PDA

View Full Version : constructive possession


blackbox
11-10-2008, 8:38 AM
So, I'd like to know if this is actually against the law, or just a really bad idea: AR15 lower, no mag locking device + a detached upper + 30 rd mags, all locked in a single case.

hawk1
11-10-2008, 8:41 AM
Very bad idea. Nothing good can come from that.

69Mach1
11-10-2008, 8:42 AM
There is no constructive possession in CA for assault weapons. However, common sense says don't do it, especially if that's how you're transporting it also. I'm assuming when you say "lower" you mean a complete lower.

Edit: If however you had a monster man grip attached to the lower and no flash suppress or FG on the upper, that would make it a little safer.

blackbox
11-10-2008, 8:43 AM
I know its a bad idea anyway you slice it, this is a theoretical question.

motorhead
11-10-2008, 9:00 AM
i'm usually on the other side of the constuctive debate, but i have to say that while legal, it's an extremely poor choice. remember animaniacs good idea/bad idea? really bad idea. to the average leo this looks like an aw erector set.

BONECUTTER
11-10-2008, 9:01 AM
Nothing to stop someone less then honest to push some pins together and say he/she found it that way.

Plus how would a jury view it.

fairfaxjim
11-10-2008, 9:04 AM
I know its a bad idea anyway you slice it, this is a theoretical question.

If you knew it was a bad idea, why did you ask the question whether or not it was a bad idea?

There is no constructive posession in CA. You can have all the legal parts you want.

However, you are asking any and every LEO that you MAY have occasion to come in contact with to KNOW that (and care enough to make the call themself). It kind of boils down to "do you fell lucky today punk? Well, do you?" You can just bet that if some LEO keys on that collection of parts, that some assistant DA is going to just start piling things on to make it easier for themselves to get a conviction, and/or just to make you sweat. Unless you managed to pony up big bucks for a very good fireamrs knowledgable attorney, I would bet the best you would get away with would be to surrender the firearm (they will call it an AW and you will have to prove otherwise or agree to the surrender if you can't afford to fight it in court) as a nuisance, pay the $150.00 or $300.00 (plus your attorney's fees) for the privledge and go b***h and moan about how you got screwed.

stphnman20
11-10-2008, 9:04 AM
Nothing to stop someone less then honest to push some pins together and say he/she found it that way.

Plus how would a jury view it.
+1..

It's kinda the same as an SBR..

bwiese
11-10-2008, 10:04 AM
The above worries are why I encoruage vendors (esp outta state FFLs) to not to send disassembled OLL rifles all in one box to a CA FFL. Rather, the PG and or other features like telestock should be detached/sent separately (i.e, barreled action shipped alone).

bwiese
11-10-2008, 10:05 AM
+1..

It's kinda the same as an SBR..

No, the above is defendable.

SBR/SBS constructive possession is not defendable and is specifically codified in 12020(c)(...).

blackbox
11-10-2008, 10:16 PM
If you knew it was a bad idea, why did you ask the question whether or not it was a bad idea?


I asked if it was just a bad idea, or if it was illegal. Of course its a bad idea, but there's a pretty big difference between that and something that is solidly illegal. Also, its the weird "edge cases" that lead to a better understanding of the law. (and you never know what situation might come up).

Outside of the realm of theory, I've got an SU16 which gives you basically the above setup in a legal manner.

Thanks for the replies....

ohsmily
11-10-2008, 10:30 PM
If the lower has a monsterman grip or U15 stock and the upper doesn't have any evil features, then you don't really have anything to worry about do you.

DedEye
11-11-2008, 5:27 AM
The above worries are why I encoruage vendors (esp outta state FFLs) to not to send disassembled OLL rifles all in one box to a CA FFL. Rather, the PG and or other features like telestock should be detached/sent separately (i.e, barreled action shipped alone).

I've encouraged some to send ARs with the upper and lower separate simply because doing so is not illegal, and it allows OLL friendly FFLs in state to legally receive said rifles and install CA compliance parts on them.

Do you think two separate boxes (one for uppers, one for lowers) in the same shipment is a safer idea?

CSACANNONEER
11-11-2008, 10:24 AM
So, I'd like to know if this is actually against the law, or just a really bad idea: AR15 lower, no mag locking device + a detached upper + 30 rd mags, all locked in a single case.

I've transported my featureless builds this way. I don't see anything wrong with it. I can't see the want or need to transport a PG build like this unless it is a rimfire build. BTW, you don't even need to transport a non-AW long arm in a case, let alone a lock case.

bwiese
11-11-2008, 10:43 AM
I've encouraged some to send ARs with the upper and lower separate simply because doing so is not illegal, and it allows OLL friendly FFLs in state to legally receive said rifles and install CA compliance parts on them.

Do you think two separate boxes (one for uppers, one for lowers) in the same shipment is a safer idea?

Probably so. Eliminates potential drama on misdirected shipments, etc.

For AK type guns gripless + no features is OK; send the grip separately and the person can put the mag lock on before grip is attached.

FAL types: send the barreled upper (serialized part) in one box, the lower (a non-gun!) in another box.