notice the last paragraph.  If I was the deputy AG I sure as hell would put some CYA in there, even if they asked me if orange soda was legal.  

i22.photobucket.com/albums/b343/ebolamonkey/letter.jpg

Please people, the DoJ DID NOT threaten Fulton.  They merely said that a DISTRICT ATTORNEY could prosecute.  Guess what? They could prosecute you for selling one of your M14s to California!  That's right!  The charges wouldn't stick, but you might get 25,000 in legal fees.  Something to think about for sure.  

ETA:  Please don't think that I do not understand Fulton's position on this.  I would agree with them not selling these to California IF they didn't do the whole "we will report them stolen" thing.  Since the item was already shipped, they could have canceled the next order and ASKED the dealer to send them back, or at least worked out a way to send it through a supplier/third party.  I know it is not a big company and you don't want to deal with legal hassles.  But it is the gun business, and anyone selling ANY guns in California needs to understand the possibilities.    

Fulton, I wish you the best of luck with your business.  

I love the finish on the latest batch of Fultons!  The black looks better than the grey IMO.  The quality appears to be excellent: