I picked up a lauer lower at the del mar airsoft show this weekend, and was thinking about getting a rimfire upper for it and have fun until DOJ makes a move..  This is legal right?  since its a rimfire.

This is only legal if the magazine is fixed in place, and holds 10 or less rounds.

Period.

Quoted: This is only legal if the magazine is fixed in place, and holds 10 or less rounds. Period.

Really? I'd think it would be "legal" but would imagine you could catch shit for it. What if you put a 1/4" bolt through the rear take down pin with a nut on it with a roll pin through the hole deal to keep you from taking it apart? Then the upper would be semi-permanent.

The only problem is you need to add a pistol grip to your receiver, which would make it an AW by feature.

IMHO, if you fix a mag to the lower you can do whatever else you want to. Flashhider, col. buttstock, etc.

If you do not fix a mag and you add a pistol grip to the lower you have created an assault weapon. Or if you do not fix a mag and add a flashhider you have created an assault weapon.

The rimfire upper doesn't matter. The lower is the weapon.

I am not an expert by any means. What I say may be 100% wrong. Just my interpretation of the so called law.

Quoted: IMHO, if you fix a mag to the lower you can do whatever else you want to. Flashhider, col. buttstock, etc. If you do not fix a mag and you add a pistol grip to the lower you have created an assault weapon. Or if you do not fix a mag and add a flashhider you have created an assault weapon. The rimfire upper doesn't matter. The lower is the weapon. I am not an expert by any means. What I say may be 100% wrong. Just my interpretation of the so called law.

That is my interpretation  of the law as well.

IF the upper is permanently attached to the receiver such that it would be impossible for it to fire anything other than .22LR, you might be able to get away with a .22lr detachable magazine on it.

HOWEVER, I would not want to be the test case, since the upper for unmodified ARs are easily swappable.

Personally, I'm trying to hear back from Iggy about a lower that is adapted to accept only aftermarket .22lr magazines, and thus only rimfire, therefore allowing a detachable magazine, dedicated-.22lr AR.

He's apparently too busy to call people back, though.

Dear Mr. ******: In response to your correspondence, assault weapons as defined by California Penal Code section 12276.1 would exclude a rifle that fires only .22 cal rimfire ammunition. Sincerely, Mr. Dana McKinnon Field Representative Firearms Division (916) 263-4881 >>> <********@********.***> 6/10/05 1:31:43 AM >>> Below is the result of your feedback form.  It was submitted by (********@********.***) on Friday, June 10, 2005 at 08:31:43 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: ***** ****** Telephone: feedback: Would a rifle manufactured at home for personal use that has the same characteristics as a rifle listed as an Assault Weapon, but that has been permanently been modified to be able to fire only rimfire ammunition still be an Assault Weapon? For example: Would an AR-15 style of rifle, which is normally defined as an assault weapon because it is a centerfire rifle with a detachable magazine and a pistol grip, that is manufactured in a way that makes firing centerfire ammunition impossible but allows rimfire ammunition to be fired via detachable magazines still be considered an Assault Weapon as per the California Department of Justice's definition of Assault Weapons?

My original idea was to mill a 1/4" deep 1" fat slot into the top of an 80% receiver on the front most part of the mag well. I would then take a 1" wide 1/4" thick piece of aluminum and, with counter sunk bolts and some loctite, attach it to the receiver. I could then take some of those Ciener mags and mill the front inch off of them to the point where they would be able to pass past it, but a normal AR mag couldn't. I also heard suggestions of mounting the piece of aluminum sideways so it was vertical, then all you would need is use a chop saw to chop a groove into the magazine deep enough to pass by it. Either way, the idea is the same.

Another idea I had recently was to simple drill and push in a roll pin in the same place that Vulcan put their roll pins. If the pin was in place, a normal AR mag couldn't be pushed past it because of the rear ridge that holds the follower (the tail end of the follower that acuates the bolt stop). However, since the Ceiner mags don't have that ridge, they could pass by freely without being modified (always a plus when sharing people's mags at the range).

If you were to do a modification like that, I would assume the rifle would then be legal.

ETA: I wanted to use aluminum so that when I got around to setting up a personal anodize tank it would all match. Of course I would have to get the same type of aluminum, but at that size 7075 is cheap.

Rimfires rifles are exempt.

Quoted: Rimfires rifles are exempt.

Not rimfire AR-15s.

If you used a standard upper and a .22 bolt conversion, this is a gray area since one could arge the ease of converting back.

You could use an .22 upper and a .22 bolt conversion. Then replace a take down pin with a nut/lock-screw combo, preventing assembly of an AW without the use of tools.  Or it's less gray, and I'm not a lawyer.

Personally I would think that it would be illegal. I know its a rimfire but like someone said, the lower is the weapon and its made for a centerfire.

Now here is my interpretation of the grey area. We now know that using a "perminant kit" to fix our mags in place is considered acceptable(depends on DA's to a certain extent) so wouldnt fixing the takedown pins in a similiar fashion be equally perminant?

I personally wouldnt do it, but it seems like because of the letter sent to Neo, there is a little gray area.

Quoted: Quoted: Rimfires rifles are exempt. Not rimfire AR-15s.

The series ban has been struck down.  Lauers are not "AR15's" as far as cali AW laws are concerned.

