Possible AR15 lowers legally for sale in CA - Page 2

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Possible AR15 lowers legally for sale in CA (Page 2 of 4)

Posted: 12/3/2005 4:24:31 PM EDT

[#1]

I took the pistol grip off my receiver and just held it for a while. It actually didn't feel that bad, though I can't say whether it would work good while firing live rounds (can't do that in my room at 2 am).

If you own an AR, take the AR and hold it firm against your shoulder and grab the pistol grip like you normally would. Then, just let your middle finger down to your pinky finger release. I know it sounds very odd, but it doesn't feel so bad. I bet with a small cube of aluminum or steel I could mill a 'grip' that was flush with the trigger guard, same dimensions as the top of a pistol grip, but have a C shape that follows the already existing contour of the AR receiver. If you make your own Vulcan style from an 80% or remove the anodizing (Highly recommened against this) you could then have it Tig welded on. Perma-non-pistol grip. I am going to go pick up some 7075 on Monday to start another gun project, and I will try to get a piece of scrap to try and make it. I'll let you all know how it goes.

ETA: Does anyone know if bolting a pistol grip, flash suppressor, etc. on and then grinding/filing the head off counts as permanently attached in regards to a gun?

Posted: 12/3/2005 4:46:15 PM EDT

[#2]

Gripless AR's are really easy to fire. No biggie.

You just have to cut an old grip so it will hold in the selector spring and detent. Or thread the detent hole to accept a screw ala FAB-10. No need to reinvent the wheel. Unless you want to, of course!

ETA that I just realized that the early FAB-10's had this modification and the later ones don't. The early one's also have the rear push pin detent hole threaded too. So you don't need a grip or a buttstock to have a fully functional weapon.

Just trivia.

Posted: 12/3/2005 5:05:16 PM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
Gripless AR's are really easy to fire. No biggie.

You just have to cut an old grip so it will hold in the selector spring and detent. Or thread the detent hole to accept a screw ala FAB-10. No need to reinvent the wheel. Unless you want to, of course!

ETA that I just realized that the early FAB-10's had this modification and the later ones don't. The early one's also have the rear push pin detent hole threaded too. So you don't need a grip or a buttstock to have a fully functional weapon.

Just trivia.

Or maybe they hated those airborne springs....

Posted: 12/3/2005 8:24:07 PM EDT

[#4]

Unless you hung the stock off the grip, wouldn't have the stock above, with a space for your thumb below it, be considered a thumbhole stock?

Posted: 12/3/2005 10:56:19 PM EDT

[#5]

978.20(e) Thumbhole Stock
The proposed definition originally noticed to the public defined a thumbhole stock as "any stock with any opening that enables the firearm to be grasped, controlled and fired with one hand." Comments received during the initial comment period (December 31, 1999 through February 28, 2000) stated that the term "any stock with any opening" is overly broad and ambiguous. The Department agrees that any opening can include openings other than thumbholes. As a result, the Department changed "any stock with any opening" to "a stock with a hole." Significant public input received during the initial comment period also addressed the subjectivity of the phrase "fired with one hand." It appears from the comments that it could be an arbitrary standard that requires consideration of physical characteristics such as strength and dexterity that vary from person to person. The Department accordingly determined its use would add confusion rather than clarity to the definition. The definition was revised to specify the physical characteristic of a thumbhole stock as "a stock with a hole that allows the thumb of the trigger hand to penetrate the stock," and was noticed during the first 15-day comment period (May 10 through May 30, 2000). The comments received during this 15-day notice raised additional challenges regarding the definition of the term "penetrate." In an effort to further clarify the definition, the Department added the phrase "into or through" to the phrase "penetrate the stock." The final revised definition: "thumbhole stock means a stock with a hole that allows the thumb of the trigger hand to penetrate into or through the stock" was noticed during the second 15-day comment period (July 12 through July 31, 2000). Although additional comments were received, none resulted in substantial revision to the definition. However, the Department made a non-substantial revision by adding "while firing" to make it explicit in the definition that the placement of the thumbhole must allow the thumb of the trigger hand to penetrate into or through the stock while firing.

Nope. Not in California at least.

Posted: 12/4/2005 1:32:09 AM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
I took the pistol grip off my receiver and just held it for a while. It actually didn't feel that bad, though I can't say whether it would work good while firing live rounds (can't do that in my room at 2 am).

If you own an AR, take the AR and hold it firm against your shoulder and grab the pistol grip like you normally would. Then, just let your middle finger down to your pinky finger release. I know it sounds very odd, but it doesn't feel so bad. I bet with a small cube of aluminum or steel I could mill a 'grip' that was flush with the trigger guard, same dimensions as the top of a pistol grip, but have a C shape that follows the already existing contour of the AR receiver. If you make your own Vulcan style from an 80% or remove the anodizing (Highly recommened against this) you could then have it Tig welded on. Perma-non-pistol grip. I am going to go pick up some 7075 on Monday to start another gun project, and I will try to get a piece of scrap to try and make it. I'll let you all know how it goes.

