PDA

View Full Version : Underground Regulation: Non Rosterable Frames


hoffmang
02-26-2009, 3:30 PM
All,

Just dispatched by courier is this petition (http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/oal/Underground_Rulemaking_NRF-2009-02-26-01.pdf) to the Office of Administrative Law (http://www.oal.ca.gov/) showing that it is an underground regulation (http://www.oal.ca.gov/Underground_Regulations.htm) to claim that the frame or receiver of a handgun is an "unsafe handgun" under California Law.

The OAL generally takes about 60 days to determine whether they will review the underground regulation petition or not so stay tuned.

-Gene

PolishMike
02-26-2009, 3:31 PM
first in a big thread.


Hope this works out in our favor

EDIT: So I take it this puts NeRFs on hold for a long while?

Cypren
02-26-2009, 3:48 PM
Beautiful. I had never noticed that 12125 wasn't listed in 12001(c) -- that's a brilliant find.

G17GUY
02-26-2009, 3:50 PM
:D Thats some damn good news!

So was DOJ already notified but refuse to respond?

sierratangofoxtrotunion
02-26-2009, 3:50 PM
And so it starts. :D

alexander
02-26-2009, 3:54 PM
That was worth the two week wait. Thanks Gene.

nat
02-26-2009, 3:57 PM
Good stuff!

FreshTapCoke
02-26-2009, 3:58 PM
This forum is one of the most amazing things I've ever had the pleasure of being involved with.

leelaw
02-26-2009, 3:59 PM
So I wonder how many "they're not doing anything about NRFs!!" guys will eat their words now.


<crickets>

Good job, CGF.

383green
02-26-2009, 4:15 PM
Great job!

I wonder if you can clarify one point: Is the preparation and dispatch of this petition the only thing that was delaying the first NeRF transfers, or will y'all still be waiting for the OAL response?

PolishMike
02-26-2009, 4:16 PM
So I wonder how many "they're not doing anything about NRFs!!" guys will eat their words now.


<crickets>

Good job, CGF.


Can you explain in "lay-terms" what this means to us and why it took several months?

hoffmang
02-26-2009, 4:16 PM
So was DOJ already notified but refuse to respond?

When they basically didn't wish to discuss or consider a non hard line with the Capacity to Accept regulation, I took that to mean that waiting for them to respond on the NRF items wouldn't be worth the delay.

I'll post up the PRAR timelines and communications that lead to this filing when I have a chance. They are amusing. Right now I've got some other things to take care of.

-Gene

yellowfin
02-26-2009, 4:18 PM
How good is the OAL in dealing with such matters? Are they reliable to not have any buddy buddying with the BoF?

hoffmang
02-26-2009, 4:18 PM
I wonder if you can clarify one point: Is the preparation and dispatch of this petition the only thing that was delaying the first NeRF transfers, or will y'all still be waiting for the OAL response?

We have a CGF board meeting tonight. As you can see we've been a bit preoccupied getting the two petitions together so we'll have that plan though through and announced shortly.

Short answer: dunno at this exact second but will know very soon.

-Gene

hoffmang
02-26-2009, 4:19 PM
How good is the OAL in dealing with such matters? Are they reliable to not have any buddy buddying with the BoF?

They were very effective to deal with on our first petition. You should have confidence they will handle this fairly.

-Gene

gd-bh
02-26-2009, 4:22 PM
However it turns out, "thank you" for the obviously large effort that went into this and the other petition. Let's hope that the "good guys" win this one, and send the anti's into a hasty retreat.

383green
02-26-2009, 4:22 PM
Thanks for the clarification, Gene. I'm not in a hurry... I was just curious.

Also, my eyes pop wide open when you say things like "Right now I've got some other things to take care of". Ok, that could mean that you have to go feed the dogs, fix a clogged drain, etc., but somehow I think you're casually arming another legal nuke to lob at our enemies... :D

G17GUY
02-26-2009, 4:23 PM
This is awsome, good job!

Fedge
02-26-2009, 4:31 PM
Thank you, Gene, for all the hard work you and the CGF do for us. I can think of no more honorable act then restoring our rights here in California and you've done an absolutely outstanding job of helping all of us defend our rights. I shall (continue to) support calguns and the CGF as you pave the way forward.

Thanks.

bwiese
02-26-2009, 4:32 PM
Gene and I would be willing to NeRF even now, but to truly make things work en masse we need to do things right.

Thus, this drama came to pass: we thought it would be avoidable or be sorted quickly but it escalated instead.

hoffmang
02-26-2009, 4:33 PM
Also, my eyes pop wide open when you say things like "Right now I've got some other things to take care of". Ok, that could mean that you have to go feed the dogs, fix a clogged drain, etc., but somehow I think you're casually arming another legal nuke to lob at our enemies... :D

"What digital timer device deemed 'defense articles'' are you referring to officer?"

:reddevil:

-Gene

blackberg
02-26-2009, 4:41 PM
Looks good :thumbsup:

-bb

yellowfin
02-26-2009, 5:11 PM
Indeed it is fine work. Many thanks for your excellent effort and attention to detail. Now, to make some more cash to take part in this marvelous revolution...

avidone
02-26-2009, 5:15 PM
Thank you so much!

Ford8N
02-26-2009, 5:15 PM
Gene and I would be willing to NeRF even now, but to truly make things work en masse we need to do things right.

Thus, this drama came to pass: we thought it would be avoidable or be sorted quickly but it escalated instead.

So "they" want to fight it out at the OAL. I guess that makes sense since a certain employee is a puppet of the Brady group.

wolf13
02-26-2009, 5:25 PM
Good news!

tgriffin
02-26-2009, 7:43 PM
Gene...Bill...The Right People...Gods. 'nuff said

Hopi
02-26-2009, 7:47 PM
So "they" want to fight it out at the OAL. I guess that makes sense since a certain employee is a puppet of the Brady group.

and what a fun opponent she's been......as Gene has said "she's the gift that keeps on giving."

damon1272
02-26-2009, 7:59 PM
Gene and Bill, you are truly EVIL people....in the State's eye. You are definetly an asset to us though! Thanks for your good work!

CapS
02-26-2009, 8:26 PM
You guys are:King:just awesome.

/Cap

dfletcher
02-26-2009, 8:27 PM
If I were on the other side I would not like us. :nono:

yellowfin
02-26-2009, 8:33 PM
If I were on the other side I would not like us. :nono:
They are completely free to take a 100 foot bungee jump with a 150 foot cord.

cal_ar_shooter
02-26-2009, 9:20 PM
Thank you for all the hard work you have done for us here.:D

thedrickel
02-26-2009, 9:23 PM
Damn I knew I should have written down Rickel, Zed, NMN

on that 4473!

CHS
02-26-2009, 9:54 PM
This thread makes me happy in many many ways :)

RRangel
02-26-2009, 10:35 PM
So "they" want to fight it out at the OAL. I guess that makes sense since a certain employee is a puppet of the Brady group.

Don't forget LCAV.

hoffmang
02-26-2009, 11:11 PM
Damn I knew I should have written down Rickel, Zed, NMN

on that 4473!

A hat tip to the man who scanned.

I used to want Alison gone. Now I don't want her to ever leave...

Thanks Alison :thumbsup:

-Gene

trashman
02-26-2009, 11:12 PM
Exciting stuff guys - a good reminder that sometimes the insurgents wear business suits and really nice Florsheims!

--Neill

Quiet
02-26-2009, 11:31 PM
:iggy2:

oaklander
02-26-2009, 11:49 PM
The side effect to all of this is that Alison will soon develop a phobia when it comes to getting (1) FEDEX letters, and (2) emails from anyone on the CGF.

:)

hoffmang
02-27-2009, 12:01 AM
So far, I haven't spotted any typos in this one... :whistling: :hide:

-Gene

Barbarossa
02-27-2009, 12:05 AM
Thanks Alison :thumbsup:


Seeing this unfold, Makes me even more grateful of the work that went into OLL's.

Cheers!

oaklander
02-27-2009, 12:20 AM
http://s5.tinypic.com/zn7ztt.jpg

Racefiend
02-27-2009, 12:20 AM
So far, I haven't spotted any typos in this one... :whistling: :hide:

-Gene

Not to burst your bubble, but on page 5 you use "neither...or" instead of "neither...nor".

