Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 2/13/2006 9:11:49 PM EDT
It's starting folks! You guys see this yet I can only hope no one was directly affected. But here comes another fight for you.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=182415

[quote="The High Road.org"]Because of a possible loophole opening up in California allowing new AR's and AK's to be registered as assault weapons, there's been a buying spree going on in California these past two months. However, the state Department of Justice (DOJ) just seized 500+ stripped lowers from a Bay Area FFL.

A group buy advertised on CalGuns.net had forum members doing the paperwork & pickup at an FFL in the city of Milpitas (SF Bay Area). CA law mandates a ten day wait before pickup. The FFL doesn't normally do this volume of business, and so ran out of safe space. The Department of Justice visited, noticed this, and seized 500+ stripped lowers. The FFL immediately went out and bought an enormous safe and the DOJ was notified of such, but it's been two weeks and they haven't returned them, even though it should have been within a day or two. Someone called the DOJ and got the answer from the clerks that the stripped lowers are now contraband and won't be returned, because of how the group buy was conducted--I'm not sure exactly what their technical legal ground their reasoning rests on, but it sounds like crap to me, based on my previous experiences buying and selling guns in this state. It seems as if the "small safe" reasoning was just an excuse to grab them. These lowers are very specifically legal in California, and pickups of the same model that were shipped to the FFL after the DOJ seizure have continued, as have sales throughout the state. The person who organized the group buy has retained a lawyer, but hasn't gotten far with getting them returned yet (it's been two weeks). Meanwhile, the owners of the lowers will have to keep doing the paperwork and paying a 25 dollar fee every 30 days, or they risk losing their lowers.

So what we have here is the DOJ seizing five hundred legal receivers on a technicality, and refusing to return them once the technicality has been fixed. For those of you who say the gov't hasn't taken your guns, well, they have just taken 500+ in one fell swoop in California. Of course, they may just be looking for another technicality, or making up the law as they go along, which the Firearms Division of the DOJ is known to do. One of these lowers is mine, and I believe the person who organized the group buy has two that were seized. He’s determined to get them all back, but I don’t know if it will happen.

Please don't dismiss this as just a California thing--we are your fellow Americans, and the “as goes California, so goes the nation” saying hasn’t been repeated for no reason.

More info is located at:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=28447
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/f...splay.php?f=81

Here’s some basic background information on CA gun laws: The assault weapons law bans guns by feature, and a detachable mag is a required feature. There are also guns banned by model. The DOJ can add AR/AK receiver names at will, and then owners have a few months to register them as assault weapons. So fixed-mag AR’s are legal unless the DOJ bans that model, at which point residents have some time to register them as assault weapons, and assault weapons can have politically incorrect features. The DOJ announced such an addition to the ban list (for the first time), and so CA gun owners went on a buying spree. However, the DOJ just published a memo stating that they would not allow politically incorrect features to be added, which is not what the law states, but that’s another battle…[/quote
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 9:54:31 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 10:11:54 PM EDT
Yeah, this has been all over Calguns for awhile now. Pretty much thieves.
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 9:54:31 AM EDT
The FFL and Ben (arranger of group buy) have an attorney on it now.

This may take time to resolve.

Ultimately I don't think anyone will lose money. I would hope that if the lowers involved get 'named' that because they were "in DROS" they are still the owners' property.

Bill W.
San Jose

Link Posted: 2/14/2006 10:08:31 AM EDT
That would suck if my lowers got nabbed before the pickup date.

But then again the DOJ has no way to know if they are a rifle or if they are a evil stripped lower
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 4:49:43 PM EDT
Is there an official DOJ firearms division phone number so that the hundreds of lower owners and anybody else in calguns ar15 or thehighroad who feels strongly about this can use to call about once every 15 minutes and bring their phone system to its knees?
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 7:35:57 PM EDT
That might be counterproductive. The goal is to get the parts returned sooner rather than later, and at minimal or no cost.
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 8:33:50 PM EDT
Two of those receivers are mine! Damn it!
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 11:01:55 AM EDT
So what is the dealer telling you? You made a contract with him and he apparently (according to the DoJ) failed to legally store your property as was his legal duty both to you and to the state.

So you should either get your money back or your lowers from him. I got the feeling that eventually, if the lowers are found to be legal, you should get them. My gut feel is that they are legal otherwise the DoJ would(should) have been scarfing them up at all the other dealers. They sure can't say that didn't/don't know where the others are.

Your beef is with the dealer/ffl , he needs to take the battle to the DoJ.

Good Luck
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 11:21:18 AM EDT

Originally Posted By PaDanby:

Your beef is with the dealer/ffl , he needs to take the battle to the DoJ.

Good Luck



I agree. The buyer entered into a contract with the dealer where the dealer would deliver a specific profit after 10 days. The dealer has failed to make good on that contract.


BTW: Thats why you pay will credit cards.
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 11:32:52 AM EDT
Not quite true.

Many buyers on these group buys paid a 3rd party, which funded the group buy. The FFL just provided the transfer service and received the lowers from out of state, and would hand the lowers out to DROSees after the 10day wait.

I believe many people paid separate money to the FFL, and separate money to the person funding the group buy who ran the online payment service.

It should be noted that the person who funded the group buy makes no money on lower sales. He's doing this since he has time & a high credit limit and out of "humanitarian interest".

So this adds complexity to the situation.

It will be interesting to find out if there were other firearms besides lowers that were "in process" and seized, but yet were returned once storage requirements met.

This is why lawyers are involved.

Bill W.
San Jose
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 11:50:51 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/15/2006 1:41:24 PM EDT by Paul]
Any of you guys that are involved and do not support this FFL to the end, are chicken shits...