ETA: Does anyone know if bolting a pistol grip, flash suppressor, etc. on and then grinding/filing the head off counts as permanently attached in regards to a gun?

You guy's know they make these "hook" grips for Bna states right? I lost the link, but its a metal rod coated in foam rubber. I'll try and find that damn link now...

Posted: 12/4/2005 9:57:25 AM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I took the pistol grip off my receiver and just held it for a while. It actually didn't feel that bad, though I can't say whether it would work good while firing live rounds (can't do that in my room at 2 am).

If you own an AR, take the AR and hold it firm against your shoulder and grab the pistol grip like you normally would. Then, just let your middle finger down to your pinky finger release. I know it sounds very odd, but it doesn't feel so bad. I bet with a small cube of aluminum or steel I could mill a 'grip' that was flush with the trigger guard, same dimensions as the top of a pistol grip, but have a C shape that follows the already existing contour of the AR receiver. If you make your own Vulcan style from an 80% or remove the anodizing (Highly recommened against this) you could then have it Tig welded on. Perma-non-pistol grip. I am going to go pick up some 7075 on Monday to start another gun project, and I will try to get a piece of scrap to try and make it. I'll let you all know how it goes.

ETA: Does anyone know if bolting a pistol grip, flash suppressor, etc. on and then grinding/filing the head off counts as permanently attached in regards to a gun?
You guy's know they make these "hook" grips for Bna states right? I lost the link, but its a metal rod coated in foam rubber. I'll try and find that damn link now...

www.fabten.com/what's_new.htm

They put an apostrophe in the URL, so you will have to copy and paste it. But I think that's what you were looking for. I don't think this would fly in California, because their definition of pistol grip is different than the federal one. It's about where your fingers are when you grip it.

Posted: 12/4/2005 1:21:35 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
978.20(e) Thumbhole Stock
The proposed definition originally noticed to the public defined a thumbhole stock as "any stock with any opening that enables the firearm to be grasped, controlled and fired with one hand." Comments received during the initial comment period (December 31, 1999 through February 28, 2000) stated that the term "any stock with any opening" is overly broad and ambiguous. The Department agrees that any opening can include openings other than thumbholes. As a result, the Department changed "any stock with any opening" to "a stock with a hole." Significant public input received during the initial comment period also addressed the subjectivity of the phrase "fired with one hand." It appears from the comments that it could be an arbitrary standard that requires consideration of physical characteristics such as strength and dexterity that vary from person to person. The Department accordingly determined its use would add confusion rather than clarity to the definition. The definition was revised to specify the physical characteristic of a thumbhole stock as "a stock with a hole that allows the thumb of the trigger hand to penetrate the stock," and was noticed during the first 15-day comment period (May 10 through May 30, 2000). The comments received during this 15-day notice raised additional challenges regarding the definition of the term "penetrate." In an effort to further clarify the definition, the Department added the phrase "into or through" to the phrase "penetrate the stock." The final revised definition: "thumbhole stock means a stock with a hole that allows the thumb of the trigger hand to penetrate into or through the stock" was noticed during the second 15-day comment period (July 12 through July 31, 2000). Although additional comments were received, none resulted in substantial revision to the definition. However, the Department made a non-substantial revision by adding "while firing" to make it explicit in the definition that the placement of the thumbhole must allow the thumb of the trigger hand to penetrate into or through the stock while firing.

Nope. Not in California at least.

Oooh! "Penetration"!

Posted: 12/4/2005 3:38:44 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
Quoted:
978.20(e) Thumbhole Stock
The proposed definition originally noticed to the public defined a thumbhole stock as "any stock with any opening that enables the firearm to be grasped, controlled and fired with one hand." Comments received during the initial comment period (December 31, 1999 through February 28, 2000) stated that the term "any stock with any opening" is overly broad and ambiguous. The Department agrees that any opening can include openings other than thumbholes. As a result, the Department changed "any stock with any opening" to "a stock with a hole." Significant public input received during the initial comment period also addressed the subjectivity of the phrase "fired with one hand." It appears from the comments that it could be an arbitrary standard that requires consideration of physical characteristics such as strength and dexterity that vary from person to person. The Department accordingly determined its use would add confusion rather than clarity to the definition. The definition was revised to specify the physical characteristic of a thumbhole stock as "a stock with a hole that allows the thumb of the trigger hand to penetrate the stock," and was noticed during the first 15-day comment period (May 10 through May 30, 2000). The comments received during this 15-day notice raised additional challenges regarding the definition of the term "penetrate." In an effort to further clarify the definition, the Department added the phrase "into or through" to the phrase "penetrate the stock." The final revised definition: "thumbhole stock means a stock with a hole that allows the thumb of the trigger hand to penetrate into or through the stock" was noticed during the second 15-day comment period (July 12 through July 31, 2000). Although additional comments were received, none resulted in substantial revision to the definition. However, the Department made a non-substantial revision by adding "while firing" to make it explicit in the definition that the placement of the thumbhole must allow the thumb of the trigger hand to penetrate into or through the stock while firing.