Great job nonetheless. If I was a woman, I'd have your babies.

hoffmang
02-27-2009, 12:27 AM
Not to burst your bubble, but on page 5 you use "neither...or" instead of "neither...nor".


Excellent nit-pick!

However as typos go, I'll take that compared to three embarrassing ones in the CTA petition and one in the original permanence petition.

-Gene

leelaw
02-27-2009, 12:31 AM
I'll take that compared to three embarrassing ones in the CTA petition and one in the original permanence petition.

-Gene

LOL.. Yeah.... :43:

Racefiend
02-27-2009, 12:38 AM
Well if you ever need proofreading, I would donate my time for the cause :)

bones138
02-27-2009, 12:47 AM
You deserve a dinner party in your honor and to be presented with a nice plaque.

artherd
02-27-2009, 1:13 AM
You deserve a dinner party in your honor and to be presented with a nice plaque.

Can the plaque have the remnants of certain bothersome laws-gone-bye? ;)

Sam
02-27-2009, 1:17 AM
thank you Gene!

bruss01
02-27-2009, 6:40 AM
Wow.

Times are tight right now for us, but these 2 submissions are a really a deserving effort. Just sent my contrib for $100 to CGF.

At last somebody doing something tangible! Thank you!

SDJim
02-27-2009, 7:26 AM
You deserve a dinner party in your honor and to be presented with a nice plaque.
Maybe we should take a vote to select an "Honorary Cal-Gunner of the Year" to be awarded to the bureaucrat who most helped advance the cause of Gun Owners Rights in California . . . They could get a plaque also.

Santa Cruz Armory
02-27-2009, 8:22 AM
Thanks for all the time and hard work you guys put into defending our rights here in CA. The CGF needs to expand to other non gun friendly states.

:thumbsup:

Taro
02-27-2009, 8:36 AM
Gene, you are doing a wonderful job representing all of us that want to comply with California's draconian guns laws. Your letter is certainly on point, containing very convincing data to support your conclusions. Thank you for taking the time and effort to draft such a comprehensive letter.

I sincerely hope and pray that DOJ will finally see the light and declare rifles with bullet buttons installed are not assault weapons. If they do, we have only you to thank for your herculean efforts on behalf of all of us.

rkt88edmo
02-27-2009, 9:03 AM
Time to start saving my pennies for a Pac Lite upper for the MkII

oddball
02-27-2009, 9:10 AM
:thumbsup:

Kudos to Gene!

jas000
02-27-2009, 9:30 AM
Thanks! :thumbsup:

And, just donated $100 to CGF ! (Efforts like this deserve moral and whatever financial support can be mustered. I remember a couple months back something about having a "topologist" (mathmetician specializing in shapes and surfaces) prepared if needed for the U15-stock issue - classic !).

rkt88edmo
02-27-2009, 9:45 AM
iv.) The Analysis of Federal Law is Irrelevant, Incorrect, and Cuts the Other Way

That has to be one of my favorite titles - it is poetical enough to be in a play

ACT IV: In Which The Analysis of Federal Law is Irrelevant, Incorrect, and Cuts the Other Way


This section seems to hinge on the new 4473. I know they changed the form but do we have any real insight as to why 4473 was changed? Particularly the part about frames not being handguns or revolvers for reporting purposes?

Fate
02-27-2009, 9:54 AM
Gene, you're a superhero! Glad you're on our side!

http://neuronarrative.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/superhero.jpg?w=222&h=240

Tallship
02-27-2009, 10:13 AM
Great job, guys. Just out of curiosity, who was the first one to realize that 12025 was not included in 12001?

hoffmang
02-27-2009, 11:00 AM
Great job, guys. Just out of curiosity, who was the first one to realize that 12025 was not included in 12001?

The actual first person can't be named but he knows who he is. In a different regulatory environment he didn't want to make it public as we might have faced "fixup" legislation.

A Calgunner started a thread about pistol framed carbines. That made me look and I discovered the discrepancy anew.

-Gene

383green
02-27-2009, 11:15 AM
He Who Cannot Be Named? I like the sound of that... :43:

7x57
02-27-2009, 11:18 AM
As long as it wasn't He Who Cannot Even Be Vaguely Alluded To. :D

7x57

wash
02-27-2009, 11:26 AM
If a frame isn't a handgun, does this mean we can get more than one every thirty days?

hoffmang
02-27-2009, 11:39 AM
If a frame isn't a handgun, does this mean we can get more than one every thirty days?