You knew it was going to be a risk, and you took it.

Short of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, this is one of the best things that you can do...

Stand up with these guys, dont go looking to hang them out to dry because you lost a couple hunderd dollars.
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 1:27:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/15/2006 3:12:19 PM EDT by Mike_Mills]

Originally Posted By R-32:
Any of you guys that are involved and do not support this FFL to the end, are chicken shits...

I totally agree with you here.

You knew it was going to be a risk, and you took it.

Short of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, this is one of the best things that you can do...

I think this is totally out of bounds. This should be deleted from the thread. You should rephrase your statement to reflect your anger but not in terms of xxxxxxxxx.


Stand up with these guys, dont go looking to hang them out to dry because you lost a couple hunderd dollars.

Again, agreed as I saw purchasing a receiver as a political statement as much as a hardware acquisition. .




[Ageed - we can think things like this but do not post them here. You never know how much it takes to spur a no knock raid - Paul]

Link Posted: 2/15/2006 2:21:11 PM EDT
+1

What is the saying about hanging together or being hung alone?
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 2:25:47 PM EDT
This is messed up! Did anyone contact the legal department of the NRA or the GOA - Gun Owners of America of California and the national organization of GOA itself?
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 2:26:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By bwiese:
Not quite true.

Many buyers on these group buys paid a 3rd party, which funded the group buy. The FFL just provided the transfer service and received the lowers from out of state, and would hand the lowers out to DROSees after the 10day wait.



That does change things and makes it much tougher to get your money back. Thats why when i bought mine i made sure to buy from the same FFL who would handle DROS.
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 3:01:20 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/15/2006 3:04:45 PM EDT by phish]
There might be some progress on this. A poster on Calguns went to go pick up 3 of his lowers today and the CA-DOJ was there inspecting the safe and inventory. I don't know if this was an "official audit" to determine if they should return the receivers or not.

I'm going to give the FFL a call tomorrow and ask whether I should re-DROS or not, hopefully he can give me the full skinny.



ETA: Calguns link
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 1:07:07 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/16/2006 9:51:58 AM EDT by R-32]

Originally Posted By Mike_Mills:

Short of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, this is one of the best things that you can do...

I think this is totally out of bounds. This should be deleted from the thread. You should rephrase your statement to reflect your anger but not in terms of xxxxxxxxx.

[Ageed - we can think things like this but do not post them here. You never know how much it takes to spur a no knock raid - Paul]





Mike Mills You are corrcet it may not have been the best words, but it is not "Totally out of bounds", until you all get together and quit your thinking like libtard slave's, You all will have to keep putting up with the garbage that is being handed to you. We have the same thing going on in my neck of the country, and we seem to beat it back time and time again...We pack our halls to standing room only...Im from So Cal, and I understand, Long drives, and small numbers of passionate people, but damn man...when are you all going to get up and start fighting? ( That is not saying to XXXXXX anyone)

Paul, sorry, did not mean to cause a prob. You know how we are in this area...(Heck I just beat CavVet and USNjoe to the post).

Sorry, Keep up the pressure, Im here rooting for ya all, Im not trying to bash ya.

Link Posted: 2/16/2006 5:36:54 PM EDT
I called a little while ago. He informed me that he passed but still no word on when/if they are going to be returned.

from CalGuns, Heaven Forfend this might end up being much ado about very little
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 6:47:41 PM EDT
I got the same lowdown when I went in today to re-DROS. Knowing my luck, they'll be returned next Wednesday, so the gubmint gets an extra $25!

Link Posted: 2/17/2006 7:55:08 AM EDT
500 lowers X $25 per DROS = potentially $12,500 in additional fees.
I know it's less than that since some DROS'd more than one lower, but that's a nice little bonus for the DOJ just for sitting on these lowers for a month, doing nothing.
They've been doing that for the past 5 years with these lowers, so it shouldn't surprise anyone.

Link Posted: 2/17/2006 8:26:14 AM EDT

Originally Posted By M4-guy:
500 lowers X $25 per DROS = potentially $12,500 in additional fees.
I know it's less than that since some DROS'd more than one lower, but that's a nice little bonus for the DOJ just for sitting on these lowers for a month, doing nothing.
They've been doing that for the past 5 years with these lowers, so it shouldn't surprise anyone.




DROS fees = Peanuts, chump change, etc. DROS fees are nothing compared to the billions in taxes they collect. DROS processing fees are probably a loss in revenue.

Get rid of guns and bump up the taxes
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 11:56:14 AM EDT

Originally Posted By bwiese:
It should be noted that the person who funded the group buy makes no money on lower sales.



Apparently this is at the heart of their "investigation".
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 12:04:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SillyPuddy:

Originally Posted By bwiese:
It should be noted that the person who funded the group buy makes no money on lower sales.



Apparently this is at the heart of their "investigation".



Haha, they can't understand Ben's 'humanitarian' interest that as many off-list lowers get into CA as possible.

Their heads must be spinning.

Bill Wiese
San Jose CA
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 12:51:41 PM EDT
You'd think State workers would be totally comfortable with the concept of not turning a profit.
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 4:16:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Wulfenite:
You'd think State workers would be totally comfortable with the concept of not turning a profit.



I think maybe it's because it was conservatives not turning a profit.
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 3:56:45 PM EDT
Just a question on this:

Were these FIXED or DETACHABLE MAGAZINES??

I can;t tell from the text of the thread....

Thanks!
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 4:42:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By lonewolf223:
Just a question on this:

Were these FIXED or DETACHABLE MAGAZINES??



These were bare, stripped off-list lowers. They are exact legal equivalent of a fixed-mag setup - that is, they were not assault weapons and are regular firearms.

Bill Wiese
San Jose
Top Top