Nope. Not in California at least.

Oooh! "Penetration"!

And this is exactly why the DOJ thinks we are not mature enough to own firearms.

Posted: 12/5/2005 6:32:06 AM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I took the pistol grip off my receiver and just held it for a while. It actually didn't feel that bad, though I can't say whether it would work good while firing live rounds (can't do that in my room at 2 am).

If you own an AR, take the AR and hold it firm against your shoulder and grab the pistol grip like you normally would. Then, just let your middle finger down to your pinky finger release. I know it sounds very odd, but it doesn't feel so bad. I bet with a small cube of aluminum or steel I could mill a 'grip' that was flush with the trigger guard, same dimensions as the top of a pistol grip, but have a C shape that follows the already existing contour of the AR receiver. If you make your own Vulcan style from an 80% or remove the anodizing (Highly recommened against this) you could then have it Tig welded on. Perma-non-pistol grip. I am going to go pick up some 7075 on Monday to start another gun project, and I will try to get a piece of scrap to try and make it. I'll let you all know how it goes.

ETA: Does anyone know if bolting a pistol grip, flash suppressor, etc. on and then grinding/filing the head off counts as permanently attached in regards to a gun?
You guy's know they make these "hook" grips for Bna states right? I lost the link, but its a metal rod coated in foam rubber. I'll try and find that damn link now...

www.fabten.com/what's_new.htm

They put an apostrophe in the URL, so you will have to copy and paste it. But I think that's what you were looking for. I don't think this would fly in California, because their definition of pistol grip is different than the federal one. It's about where your fingers are when you grip it.

The Fabten version allows the hand to rest below the imaginary line. A straight metal rould would work.

Posted: 12/11/2005 1:32:43 PM EDT

[#11]

boys, I would get on board, and follow this forum, and flood the state with new receivers, forcing them to either add to the list or look like a bunch of idiots, because their law is not working. If they open up the registration period again by adding to the list. That means if you did not register the first time around, and you want to own a legal one, its done. Lowers are so cheap, that almost anyone can afford them, and if they never open up registration again, and you own these, you probably won't be out any money. It als0 means you can stick it to shoeless ventures for ripping off anyone who owns a fab ten. His receivers go from 300-500 dollars, and are no better then an aluminum paper weight. Its time to organize, and take back this state.
Don't forget to swign the rkba petition, and get your registered friends to sign it.

Posted: 12/11/2005 2:11:36 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
boys, I would get on board, and follow this forum, and flood the state with new receivers, forcing them to either add to the list or look like a bunch of idiots, because their law is not working. If they open up the registration period again by adding to the list. That means if you did not register the first time around, and you want to own a legal one, its done. Lowers are so cheap, that almost anyone can afford them, and if they never open up registration again, and you own these, you probably won't be out any money. It als0 means you can stick it to shoeless ventures for ripping off anyone who owns a fab ten. His receivers go from 300-500 dollars, and are no better then an aluminum paper weight. Its time to organize, and take back this state.
Don't forget to swign the rkba petition, and get your registered friends to sign it.

Damn, I didn't realize this was going that far. It may be a real opportunity to open up the registration to new ARs, everybody should at least check it out.

Posted: 12/11/2005 2:56:52 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
Quoted:
boys, I would get on board, and follow this forum, and flood the state with new receivers, forcing them to either add to the list or look like a bunch of idiots, because their law is not working. If they open up the registration period again by adding to the list. That means if you did not register the first time around, and you want to own a legal one, its done. Lowers are so cheap, that almost anyone can afford them, and if they never open up registration again, and you own these, you probably won't be out any money. It als0 means you can stick it to shoeless ventures for ripping off anyone who owns a fab ten. His receivers go from 300-500 dollars, and are no better then an aluminum paper weight. Its time to organize, and take back this state.
Don't forget to swign the rkba petition, and get your registered friends to sign it.

Damn, I didn't realize this was going that far. It may be a real opportunity to open up the registration to new ARs, everybody should at least check it out.