No. A frame is a firearm/handgun for the section of the Penal Code that limits us to one handgun in 30 days per 12001(c).

-Gene

wash
02-27-2009, 11:44 AM
I guess that means we still need a handgun safety certificate?

I haven't bought a handgun in a while...

thedrickel
02-27-2009, 11:49 AM
C&R + COE FTW!

xxdabroxx
02-27-2009, 12:45 PM
This line in the frames letter really pisses me off, "A pistol must be tested and approved by a DOJ-certified handgun testing laboratory before it can be approved for sale in California. A handgun that is tested and approved is eligible for listing on DOJ's roster of handguns that have been determined 'not unsafe' and approved for sale to the public

and thanks Gene, Bill, and all others at CGF!

but did you have to use a Taurus pt1911 for the complete pistol and frame? really?

and what is Tidewater?

Monte
02-27-2009, 1:14 PM
Time to start saving my pennies for a Pac Lite upper for the MkII

Ooh, good call, but would a serial numbered barreled upper qualify? I thought I read somewhere in one of these threads that the reason a frame didn't qualify as a firearm was because it didn't have the ability fire a projectile (I'm still trying to re-find that bit of info). It might be a bit of a stretch, since you'd have to futz around with it a bit to fire a round, but who knows. :confused:

Librarian
02-27-2009, 1:53 PM
and what is Tidewater?

Tidewater Marine Western, Inc. v. Bradshaw, 14 Cal. 4th 557, 571 (1996)
In this case, we decide whether the wage orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission (IWC) govern employment in the Santa Barbara Channel. To decide that question, we must decide, among other things, whether written interpretive policies of the state agency charged with enforcing IWC wage orders constitute regulations within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (Gov. Code, § 11340 et seq.). We conclude that these interpretive policies do constitute regulations and therefore are void because they were not adopted in accordance with the APA. Nevertheless, we conclude that the agency properly exercised its enforcement jurisdiction and that the trial court erred in granting a permanent injunction barring enforcement.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeal. Generically, state agencies must follow the rules to create regulations.

rkt88edmo
02-27-2009, 2:00 PM
Ooh, good call, but would a serial numbered barreled upper qualify? I thought I read somewhere in one of these threads that the reason a frame didn't qualify as a firearm was because it didn't have the ability fire a projectile (I'm still trying to re-find that bit of info). It might be a bit of a stretch, since you'd have to futz around with it a bit to fire a round, but who knows. :confused:

Good question - but what good is a barrelled upper without a bolt, firing pin, hammer, etc. - it definitely is not quite cleanly as cut since the MkII upper has a barrel and chamber - but still lacks the majority of what would make up a "handgun'.

wildhawker
02-27-2009, 3:02 PM
As long as it wasn't He Who Cannot Even Be Vaguely Alluded To. :D

7x57

THAT is classic!

7x57
02-27-2009, 3:11 PM
THAT is classic!

I wish it was original with me, but it isn't.

7x57

CHS
02-27-2009, 5:04 PM
A Calgunner started a thread about pistol framed carbines. That made me look and I discovered the discrepancy anew.

-Gene

That was me :)

CHS
02-27-2009, 5:08 PM
Ooh, good call, but would a serial numbered barreled upper qualify? I thought I read somewhere in one of these threads that the reason a frame didn't qualify as a firearm was because it didn't have the ability fire a projectile (I'm still trying to re-find that bit of info). It might be a bit of a stretch, since you'd have to futz around with it a bit to fire a round, but who knows. :confused:

Only a complete assembled handgun has the ability to fire. A pac-lite upper does not, even though it has a chamber.

The paclite does not come with a bolt, which also means it has no firing pin. The paclite uses your original bolt. There's also no hammer since that is part of the frame.

A paclite is a perfect NeRF example.

Joe
02-27-2009, 5:20 PM
this is awesome

Monte
02-27-2009, 7:25 PM
Good question - but what good is a barrelled upper without a bolt, firing pin, hammer, etc. - it definitely is not quite cleanly as cut since the MkII upper has a barrel and chamber - but still lacks the majority of what would make up a "handgun'.

