I have read time and time again about efforts to build a fixed mag rifle where the magazine can be removed with the use of a bullet. DO NOT DO THIS!!!

Today I saw someone on AR15.com claiming he was less than 3 weeks away from completing a rifle that operated like this. You WILL be prosecuted by illegal manufacture of an Assault Weapon. The DOJ told Vulcan that the mag had to have the floorplate welded _AND_ be glued into the rifle before they would approve it. Pinning the mag is ALREADY PUSHING THE ENVELOPE!!!

You WILL go to jail if you build a detachable magazine rifle that requires a bullet to detach the mag. You _WILL_ hurt our efforts to challange the DOJ in a court because your dumb *** will already be establishing case law.

DO NOT ATTEMPT TO BUILD a rifle like this UNLESS you want to hand the DOJ an SLAM DUNK conviction against you for building an illegal Assault Weapon. PLEASE be patient the law is on our side.

Quoted: I have read time and time again about efforts to build a fixed mag rifle where the magazine can be removed with the use of a bullet. DO NOT DO THIS!!! Today I saw someone on AR15.com claiming he was less than 3 weeks away from completing a rifle that operated like this. You WILL be prosecuted by illegal manufacture of an Assault Weapon. The DOJ told Vulcan that the mag had to have the floorplate welded _AND_ be glued into the rifle before they would approve it. Pinning the mag is ALREADY PUSHING THE ENVELOPE!!! You WILL go to jail if you build a detachable magazine rifle that requires a bullet to detach the mag. You _WILL_ hurt our efforts to challange the DOJ in a court because your dumb *** will already be establishing case law. DO NOT ATTEMPT TO BUILD a rifle like this UNLESS you want to hand the DOJ an SLAM DUNK conviction against you for building an illegal Assault Weapon. PLEASE be patient the law is on our side.

 He WILL go to jail? That sounds like strong language, for someone who is admittedly already operating in a gray area by pinning the mag. Neither a pinned mag, nor what this guy is talking about, is DOJ APPROVED. So they are in the same gray area in that respect. Both methods follow the letter of the law. So they are in the same gray area in that respect.

 How exactly will they be establishing case law that will hurt your efforts to challenge the DOJ?

 I have no interest in doing this personally, because I have a bit of patience, and can wait a few months to see what the outcome is. But if someone else wants to, I'm not going to judge them, or apply DOJ style scare tactics. It should be sufficient to simply point out that while they may be following the letter of the law, that doesn't guarantee that they won't be harrassed, prosecuted, and run through the wringers in a lengthy legal process.

No one yet has been arrested or charged for having a pinned mag.  Off list lowers have been sold at shows with pinned mags in them without incident.  Lets not push the envelope too far.  The DOJ is like a dog that barks a lot... it may not chase you down and bite you but if you put your hand in front of its mouth and tease it enough it will definitely bite you.

This is crap, the definition of a detachable mag is pretty clear.

Quoted: This is crap, the definition of a detachable mag is pretty clear.

And when did the DOJ start following the law with their confiscations and prosecutions?

Play it safe, keep a low profile, let things work themselves out.

Damn, if it wasn't for sharing custody of my dogs I'd be in AZ right now away from all this crap saving up to buy one of those new SIG rifles.

I find it interesting that there are people who complain about the rules they must live by but, at the same time when someone else decides that they are done waiting for the all the dust to completely settle, he wishes to do something at the time is by the law or how he understands it. I know the speed limit on the freeway is 65mph and as long as I do that speed, no problem. Also, if I choose to drive 70mph(which I believe is a grey area in itself) chances are I wont be pulled over. If I am than I pay the consequences. You can wait if you want, but remember, this whole thing is likely to go on for longer than I wish to wait. I will not be breaking the law as it stands and in the future if all goes our way it will be easier to get rid of the "TOOL" portion of the mag removal step than a more permanant one(i.e. welding, etc...) I try to live by the letter of the law and that is what I am doing. As for patience, ask yourself how long it's been since we have had the opportunity to do what I can do now??????

Quoted: That sounds like strong language, for someone who is admittedly already operating in a gray area by pinning the mag. Neither a pinned mag, nor what this guy is talking about, is DOJ APPROVED. So they are in the same gray area in that respect. Both methods follow the letter of the law. So they are in the same gray area in that respect.

You are wrong. The purchase of off-list lowers is not grey area. It's clean. We'd all be in the cooler otherwise, with 175 FFLs in jail.  

You are confusing DOJ approval with legality.  [DOJ approval, in fact, may NOT mean legality, esp if an agent signs off on a design when he doesn't really know the law!]  If the DOj says "dance on the receiver and wrap it in cow dung to be legal" a manufacturer will - just so he can sell.  Unapproved does not mean illegal.

Following the DOJ 978.20 definitions (or avoiding them, in case of detachable magazine) is easy to do.

The issues I see with the bullet-tool mag release are:

there's just no rational reason right now to have a mag that shouldn't ever be detached in CA easier to detach than the pistol grip or telestock: there never should be an open magwell if a pistolgrip or telestock, etc is attached.

it's not screwed in, so something shocking/jarring that subsystem could cause a heavy, loaded mag to move even if mag catch is tight.  It IS spring loaded if it's gonna be operated by a bullet tool and something could happen (car crash?) to make you a felon.

Bill Wiese
San Jose CA

Quoted: I find it interesting that there are people who complain about the rules they must live by but, at the same time when someone else decides that they are done waiting for the all the dust to completely settle, he wishes to do something at the time is by the law or how he understands it. I know the speed limit on the freeway is 65mph and as long as I do that speed, no problem. Also, if I choose to drive 70mph(which I believe is a grey area in itself) chances are I wont be pulled over. If I am than I pay the consequences. You can wait if you want, but remember, this whole thing is likely to go on for longer than I wish to wait. I will not be breaking the law as it stands and in the future if all goes our way it will be easier to get rid of the "TOOL" portion of the mag removal step than a more permanant one(i.e. welding, etc...) I try to live by the letter of the law and that is what I am doing. As for patience, ask yourself how long it's been since we have had the opportunity to do what I can do now??????

Are you completely insane?  There is a _HUGE_ difference between the grey area between 65mph and 70mph and manufacturing an illegal assault weapon.  One earns you a $225 ticket and traffic school, the other earns you a felony conviction and you can NEVER own a gun again.

Are you saying that you're willing to gamble your right to ever own a gun again just to drop a mag?

Detachable vs. permanently attached has been beaten to death here and on that other site.  

The issue really is:  how far is the DOJ willing to go to harrass gun owners?  

I'm pretty sure that no matter how well you dot an "i" and cross a "t", if a DOJ agent sees you detaching your magazine from your rifle you are going to be arrested.  

It will cost you thousands of dollars in legal fees to prove you are right and the DOJ is wrong.  And keep in mind that no matter how right you are you will never prove you are right if you live in SF or LA.

Yep.

Follow the FAQ on Calguns and you will stay legal.

Bill Wiese
San Jose CA

Quoted: Quoted: That sounds like strong language, for someone who is admittedly already operating in a gray area by pinning the mag. Neither a pinned mag, nor what this guy is talking about, is DOJ APPROVED. So they are in the same gray area in that respect. Both methods follow the letter of the law. So they are in the same gray area in that respect. You are wrong. The purchase of off-list lowers is not grey area. It's clean. We'd all be in the cooler otherwise, with 175 FFLs in jail.

 No, you are wrong. It IS in a grey area, in terms of the fact that even many of the DOJ letters states that any of the 58 other DAs can arrest you. It is technically legal, but the DOJ says you can still be prosecuted by any one of the other 58 DAs.  The DOJ isn't arresting you, because as their letters have said, they believe it to be legal. Someone, and I forget who even posted this on calguns:

My FAQ is gonna be updated later today. The "58 DAs" warning you've seen is a bit more than boilerplate. While Harrott is indeed strong and should be a defense, you could have a real antigun DA combined with an antigun judge that just wouldn't kick it out (even though Harrott says AR/AK 'series' determination is not a matter for a trial court's determination!), and it could conceivably run up thru appeal.

  By the letter of the law, the purchase of receivers is legal. By the letter of the law, the use of a tool(such as a bullet) to remove a magazine makes it not a detachable magazine. Hence it is in a gray area, where it is legal according to the letter of the law, but you could still be prosecuted.

  None of those DOJ letters mention using just a nut on the mag catch to lock the mag in place. The letters simply state that it can't have the features of an AW according to 12276.1, unless I have missed one somewhere. I haven't seen anyone post anything saying that the nut method of affixing a magazine was approved by the DOJ as meeting the requirements of fixed magazine. But it is legal, according to how the laws are written. Sounds an awful lot like the situation with using a bullet to remove the magazine.

 Stating that one is unequivocally 100% legal, and the other is unequivocally 100% going to get you jail time, as some are stating, is ridiculous.

Quoted: You are confusing DOJ approval with legality.  [DOJ approval, in fact, may NOT mean legality, esp if an agent signs off on a design when he doesn't really know the law!]  If the DOj says "dance on the receiver and wrap it in cow dung to be legal" a manufacturer will - just so he can sell.  Unapproved does not mean illegal.

 I am not confusing approval with legality, I don't know where you are getting that from.  Reread what I said.

Quoted: there's just no rational reason right now to have a mag that shouldn't ever be detached in CA easier to detach than the pistol grip or telestock: there never should be an open magwell if a pistolgrip or telestock, etc is attached.

 Per the letter of the law, where is it stated that an open magwell means that it has a detachable magazine? To have a detachable magazine, wouldn't it need an open magwell, AND require that the magazine, once inserted, could be removed without the use of a tool? Thats what I got out of reading 978.20

Quoted: it's not screwed in, so something shocking/jarring that subsystem could cause a heavy, loaded mag to move even if mag catch is tight.  It IS spring loaded if it's gonna be operated by a bullet tool and something could happen (car crash?) to make you a felon.

I don't want to do the math on it right now, but it would take a good bit of G forces to get it to pop out without use of a tool, IF it were just spring loaded. And even then you would have to hope for a situation where the forces against the magazine don't bind it on the mag catch, because that would help lock it in place. The forces necessary to do this will only happen when the rifle hits a solid object to change its velocity, as you may have heard the old saying "it's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop at the end."At that point, whatever the AR hits that causes the G shock could be considered the tool.

 If your AR with a locking nut was involved in a crash, where it was ejected, and skidded down the freeway at say 80mph, it is very conceivable to wear through the nut, releasing the magazine. Then you'd be in possession of an open magwell AR! If you are in doubt, I can show you what asphalt does to metal motorcycle parts when they go sliding...

 But you are assuming that the design isn't set up so that the mag catch is locked solid, and held by more than just a spring. Making a mag catch that locks solid(and impervious to the acceleration event), but still allows removal with a tool(and only with a tool) is doable.

Zapp-
Whatever you decide to do with your magazine configuration, please keep us posted, and good luck.

Quoted: Zapp- Whatever you decide to do with your magazine configuration, please keep us posted, and good luck.

 I'm just waiting to see what happens with registration. No point in designing a solution to a problem if the problem is going away on its own in a few weeks.

My intentions on this forum is not to upset, pass on bad information to somebody or for that matter start ranting on about how what someone else is trying to do under the current situation is wrong and going to ruin it for everyone else. My plan to build an AR with a magazine that is fixed in a way that a "TOOL" must be used to detatch the magazine is(as stated before) legal by all current standards. I would also like to say that once completed, my plan is not to advertise my AR to friends, family and neighbors. So, for all those who think what I am doing is such a terrible thing and is going to cause a "TSUNAMI" in the world of the doj and the rest of the gun-owners: TAKE A CHILL PILL, A HIT OFF YOUR BONG'S and just worry about #1 and nobody else.