Its a race, read the doj thread there.
The doj showed up at the show, and said they will be adding names to the list in two weeks. Hurrry up guys it is a race for those who did not register the first time around!

Posted: 12/11/2005 3:54:05 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
boys, I would get on board, and follow this forum, and flood the state with new receivers, forcing them to either add to the list or look like a bunch of idiots, because their law is not working. If they open up the registration period again by adding to the list. That means if you did not register the first time around, and you want to own a legal one, its done. Lowers are so cheap, that almost anyone can afford them, and if they never open up registration again, and you own these, you probably won't be out any money. It als0 means you can stick it to shoeless ventures for ripping off anyone who owns a fab ten. His receivers go from 300-500 dollars, and are no better then an aluminum paper weight. Its time to organize, and take back this state.
Don't forget to swign the rkba petition, and get your registered friends to sign it.

Damn, I didn't realize this was going that far. It may be a real opportunity to open up the registration to new ARs, everybody should at least check it out.

Its a race, read the doj thread there.
The doj showed up at the show, and said they will be adding names to the list in two weeks. Hurrry up guys it is a race for those who did not register the first time around!

Did you happen to see who is best to contact to begin DROS asap? I couldn't really decipher who to contact in LA/OC area or how to get them sent down here. Do I contact tenpercent directly? I emailed my FFL in Westminster about it to see if he can get them.

Posted: 12/11/2005 3:55:03 PM EDT

[#15]

The Fab 10 and Vulcan, and now Bushmaster(?) have CA legal fixed mag rifles. Unless the people at the CA DOJ are REALLY stupid, why would they add ANY names to the list?

They obviously are ok with the afore mentioned firearms, why would they do something that would allow untold hundreds (thousands?) of new detachable mag semi auto, centerfire firearms into CA as assault weapons?

Don't get me wrong, I wish you guys the best of luck and hope the DOJ really is that dumb.

Posted: 12/11/2005 4:04:41 PM EDT

[#16]

I have a feeling this will all turn out like the SKS thing, and for that reason I am not going to buy any (not to mentio no money

).

However, if registration does open again, I have three cali legal lowers I have made that I will register if I can....which I am praying I will be able to do.

ETA: Those with Cali legal lowers, even Fab-10s and the like with the closed mag well, may want to register their's also. The DOJ may reword it to make any AR variant of any kind, including fixed mag ones, AWs and then your rifle will be screwed. So register it and if things go well, then you can always turn it into a real AR.

I wonder what would happen if you registered a normal firearm, like a normal semi-auto shotgun, as an AW even when it wasn't. Could you then put like a removable magazine on it and what not? Just something to think about if they open registration to all new weapons.

Posted: 12/11/2005 4:09:04 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
The Fab 10 and Vulcan, and now Bushmaster(?) have CA legal fixed mag rifles. Unless the people at the CA DOJ are REALLY stupid, why would they add ANY names to the list?

They obviously are ok with the afore mentioned firearms, why would they do something that would allow untold hundreds (thousands?) of new detachable mag semi auto, centerfire firearms into CA as assault weapons?

Don't get me wrong, I wish you guys the best of luck and hope the DOJ really is that dumb.

It's not that people want the lowers for making an "assault weapon" as described by the DOJ. It's the fact that people should be allowed to build legal rifles from manufacturers that are not banned by name on the Kaiser list.

If you're building a rifle that complies to DOJ specifications then there should be no friction. After all we're complying to their guidelines.

A Fag 10 and Vulcan have AR15 parts but I think we'll all agree that they ARE NOT AR15's! Neither are rifles that have AR15 parts but comply to the DOJ's very own "Assault Weapon" feature identification guidelines.

Posted: 12/11/2005 4:09:36 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
I have a feeling this will all turn out like the SKS thing, and for that reason I am not going to buy any (not to mentio no money ).

However, if registration does open again, I have three cali legal lowers I have made that I will register if I can....which I am praying I will be able to do.

You guys have to read the threeads over at calguns, you are going over tired material that was already gone over before they started all this. Its very impo0rtant you go over therer and read all the threads associated with this. The DOJ has to follow the law, they cannot create new law, only the legislature can. The sks opened up registration for guns already banned. This will open up for registration on guns added to.

READ

Posted: 12/11/2005 4:09:46 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
The Fab 10 and Vulcan, and now Bushmaster(?) have CA legal fixed mag rifles. Unless the people at the CA DOJ are REALLY stupid, why would they add ANY names to the list?

They obviously are ok with the afore mentioned firearms, why would they do something that would allow untold hundreds (thousands?) of new detachable mag semi auto, centerfire firearms into CA as assault weapons?

Don't get me wrong, I wish you guys the best of luck and hope the DOJ really is that dumb.