Only a complete assembled handgun has the ability to fire. A pac-lite upper does not, even though it has a chamber.

The paclite does not come with a bolt, which also means it has no firing pin. The paclite uses your original bolt. There's also no hammer since that is part of the frame.

A paclite is a perfect NeRF example.

Good points about the lack of bolt and firing pin. Completely forgot they didn't come with those parts. :cool:

hoffmang
02-27-2009, 8:23 PM
Good points about the lack of bolt and firing pin. Completely forgot they didn't come with those parts. :cool:

You will note that in the document I say that "a frame or receiver generally does not contain a chamber..." I was thinking of some revolver frames that would have integral barrels in the frame but that is another example.

-Gene

BigDogatPlay
02-27-2009, 11:16 PM
Gene, thank you. That petition is brilliant and simple. The words in the law mean things, and it's good that the BoF may get to learn that lesson again.

While any hearing is a crap shoot, it's going to be very difficult to argue against the logic and the facts of the petition. I wish I could be there to hear BoF trying to argue it as it is bound to be funny.

CGF is just about the best thing gun owners in California have going for them these days. I'll have a donation on the way out this weekend.

GuyW
03-02-2009, 11:45 AM
Only a complete assembled handgun has the ability to fire.

So a non-fireable gun is defacto "safe", yes?

What safety-nazi can object to a non-firing gun?
.

Librarian
03-02-2009, 12:18 PM
So a non-fireable gun is defacto "safe", yes?

What safety-nazi can object to a non-firing gun?
.
But is it "not-unsafe"? :)

artherd
03-02-2009, 4:09 PM
"The Calguns Foundation - teaching state lawyers the actual meaning of the law since 2008"

I like it :)

hoffmang
03-02-2009, 4:50 PM
"The guys who would become Calguns Foundation - teaching state lawyers the actual meaning of the law since 2006"


Fixed it for you.

-Gene

artherd
03-02-2009, 11:25 PM
hehehehe - BAM! :)

tonelar
03-04-2009, 12:04 AM
Can you guys say which ffl(s) are working with CGF on NeRF ing?

CSDGuy
03-04-2009, 12:15 AM
As I see it, a NRF can't be unsafe or not-unsafe simply because it can't be tested. A brick would be just as testable... and would have the same outcome as a NRF. :D

artherd
03-04-2009, 12:32 AM
Can you guys say which ffl(s) are working with CGF on NeRF ing?

**** NO man! IF we could, we would. When the time comes, we will :)

Till then, please keep in mind that I started on OLLs in 2003. They didn't happen till 2005. Good things take strategic planning, time, and a metric assload of money :)

7x57
03-04-2009, 12:34 AM
As I see it, a NRF can't be unsafe or not-unsafe simply because it can't be tested. A brick would be just as testable... and would have the same outcome as a NRF. :D

Ahhh! Shut up, shut up, shut up!!!!! We do NOT want them to think about that. If they do, they'll be after our bricks next. :TFH:

7x57

383green
03-04-2009, 12:36 AM
I'm happy to see that you're not using those silly imperial units of money. :)

thatrogue
03-04-2009, 12:45 AM
CalGuns foundation feels a little like are own little "Sons of Liberty" some 230 years later.

wildhawker
03-04-2009, 6:48 AM
Ahhh! Shut up, shut up, shut up!!!!! We do NOT want them to think about that. If they do, they'll be after our bricks next. :TFH:

7x57

AM and DOJ... seizing un-rostered chimney stacks since 2009...

tonelar
03-04-2009, 9:13 AM
**** NO man! IF we could, we would. When the time comes, we will :)

Ok. I'll just hope they're in the Bay Area. Or at least in NoCal.


Good things take strategic planning, time, and a metric assload of money :)

The Olde' English Imperial Assload wasn't practical to standardize.

I'm happy to see that you're not using those silly imperial units of money. :)

God Save the Metric Assload!

wash
03-04-2009, 9:55 AM
Someone let me know when the first FFL starts doing these, I want to bring in an Automag from out of state.

Dirty Harry style.

MP5
03-06-2009, 1:43 PM
Someone let me know when the first FFL starts doing these, I want to bring in an Automag from out of state.

Dirty Harry style.