Quoted: Personally I would think that it would be illegal. I know its a rimfire but like someone said, the lower is the weapon and its made for a centerfire.

Says who?  Hell some are marked "Multicaliber."

If you build it as a rimfire its a rimefire and exempt unless banned by name.

Quoted: Quoted: Personally I would think that it would be illegal. I know its a rimfire but like someone said, the lower is the weapon and its made for a centerfire. Says who?  Hell some are marked "Multicaliber." If you build it as a rimfire its a rimefire and exempt unless banned by name.

That is exactly my interpretation.

Keep the magazine pinned. You don't want to be the test case regardless of how you interpret the law. If you put a detachable magazine on, and it still accepts a centerfire magazine, you're going to be screwed.

Just wait until the whole thing blows over, and if, in the end, you are able to register it as an AW, do it and convert to your heart's content, but don't do it beforehand.

This receiver buying frenzy is done to be completely legal, not to ride the fine line of legality.

I'm going for it. because its a rimfire, and when I put it together it will still be rimfire rifle.  
Yeah, you can put a 5.56 mag in but it wont fire.  Hell I can cram a 9mm mag into my 10/22 and that does not make it an assult weapon.

Quoted: Quoted: Personally I would think that it would be illegal. I know its a rimfire but like someone said, the lower is the weapon and its made for a centerfire. Says who?  Hell some are marked "Multicaliber." If you build it as a rimfire its a rimefire and exempt unless banned by name.

Dont shoot the messenger. I agree you can probably get away with it but fuck it, you are the one up for having a potential AW and getting a felony.

I just added my two cents.

and for the record and ar15 isnt a brand and lauers are ar15's. Anything with the capablity of accepting a centerfire detachable magazine with a pistol grip is considered an AW.

Maybe if you welded half the mag slot up so it could only get a 22 mag in it then you would be ok.

Have fun. The odds are definitely in your favor. Not likely that you'll get busted. However you are definitely in a gray area due to the features restriction, not the series restriction. It could be argued that when you remove the .22 upper you have created an assault weapon by features.

People have been turned down for DROS by FFL's in this latest buy because they wanted to buy complete weapons without the pinned mags. You can't get completed AR lowers imported into CA if they have collapsible buttstocks or pistol grips attached because it is interpreted as being an AW by the features law.

I think that you will be okay, BUT you may run into someone who knows it all and get in trouble. And while you may beat the rap, you will not beat the ride.

hmm, this is interesting.   i would like to build up a 22lr  rifle also.

past few years i've seen Turners selling the  Armscorp AK chambered in a 22lr with a detachable mag and pistol girp.  

Quoted: hmm, this is interesting.   i would like to build up a 22lr  rifle also. past few years i've seen Turners selling the  Armscorp AK chambered in a 22lr with a detachable mag and pistol girp.

Yeah, but they only accept a .22 magazine. And the barrel can't be changed out easily. And it is exclusively a rimfire weapon.

ETA that rimfire weapons are exempted from the idiotic restrictions. A multi calibered lower MAY not be exempted if it has the capacity to accept a centerfire mag.

Quoted: Anything with the capablity of accepting a centerfire detachable magazine with a pistol grip is considered an AW.

Nope, it has to be centerfire and semi auto. Just fitting a "centerfire" magazine doesnt mean shit except for the detachable mag requirements.  If the rifle fires .22LR as is, and has to be modified to fire any centerfire ammo, then its a rimfire and its exempt.

Hell it would take longer to make a .22LR "AR" fire centerfire ammo than it would take to screw the nut off a FABforgery's mag catch.

Quoted: Have fun. The odds are definitely in your favor. Not likely that you'll get busted. However you are definitely in a gray area due to the features restriction, not the series restriction. It could be argued that when you remove the .22 upper you have created an assault weapon by features.

When you remove the upper its no longer centerfire or semi auto. With no upper its just as much a straight pull bolt action .22 as a semi auto 556.

...while you may beat the rap, you will not beat the ride.

True.

You are missing a point of the multi-caliber receivers: The letter I posted says that it would be exempt if it can fire ONLY rimfire ammunition, where as a Multi-caliber receiver is clearly made to fire more than just one type. You can argue that it means that it can fire multi-caliber rimfire, but try arguing that to the courts, or the 12 people who you have been made out as a criminal woning illegal weapons in a anti-gun state.

You can build it all you want, but I would advise against it. You HAVE to assemble an AW just to build the lower itself, so that right there tells you it's a no-no. Once an AW, always an AW, no mater if you change it so it's no longer an AW.

If you are really set on getting it made, at least consult an attorney first or at the very least ask someone versed in the laws, like Bill Weise.

I agree, its a grey area. I know the laws in CA are dumb but that comes with the territory. Sure its easier to pull the nut off FABforgery's mag catch but they approved that mag catch. They havent approved the rimfire aspect on a lower that was clearly made for centerfire rounds.

Check the link:  http://www.nramemberscouncils.com/CAL-DOJregs2.shtml

Summary of DOJ public hearing on 2/28/2000 on the topic.

Quoted: Check the link:  http://www.nramemberscouncils.com/CAL-DOJregs2.shtml Summary of DOJ public hearing on 2/28/2000 on the topic.

It looks like that link basically say you can do it as long as you dont have a centerfire upper on it....am I missing something