Exactly. If they dont name the receivers on the list, we'd be forced to pin the magazines to make them legal, just like the idea behind the FAL receivers. Otherwise anyone that buys these lower receivers and builds them like Eugene Stoner intended, they would be committing a felony.

Posted: 12/11/2005 4:18:28 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Quoted:
The Fab 10 and Vulcan, and now Bushmaster(?) have CA legal fixed mag rifles. Unless the people at the CA DOJ are REALLY stupid, why would they add ANY names to the list?

They obviously are ok with the afore mentioned firearms, why would they do something that would allow untold hundreds (thousands?) of new detachable mag semi auto, centerfire firearms into CA as assault weapons?

Don't get me wrong, I wish you guys the best of luck and hope the DOJ really is that dumb.

Exactly. If they dont name the receivers on the list, we'd be forced to pin the magazines to make them legal, just like the idea behind the FAL receivers. Otherwise anyone that buys these lower receivers and builds them like Eugene Stoner intended, they would be committing a felony.

Wrong, go over and read the threads.
With this, you can make an .223 seim without the pistol grip, and use thirty rounders, or you can pin the ten in. People are working on ways to put a retainer pin in to make it gripless, and since the DOJ doesn't trust gun owners in this political climate, they will add them to the list, and if they dont, it is a lot cheaper to make a tem round pin this route rather then the fab ten , vulcan, and bushmaster highway robbery that is happening right now.

Posted: 12/11/2005 4:48:16 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Fab 10 and Vulcan, and now Bushmaster(?) have CA legal fixed mag rifles. Unless the people at the CA DOJ are REALLY stupid, why would they add ANY names to the list?

They obviously are ok with the afore mentioned firearms, why would they do something that would allow untold hundreds (thousands?) of new detachable mag semi auto, centerfire firearms into CA as assault weapons?

Don't get me wrong, I wish you guys the best of luck and hope the DOJ really is that dumb.

Exactly. If they dont name the receivers on the list, we'd be forced to pin the magazines to make them legal, just like the idea behind the FAL receivers. Otherwise anyone that buys these lower receivers and builds them like Eugene Stoner intended, they would be committing a felony.

Wrong, go over and read the threads.
With this, you can make an .223 seim without the pistol grip, and use thirty rounders, or you can pin the ten in. People are working on ways to put a retainer pin in to make it gripless, and since the DOJ doesn't trust gun owners in this political climate, they will add them to the list, and if they dont, it is a lot cheaper to make a tem round pin this route rather then the fab ten , vulcan, and bushmaster highway robbery that is happening right now.

What am I wrong about? Even you say that if they don't put them on the list that it'll be alot cheaper to pin a 10rd mag into them.

Posted: 12/11/2005 5:29:32 PM EDT

[#22]

Read the post about teh DOJ guy, Chin, who ended up at the gun show. They are working on it and it will happen. No one that recently sent in a letter has got one back...no one. they are working on something.

Posted: 12/11/2005 6:25:34 PM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
Read the post about teh DOJ guy, Chin, who ended up at the gun show. They are working on it and it will happen. No one that recently sent in a letter has got one back...no one. they are working on something.

Where exactly is it? I looked through several pages and I don't want to spend another half hour reading just to find it.

Posted: 12/11/2005 6:43:37 PM EDT

[#24]

www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=25432

Act now...act fast.

Posted: 12/11/2005 7:42:06 PM EDT

[#25]

Shit!

Posted: 12/11/2005 8:10:58 PM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
Read the post about teh DOJ guy, Chin, who ended up at the gun show. They are working on it and it will happen. No one that recently sent in a letter has got one back...no one. they are working on something.

Yea Iggy showed up at the show and spoke with Ten Percent. Everyone thinks that he was an "under cover agent" that was spying on Ten Percent, but most of the dealers that work the shows know Iggy and he pops up all the time at the shows around here.

Posted: 12/11/2005 8:26:09 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Read the post about teh DOJ guy, Chin, who ended up at the gun show. They are working on it and it will happen. No one that recently sent in a letter has got one back...no one. they are working on something.

Where exactly is it? I looked through several pages and I don't want to spend another half hour reading just to find it.

It will be well worth your half hour if things go right. Everybody should at least read what has been written over there before passing judgement. These people have put a lot of time, effort, and money into this and it looks like now is the time to act. I will probably be trying to make a trip up to Taft as soon as possible. Even if things don't go right I'll just be out maybe $170.

Posted: 12/11/2005 8:43:21 PM EDT

[#28]

An AR15 lower is an AR15 lower and they are all banned by the "AR series" portion of the ban(s). They do not have to be specifically named makes and models.

Posted: 12/11/2005 8:44:46 PM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
No, it's for real AR style lowers. Since they are not banned by name, and not assembled (or stripped) in a way that makes them an AW, then they should in theory be legal to own.

False. you're forgetting about the AR & AK series ban.

Posted: 12/11/2005 8:46:49 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
Quoted:
No, it's for real AR style lowers. Since they are not banned by name, and not assembled (or stripped) in a way that makes them an AW, then they should in theory be legal to own.

False. you're forgetting about the AR & AK series ban.

False, read the doj letter of exceptance for ar-15 receivers, and the harrot deciscion

Posted: 12/11/2005 8:48:59 PM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
An AR15 lower is an AR15 lower and they are all banned by the "AR series" portion of the ban(s). They do not have to be specifically named makes and models.

That was the case until the latest harrot decision.....that "clarification" changed everything...and not how they expected it too....

Posted: 12/11/2005 8:57:04 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No, it's for real AR style lowers. Since they are not banned by name, and not assembled (or stripped) in a way that makes them an AW, then they should in theory be legal to own.

False. you're forgetting about the AR & AK series ban.

False, read the doj letter of exceptance for ar-15 receivers, and the harrot deciscion

I seen the case law and it hasnt resulted in CALDOJ doing one thing differnt. The letters that DOJ gave the opinion on were so vague that DOJ likely didnt even realize they were responding to an inquiry about an AR lower.

Write them another letter, tell them you want to import AR15 lowers to the state and just call them something else. See what their reply is.

Even home built AR lowers are banned by the "AR series" provisions of the law. Yet you think you are going to lawfully import AR lowerrs under another name.

What hobby are you going to take up when the terms of your probation are possess no firearms? I hope you like golf or softball.

Posted: 12/11/2005 9:01:45 PM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
Quoted:
An AR15 lower is an AR15 lower and they are all banned by the "AR series" portion of the ban(s). They do not have to be specifically named makes and models.

That was the case until the latest harrot decision.....that "clarification" changed everything...

correction. It SHOULD HAVE resulted in the AR & AK series portion of the law being struck down, but did not. But California DA's, and CAL-DOJ have continued with AR & AK series prosecutions.

Question: When you get busted by CAL-DOJ are you going to man up and take the hit or flip and turn snitch?

Posted: 12/11/2005 9:05:32 PM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No, it's for real AR style lowers. Since they are not banned by name, and not assembled (or stripped) in a way that makes them an AW, then they should in theory be legal to own.

False. you're forgetting about the AR & AK series ban.

False, read the doj letter of exceptance for ar-15 receivers, and the harrot deciscion

I seen the case law and it hasnt resulted in CALDOJ doing one thing differnt. The letters that DOJ gave the opinion on were so vague that DOJ likely didnt even realize they were responding to an inquiry about an AR lower.

Write them another letter, tell them you want to import AR15 lowers to the state and just call them something else. See what their reply is.

Even home built AR lowers are banned by the "AR series" provisions of the law. Yet you think you are going to lawfully import AR lowerrs under another name.

What hobby are you going to take up when the terms of your probation are possess no firearms? I hope you like golf or softball.

It's based on the Harriett decision, and many are writing letters for other non-listed receivers just to satisfy FFLs. The letter shows DOJ has recognized the Harriett decision, so if it's not listed they now fall under SB-23. The DOJ also has the right to add receivers to the banned list.

Posted: 12/11/2005 9:05:34 PM EDT

[#35]

AK Series Weapons

American Arms
AK-Y 39
AK-F 39
AK-C 47
AK-F 47

Arsenal
SLR (all)
SLG (all)

B-West
AK-47 (all)

Hesse Arms
Model 47 (all)
Wieger STG 940 Rifle

Inter Ordnance - Monroe, NC
RPK
M-97
AK-47 (all)

Kalashnikov USA
Hunter Rifle / Saiga

MAADI CO
AK 47 *
ARM *
MISR (all)
MISTR (all)

Made in China
84S *
AKM *
86S *
AKS *
56 *
AK *
56S *
AK47 *

MARS
Pistol

Mitchell Arms, Inc.
M-90
AK-47 (all)
AK-47 Cal .308 (all)
M-76
RPK

Norinco
86 S *
86 (all)
84 S *
81 S (all)
56 *
RPK Rifle
NHM 90, 90-2, 91 Sport
AK-47 (all)
MAK 90
56 S *
Hunter Rifle

Ohio Ordnance Works (o.o.w.)
ROMAK 991
AK-74

Poly technologies
AKS *
AK47 *

Valmet
Hunter Rifle
76 S

WUM
WUM (all)

* Specifically named in the Robert-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989
and required to be registered by March 31, 1992

AR-15 Series Weapons

American Spirit
USA Model

Armalite
AR 10 (all)
M15 (all)
Golden Eagle

Bushmaster
XM15 (all)

Colt
Law Enforcement (6920)
Match Target (all)
AR-15 (all) *
Sporter (all)

Dalphon
B.F.D.

