Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 1/25/2006 8:22:54 PM EDT
I live in Killafornia. I purchased and have dros'ed two STAG lowers. If i were to complete them with all the nasty features before they are put on the list, keep them in my safe but, have no ammunition or any magazines in my possession, would I still be in violation of state laws?????
Link Posted: 1/25/2006 8:25:48 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/25/2006 8:26:01 PM EDT by blacklisted]

Originally Posted By TRIG1100:
I live in Killafornia. I purchased and have dros'ed two STAG lowers. If i were to complete them with all the nasty features before they are put on the list, keep them in my safe but, have no ammunition or any magazines in my possession, would I still be in violation of state laws?????



That is an incredibly stupid question. The answer is yes. You would be in SERIOUS violation of state laws.
Link Posted: 1/25/2006 8:38:38 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/25/2006 8:39:51 PM EDT


Hi Mr. DOJ!



Please do some reading before you touch your lowers.

www.calguns.net/a_california_arak.htm
Link Posted: 1/25/2006 9:16:04 PM EDT
Not only would that be a felony, but many people with backgrounds in the legal or correctional systems have advised against even OWNING the parts dissassembled as it can be shown that you had intent to break the law.
Link Posted: 1/25/2006 9:45:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By TRIG1100:
I live in Killafornia. I purchased and have dros'ed two STAG lowers. If i were to complete them with all the nasty features before they are put on the list, keep them in my safe but, have no ammunition or any magazines in my possession, would I still be in violation of state laws?????





Link Posted: 1/25/2006 10:17:49 PM EDT
isnt the configuration TRIG1100 wanted to build still "legal" as long as he fixed a legal 10 round magazine onto the lower?

or is he talking about building the rifle without the use of a fixed magazine kit? (which would be illegal)
Link Posted: 1/25/2006 10:48:54 PM EDT
well since he says with all the nasty features and no ammo or magazines in his posession, I think it would be safe to assume he does not mean a fixed magazine build.
Link Posted: 1/25/2006 11:16:34 PM EDT

TRIG1100
Member
Joined :: January 2006
Post Number :: 1



Hi Mr. DOJ!


A legal question that might be stupid???


Yes, that would be a stupid question.

Don't do it. Know what? Don't even think about doing it.
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 7:43:39 AM EDT
There is NO SUCH THING as a stupid question.

Questions are asked because people are either uninformed, ignorant, or lack the ability and patience to search out the information on their own, or don't comprehend the law as written.

There are ACTS of stupidity. Which is what the OP would have been doing had he not asked his question.

I would agree that no one should be buying one of the off list lowers unless they understand the law first. But for all you people who want to get as many of these off list lowers into CA hands as possible, you sure come off as a bunch of A**holes to newbies sometimes.
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 8:23:25 AM EDT
I agree to some extent. However, if a 15 year old asked you how he could become a race car driver on his learning permit, would help him or tell him up front that it is a foolish idea?
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 8:55:03 AM EDT

Originally Posted By blacklisted:
I agree to some extent. However, if a 15 year old asked you how he could become a race car driver on his learning permit, would help him or tell him up front that it is a foolish idea?



www.quartermidgets.com/general/starting.html

Link Posted: 1/26/2006 9:08:54 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Pthfndr:
uninformed, ignorant, or lack the ability and patience to search out the information on their own, or don't comprehend the law as written.



I'm cool with uninformed, even ignorant sometimes, but lacking patience to search, that chaps my ass since there's a sticky and FAQ on both here and Calguns. In terms of comprehending the law, sure, legalise can look like pig Latin, heck, there was even the Harrott decision to clarify and add uniformity to the existing laws, but the main points are painfully obvious.

A first post coming in with both guns blazing about illegal shit, that looks awfully suspect. I'm surprised there hasn't been another hi-cap thread and/or question yet.

Link Posted: 1/26/2006 9:34:23 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/26/2006 9:36:33 AM EDT by Pthfndr]

Originally Posted By phish:

Originally Posted By Pthfndr:
uninformed, ignorant, or lack the ability and patience to search out the information on their own, or don't comprehend the law as written.



I'm cool with uninformed, even ignorant sometimes, but lacking patience to search, that chaps my ass since there's a sticky and FAQ on both here and Calguns. In terms of comprehending the law, sure, legalise can look like pig Latin, heck, there was even the Harrott decision to clarify and add uniformity to the existing laws, but the main points are painfully obvious.

A first post coming in with both guns blazing about illegal shit, that looks awfully suspect. I'm surprised there hasn't been another hi-cap thread and/or question yet.




Despite all the stickies, both here and at Calguns - and I'm a firm believer in always reading those things - there have been LOTS of questions on both sites about doing things that are clearly not (yet) legal to do. Heck, there are even several people on both sites who have been posting long enough to know better still asking questions about what's legal and what's not, and what they can get away with.

Sometimes I get irritated when people don't/won't spend the time to do their own research. But as we all know the gun laws, and not just in CA, can be a confusing morass. That's why we need to back each other up and either answer questions or point people to the answers. When possible I think it's a good idea to include links when answering questions.

We need to make sure people are informed. Because all it might take is a few people doing the wrong thing, at the wrong time, in the wrong place, to bring the "wrath" of the anti gun legislaters down on ALL of us yet again.

Maybe not everyone out there is the genius you are
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 9:45:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Pthfndr:
There is NO SUCH THING as a stupid question.



+1- Only stupid mistakes.
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 9:46:26 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/26/2006 9:48:05 AM EDT by blacklisted]

Originally Posted By Housefull:

Originally Posted By Pthfndr:
There is NO SUCH THING as a stupid question.



+1- Only stupid mistakes.



Bob Ross says there are no mistakes, only happy accidents.

Link Posted: 1/26/2006 9:51:49 AM EDT
That is thsoo thsilly...
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 10:30:27 AM EDT

and I'm a firm believer in always reading those things


agree %100


Heck, there are even several people on both sites who have been posting long enough to know better still asking questions about what's legal and what's not, and what they can get away with.


more often than not, they're trying to get validation for doing some shady stuff, ie. mags

when in doubt, they just shouldn't do it


We need to make sure people are informed. Because all it might take is a few people doing the wrong thing, at the wrong time, in the wrong place, to bring the "wrath" of the anti gun legislaters down on ALL of us yet again.


That's a distinct possible "unintended consequence" with all these lowers coming in now, in fact, that's one of my bigger worries.


Maybe not everyone out there is the genius you are


I've been accused of a lot of things, but never a genius.
I do however, take the time to do research and read things 2-3 times, not kick the door down with guns blazing so to speak. If I've come across as being cocky, that was never my intent.

Link Posted: 1/26/2006 10:48:18 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 11:05:22 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Big_Bear:

Originally Posted By phish:
...
more often than not, they're trying to get validation for doing some shady stuff, ie. mags


IMO, that came across in the original post,... "If i were to complete them with all the nasty features before they are put on the list, keep them in my safe..."

That seems to imply that he knows what he's doing is shady, as in "can I go ahead and build these illegal assault weapons as long as I keep them in my safe and don't take them out in public before they are put on the list?"

when in doubt, they just shouldn't do it

Exactly.



Exactly, next he'll be asking if its OK to beat his wife as long as nobody know about it.
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 2:21:40 PM EDT
Have yah ever noticed that almost all the time the answer to the "Can I do this --- legally?" question is "NO" or "Not only NO but Hell NO.!).. Usually from somebody that oughta or does know better. I don't mind them from newbs, but from guys that should know better?
Top Top