Forget the legality of Stag AR lowers. Let's make this Universal.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Forget the legality of Stag AR lowers. Let's make this Universal.

Posted: 12/28/2005 7:47:45 PM EDT

Okay, let's for arguments' sake say that the optomists are correct and you can legally buy a reciever for an assault weapon that is not on the current CA DOJ list; you simply cannot have it assembled into an "assault weapon" configuration. Once the DOJ is aware this is happening, they add the new model to the List; they must by law allow owners of said recievers 90 days to register them. These "new" assault rifles then fall under SB23 and as such may be "eviled" up with pistol grips and detachable magazines, since as an assault rifle they are already "evil" by nature. This is what is being put forward here, right?

If this is true, then ANY "new" assault rifle that came out after the Ban could be legally sold in the state in the form of a stripped reciever. That would mean FN 2000s and P-90's or even the SCAR, SIG 55X, .308 ARs, whatever you can name, could be slipped in under the radar. Any you can be assured you have not just bought an expensive paperweight. This is the bottom line if the above argument is correct.

Posted: 12/28/2005 8:01:50 PM EDT

[#1]

We are not buying stripped lowers for an assault weapon, we are buying stripped lowers which we may build into a legal non assault weapon configuration. If and only if we are allowed to register them, and DoJ says it's OK, we will build them up. I think you understand this.

Now, this whole thing is really only about AR/AK type receivers (kasler list). The DoJ needs a special court hearing to add other firearms to the list. All along we have been able to get FALs and such in, as long as they are not in a Category III assault weapon status. The P-90 and many other firearms can not be used at all in a California legal format (no way to hold them or feed rounds) so the DoJ could simply ignore them. When this initial period of "AR-Shock" is over, I think we will learn a lot about DoJ procedures. There is talk of them needing "proof of commerce" to ban new AR receivers. Only time will tell.

Posted: 12/28/2005 8:06:33 PM EDT

[#2]

Simply put, the law only bans rifles either by name, or feature. If its not on the list, and doesnt have the "evil features" than its legal. All you need is a FFL that sees things your way and will transfer a receiver of your choice to you.

Thats why FAL's have been sold with a non-detachable mag. That also inlcudes FAL receivers. People havnt bothered with some models just because its not practical, such as the HK G3/CETME rifles. Configuring these rifles as a top loader is very difficult if not impossible. Im see no reason why Bushmaster or someone else couldnt offer a CA legal AR-10

In all honesty, a top loading carbine in CA is no more useful than a SKS, but then we really love our AR-15s dont we?

Posted: 12/28/2005 8:10:47 PM EDT

[#3]

But if DOJ never adds them to the List you can never evil them up.

Posted: 12/28/2005 8:22:01 PM EDT

[#4]

but they probably will

Posted: 12/28/2005 8:27:21 PM EDT

[#5]

Ok, I'm getting tingly feelings all over. Please point me to where a fella in Sacramento can get in line

Posted: 12/28/2005 8:38:37 PM EDT

[#6]

I'm curious ... when and if the DOJ adds a brand lower to the list after requesting a court hearing, can they add multiple brands in one "hearing", or will they have to add one brand, then request a new hearing for the next brand, ect.? I've found out recently just how many lower receiver makers there are out there!

Posted: 12/28/2005 9:30:43 PM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
I'm curious ... when and if the DOJ adds a brand lower to the list after requesting a court hearing, can they add multiple brands in one "hearing", or will they have to add one brand, then request a new hearing for the next brand, ect.? I've found out recently just how many lower receiver makers there are out there!

With respect to the Stag-15, and other AR series rifles, the DOJ don't need no stinkin' court hearing to declare AR, or AK series, an assault weapon. There is a list of AR & AK makes and models. All they need to do is update the list and publish it. It is very likely that any Kasler list updates will include more manufacturers and models in addition to the Stag-15.

Take a look at A California AR/AK “Series” Assault Weapon FAQ

Posted: 12/28/2005 10:57:14 PM EDT

[#8]

It is relatively easy, given the anti-gun legislature we have, to modify the law so that any future name in the AR/AK series or any evil rifle for that matter, can be added and registered but will still be subjected to SB23 feature test. Consider this is a once in a life time deal and act accordingly.

Posted: 12/28/2005 11:32:05 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
It is relatively easy, given the anti-gun legislature we have, to modify the law so that any future name in the AR/AK series or any evil rifle for that matter, can be added and registered but will still be subjected to SB23 feature test. Consider this is a once in a life time deal and act accordingly.

On the surface, such a law seems completely illogical because it blatantly contradicts other sections of the CA penal code. The legislature, in it's infinite wisdom, would be saying that any firearm that is subsequently declared an AR/AK series assault weapon can NOT have any features that make them into an assault weapon ??? hinking.gif The legal lower receivers (Stag 15) are already subject to the SB23 feature restrictions.

Posted: 12/29/2005 8:08:11 AM EDT

[#10]

So if I were to get a superior arms lower, and they (the DOJ) were to list the reciever, I could register it and keep a detachable mag? Please correct me if Im wrong(which I frequently am), as gun laws confuse me.hinking.gif

Posted: 12/29/2005 9:04:40 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
So if I were to get a superior arms lower, and they (the DOJ) were to list the reciever, I could register it and keep a detachable mag? Please correct me if Im wrong(which I frequently am), as gun laws confuse me.

If the DOJ added any lower not already on the list you would "HAVE" to register it or you would be a felon.

The only other option is to get rid of the receiver.

Posted: 12/29/2005 6:13:08 PM EDT

[#12]

So, given that almost NONE of the 308 caliber rifles are on "the list", I should also be able to order a receiver for one of those, too, no? If they add it to "the list", then I have 90 days to register it.

Posted: 12/29/2005 6:53:42 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
So, given that almost NONE of the 308 caliber rifles are on "the list", I should also be able to order a receiver for one of those, too, no? If they add it to "the list", then I have 90 days to register it.

Posted: 12/29/2005 8:31:17 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Quoted:
So, given that almost NONE of the 308 caliber rifles are on "the list", I should also be able to order a receiver for one of those, too, no? If they add it to "the list", then I have 90 days to register it.

You know, rifles such as AR-10T.

Posted: 12/29/2005 8:43:29 PM EDT

[#15]

AR-10 is already on the LIST

Posted: 12/29/2005 8:57:57 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So, given that almost NONE of the 308 caliber rifles are on "the list", I should also be able to order a receiver for one of those, too, no? If they add it to "the list", then I have 90 days to register it.

You know, rifles such as AR-10T.

Sorry, AR is AR.

Posted: 12/29/2005 9:48:32 PM EDT

[#17]

But you mistake me, I did not mean the AR-10 but the several variants that have come out that are not on "the list". I don't know any of the actual model numbers.

Posted: 12/29/2005 9:54:05 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So, given that almost NONE of the 308 caliber rifles are on "the list", I should also be able to order a receiver for one of those, too, no? If they add it to "the list", then I have 90 days to register it.

You know, rifles such as AR-10T.

Sorry, AR is AR.

DrFridge,

I beg to differ. I just re-read the law. It is very specific in the use of the term "AR-15" series.

Oops, I just found AR 10 (all) in the list of banned Armalite firearms.

Still, there are newer and possibly better models by manufacturers that are not on the list.

Posted: 12/29/2005 10:06:46 PM EDT

[#19]

When was the last time they updated the list anyway. Also does anyone know when the list is going to be updated again?

Posted: 12/29/2005 11:16:27 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So, given that almost NONE of the 308 caliber rifles are on "the list", I should also be able to order a receiver for one of those, too, no? If they add it to "the list", then I have 90 days to register it.

You know, rifles such as AR-10T.

Sorry, AR is AR.

DrFridge,

I beg to differ. I just re-read the law. It is very specific in the use of the term "AR-15" series.

Oops, I just found AR 10 (all) in the list of banned Armalite firearms.

Still, there are newer and possibly better models by manufacturers that are not on the list.

Please dont beg... its VERY unbecoming!

But seriously folks.. I am VERY cautious when it comes to the DOJ. Just as WE are looking for every crack in the window, so are they. Only difference is they can read all the legal jargon whereas we cannot.

Im just looking out for you bro

Posted: 12/29/2005 11:58:50 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

Still, there are newer and possibly better models by manufacturers that are not on the list.

They are no longer in production. Remember, CA DOJ wants commerce before they act.

Posted: 12/30/2005 12:04:53 AM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:
Quoted:

Still, there are newer and possibly better models by manufacturers that are not on the list.

They are no longer in production. Remember, CA DOJ wants commerce before they act.

... can you expand on that?

Posted: 12/30/2005 12:13:37 AM EDT

[#23]

If you follow the CALGUNS threads, you will realize this whole shit storm starts by a single delear decided to openly sell strip lowers in the SJ fun show. I believe a lot of people got stags before that but were under the radar. Once they are open, CA DOJ act. AG doesn't want commerce. That's the real trigger.

Posted: 12/30/2005 7:35:34 AM EDT

[#24]

Well they got plenty of commerce so they will act shortly

Posted: 12/30/2005 12:41:58 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
Well they got plenty of commerce so they will act shortly

Oh yeah, without a doubt. No way will DOJ let this continue for much longer.

Posted: 12/30/2005 4:50:21 PM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Well they got plenty of commerce so they will act shortly

Oh yeah, without a doubt. No way will DOJ let this continue for much longer.

A little voice at the back of my head still saying "they will call your bluff and not put anything on the list so you will be stuck with SB23 compliant junks".

Posted: 12/30/2005 7:23:56 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well they got plenty of commerce so they will act shortly

Oh yeah, without a doubt. No way will DOJ let this continue for much longer.

A little voice at the back of my head still saying "they will call your bluff and not put anything on the list so you will be stuck with SB23 compliant junks".

OK at that point it may operate like a Fab 10 but sure as hell better quality than a Fab 10. THEN if you ever move out of state, with tools and work you can convert it to a normal rifle. Do THAT with a Fab 10

Posted: 12/30/2005 8:57:13 PM EDT

[#28]

I'm going to try to get at least one. If the theory doesn't pan out, I'm sure a compassionate ARFCOMmer out of state will take it off my hands.

Posted: 12/31/2005 12:12:42 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
OK at that point it may operate like a Fab 10 but sure as hell better quality than a Fab 10. THEN if you ever move out of state, with tools and work you can convert it to a normal rifle. Do THAT with a Fab 10

Yes indeed. We are all just trying to build a PRK compliant rifle here with quality parts. That by itself is a giant step forward.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Forget the legality of Stag AR lowers. Let's make this Universal.

Hometown » California

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us