DPMS
Panther (all)

Eagle Arms
M15 (all)
EA-15 A2 H-BAR
EA-15 E1

Frankford Arsenal
AR-15 (all)

Hesse Arms
HAR 15A2 (all)

Knights
SR-15 (all)
SR-25 (all)
RAS (all)

Les Baer
Ultimate AR (all)

Olympic Arms
AR-15
Car-97
PCR (all)

Ordnance, Inc.
AR-15

Palmetto
SGA (all)

Professional Ordnance, Inc.
Carbon 15 Rifle
Carbon 15 Pistol

PWA
All Models

Rock River Arms,
Standard
Car A2
Standard
Car A4 Flattop
NM A2 -
LE Tactical

Wilson Combat
AR-15

* Specifically named in the Robert-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989
and required to be registered by March 31, 1992

These 84 weapons were banned from future sales. The Kasler v. Lockyer California Supreme Court decision upholds the constitutionality of the Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989. As a result, the Department of Justice (DOJ) is obligated to enforce the statute with respect to identification of AK and AR-15 series weapons. These assault weapons are listed by the Department of Justice in the California Code of Regulations, Title 11, Chapter 12.9, Section 979.11 (11 CCR 979.11)

Any firearm which is a variation, with minor differences, of the AK or AR-15 type (i.e., series weapon), regardless of manufacturer, is an assault weapon under the original Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989. These assault weapons are listed by the Department of Justice in the California Code of Regulations, Title 11, Chapter 12.9, Section 979.11 (11 CCR 979.11)

Posted: 12/11/2005 9:22:33 PM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
An AR15 lower is an AR15 lower and they are all banned by the "AR series" portion of the ban(s). They do not have to be specifically named makes and models.

That was the case until the latest harrot decision.....that "clarification" changed everything...
correction. It SHOULD HAVE resulted in the AR & AK series portion of the law being struck down, but did not. But California DA's, and CAL-DOJ have continued with AR & AK series prosecutions.

Question: When you get busted by CAL-DOJ are you going to man up and take the hit or flip and turn snitch?

Oikay smarty pants, why is the vulcan cal legal "ar-15 series" allowed, and legally imported into the state, Or the bush master xm-15 with welded floor plate which is banned by name, or the bush master carbon-fiber pinned 10 round magazine? All "ar-15 series" all doj certified, and legal. Pull your head out.

Posted: 12/11/2005 9:36:56 PM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
An AR15 lower is an AR15 lower and they are all banned by the "AR series" portion of the ban(s). They do not have to be specifically named makes and models.

That was the case until the latest harrot decision.....that "clarification" changed everything...
correction. It SHOULD HAVE resulted in the AR & AK series portion of the law being struck down, but did not. But California DA's, and CAL-DOJ have continued with AR & AK series prosecutions.

Question: When you get busted by CAL-DOJ are you going to man up and take the hit or flip and turn snitch?

Oikay smarty pants, why is the vulcan cal legal "ar-15 series" allowed, and legally imported into the state, Or the bush master xm-15 with welded floor plate which is banned by name, or the bush master carbon-fiber pinned 10 round magazine? All "ar-15 series" all doj certified, and legal.

Because DOJ ruled that the pinned or welded internal mag is so fundamentally different thasn an AR lower that is no longer an AR series lower. There are real tangible differences bewtween a FAB10 and an AR15 lower. Not a simple name change.

Let me ask the obvious question? Why didnt you buy a dozen stripped lower in 1999 when it was legal do do so? Were you just a kid posting on mommies computer or do you just lack foresight?

Maybe your probation officer will let you collect Airsoft when this is all worked out.

Posted: 12/11/2005 9:47:39 PM EDT

[#38]

Posted: 12/11/2005 9:49:27 PM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:
Hey, I'm not trying to argue with you, but...I have a letter from the DOJ specifically saying it was legal for me to buy and own a certain semi-auto lower reciever...

Good luck with that. In the unlikely event your find yourself and your collection under police scrutiny that letter is going to do you little good.

Posted: 12/11/2005 9:49:36 PM EDT

[#40]

.

Posted: 12/11/2005 9:51:40 PM EDT

[#41]

Well....I hope your wrong for the sake of all the guys that buy one based on these DOJ letters.

Posted: 12/11/2005 9:59:29 PM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Hey, I'm not trying to argue with you, but...I have a letter from the DOJ specifically saying it was legal for me to buy and own a certain semi-auto lower reciever...

Good luck with that. In the unlikely event your find yourself and your collection under police scrutiny that letter is going to do you little good.

Good God, now we can be arrested for not committing crimes! Does law matter anymore or do cops and prosecuters do whatever the hell they want? What's the point of taking things to court if the cops don't care what the decision is? Unbelievable.

Posted: 12/11/2005 10:00:03 PM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:
Well....I hope your wrong for the sake of all the guys that buy one based on these DOJ letters.

So do I. It's likely that less than a few hundred people will even buy these lowers in Cali and unless they start cooking meth or beating their wife their gun collection is unlikely to ever be an issue.

Posted: 12/11/2005 10:04:03 PM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Well....I hope your wrong for the sake of all the guys that buy one based on these DOJ letters.

So do I. It's likely that less than a few hundred people will even buy these lowers in Cali and unless they start cooking meth or beating their wife their gun collection is unlikely to ever be an issue.

LOL....true enough.

Posted: 12/12/2005 1:36:40 AM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Hey, I'm not trying to argue with you, but...I have a letter from the DOJ specifically saying it was legal for me to buy and own a certain semi-auto lower reciever...

Good luck with that. In the unlikely event your find yourself and your collection under police scrutiny that letter is going to do you little good.

Greetings, I am one of the people who started all of this. After 2 years of hard and dilligent work, I have a letter from the Deputy Attorney General of the State of California clearly saying my rifle is a legal longgun.

I am highly confident in the legality of these weapons based on my own Due Dilligance, and this letter from a Deputy AG (whom by the way is also a Bar Certified Attorney.)

I already have my rifle and posess it in a mannar consistant with state law (see CPC 12276.1 'features' ban.)

http://cdglobal.net/gun/AR_4-blur-crop-600.jpg

Come and get me, I have the both the money and time to fight this and collect a civil settlement from the officers personally involved, and their departments both in the end.
Here is a copy of my letter, which by extention and acknolwegement of the Harrott v. County of Kings decision, extends legality to any non-listed firearm:
http://cdglobal.net/DOJ/CTR-02-DOJ-legal.jpg

Posted: 12/12/2005 6:18:34 AM EDT

[#46]

OWNED!..............Get'em Ben!

Posted: 12/12/2005 2:33:08 PM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:Greetings, I am one of the people who started all of this. After 2 years of hard and dilligent work, I have a letter from the Deputy Attorney General of the State of California clearly saying my rifle is a legal longgun.

I am highly confident in the legality of these weapons based on my own Due Dilligance, and this letter from a Deputy AG (whom by the way is also a Bar Certified Attorney.)

Come and get me, I have the both the money and time to fight this and collect a civil settlement from the officers personally involved, and their departments both in the end.
Here is a copy of my letter, which by extention and acknolwegement of the Harrott v. County of Kings decision, extends legality to any non-listed firearm:

Looks like Ten Percent Firearms has suspended sales of their stuff at least temporarily, I wonder how many people are going to be able to take advantage of this loophole before it is closed?

Posted: 12/12/2005 3:06:06 PM EDT

[#48]

Hopefully me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Posted: 12/12/2005 4:36:49 PM EDT

[#49]

Quoted:
Quoted:Greetings, I am one of the people who started all of this. After 2 years of hard and dilligent work, I have a letter from the Deputy Attorney General of the State of California clearly saying my rifle is a legal longgun.

I am highly confident in the legality of these weapons based on my own Due Dilligance, and this letter from a Deputy AG (whom by the way is also a Bar Certified Attorney.)

Come and get me, I have the both the money and time to fight this and collect a civil settlement from the officers personally involved, and their departments both in the end.
Here is a copy of my letter, which by extention and acknolwegement of the Harrott v. County of Kings decision, extends legality to any non-listed firearm:

Looks like Ten Percent Firearms has suspended sales of their stuff at least temporarily, I wonder how many people are going to be able to take advantage of this loophole before it is closed?

Perhaps some of the AR15.com vendors who operate in Cali will step up and start selling AR lowers.

C'mon
Quantico Arms
Mesa Tactical
Chen Lee Tactical

Somehow I don't see that happening.

Posted: 12/12/2005 4:43:54 PM EDT

[#50]

Anybody that thinks they can make relatively minor modifications to a Colt lower and not have a weapon still banned under the name and under the features provisions is going to be very unhappy if and when he does something dumb enough to have it rise to the surface.

Now, you could potentially start with an 80% lower and build it with modifications and try to convince folks it isn't under the series but good luck.

And the bar replacing the handgrip sure looks like it falls under the thumbhole definition.

You can try it and if you stay under the radar you might (might) get away with it.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Possible AR15 lowers legally for sale in CA (Page 2 of 4)

Hometown » California

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us