Doesn't Dirty Harry use a model 29? Nice work on the NeRFs Gene, much appreciated. :thumbsup:

Shotgun Man
03-06-2009, 3:22 PM
So far, I haven't spotted any typos in this one... :whistling: :hide:

-Gene

Not a typo but a usage comment. You write:



Based on the statutory rule of interpretation
expressio unius est exclusio alterius (“the expression
of one thing is the exclusion of another”), the only legally tenable interpretation of the term
“unsafe handgun” in PC §12125 – PC §12133 is that the frame or receiver of the weapon cannot
be an “unsafe handgun.” This is because none of those sections are referenced in PC §12001(c).


You employ this convention of stating code section ranges consistently throughout your petition.

Ranges are normally expressed, e.g., as "§§PC 12125-12133."

Nice job. Keep up the good work.

hoffmang
03-06-2009, 3:23 PM
You employ this convention of stating code section ranges consistently throughout your petition.

Ranges are normally expressed, e.g., as "§§PC 12125-12133."


Thanks for the tip!

-Gene

wilshire1412
03-06-2009, 5:25 PM
Automag is on the C&R list, if I am correct? I think the hard part is getting an out of state dealer to send it here as they don't want to deal with the other paperwork involved to prove that they are in fact a dealer.:confused:

wash
03-06-2009, 6:24 PM
Really, they are C&R?

Can I get one with a stock?

wilshire1412
03-06-2009, 9:35 PM
Really, they are C&R?

Can I get one with a stock?

I think the stock would be an NFA bust, but I am not sure if there is a work around with C&R handguns. I think some old Winchester 1892's that were made with trapper barrels shorter than 16" may have been exempted from the NFA rule regarding barrel length. I am not sure about the handguns although there are many around such as the Broomhandle Mauser and the old P-35 HP that were cut for shoulder stock/holsters.

MP5
03-20-2009, 11:54 AM
is the automag really C&R? and does that apply to all automags?

MP5
03-20-2009, 11:57 AM
like the automag II

ke6guj
03-20-2009, 1:07 PM
I don't see any automags listed, and AFAIK, none of them are 50+ years old.

MP5
03-20-2009, 1:20 PM
I don't see any automags listed, and AFAIK, none of them are 50+ years old.

there are other C&R exemtions than 50 years old...does the Automag fall into one of those other categories

CHS
03-20-2009, 2:17 PM
there are other C&R exemtions than 50 years old...does the Automag fall into one of those other categories

That's what he meant by "listed".

There are only two ways to be a C&R:

1.) Firearm is more than 50 years old
2.) The BATFE has determined the firearm to be a C&R and add's it to the list of C&R's.

If the Automag is neither, then it is not a C&R.

MP5
03-20-2009, 3:16 PM
Automag is on the C&R list, if I am correct? I think the hard part is getting an out of state dealer to send it here as they don't want to deal with the other paperwork involved to prove that they are in fact a dealer.:confused:

where can I find a copy of the C&R list, according to this the automag may be on it

ke6guj
03-20-2009, 3:18 PM
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/curios/index.htm

MP5
03-20-2009, 6:21 PM
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/curios/index.htm

Auto-Mag pistols, calibers .44 AMP and .357 AMP, mfd. and/or assembled by Auto-Mag Corporation, TDE, OMC,

Thank You:thumbsup:

ke6guj
03-20-2009, 6:48 PM
doh, glanced right past that. And I even did a page search to double-check. but a search for "automag" does not find "auto-mag":43:

IMC87
03-23-2009, 11:17 PM
Updates? :online2long:

CHS
03-23-2009, 11:20 PM
Updates? :online2long:

no.

hoffmang
03-24-2009, 12:22 AM
OAL has 60 days to accept or reject the petition. Their 60 days is up approximately April 28, 2009 so around then is when you should expect an update.

-Gene

D.R.E.
04-29-2009, 2:19 AM
OAL has 60 days to accept or reject the petition. Their 60 days is up approximately April 28, 2009 so around then is when you should expect an update.

-Gene


And the verdict is? :)

JeffM
04-29-2009, 2:27 AM
And the verdict is? :)

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=176408 (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=176408)

MP5
05-01-2009, 10:07 AM
This is old we've moved on to this:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=179227

:thumbsup: