PDA

View Full Version : Question about AR loading at the range


2c5s
04-08-2009, 7:38 PM
Are we allowed to remove the magazine at the range to load the weapon with the bullet button? I have been loading them from the top and just read a post about a guy releasing the mag and loading in the traditional manner. I guess I feel stupid as hell if that's the case.

DDT
04-08-2009, 7:39 PM
yes you can release the magazine if you have a properly installed and operating Bullet Button.

Those still using P50s MUST topload.

kermit315
04-08-2009, 7:55 PM
^^ what he said.

SKG19
04-08-2009, 7:58 PM
I use the bullet button on my Stag, and use a tool to release the magazine and reload the magazines like normal. I've done this at both Sunnyvale and Livermore.

hoffmang
04-08-2009, 8:36 PM
A properly configured Bullet Button equipped AR never has the capacity to accept a magazine that can be removed without a tool - even when the magwell is empty.

-Gene

ChuckBooty
04-08-2009, 8:39 PM
The only thing that makes me nervous about that (maybe nervous is the wrong word) is the fact that if a pre-ban hi-cap were to somehow make it's way to that BB equipped rifle, you then have the potential for an illegal AW.

I guess that's the only thing I'd worry about if I were to get into a debate with an aggressive LEO or something.

2c5s
04-08-2009, 9:39 PM
Thanks guys!!!!!!

hoffmang
04-08-2009, 9:43 PM
The only thing that makes me nervous about that (maybe nervous is the wrong word) is the fact that if a pre-ban hi-cap were to somehow make it's way to that BB equipped rifle, you then have the potential for an illegal AW.

I guess that's the only thing I'd worry about if I were to get into a debate with an aggressive LEO or something.

If the LEO manufactures an AW, he's guilty - not you. That is why I recommend transporting and storing BB rifles with empty 10 round magazines in them though.

-Gene

CHS
04-08-2009, 10:52 PM
The only thing that makes me nervous about that (maybe nervous is the wrong word) is the fact that if a pre-ban hi-cap were to somehow make it's way to that BB equipped rifle, you then have the potential for an illegal AW.

I guess that's the only thing I'd worry about if I were to get into a debate with an aggressive LEO or something.


So..... Don't put a hi-cap mag in your BB-equipped rifle. And don't keep any Hi-caps with that particular range bag. Seems pretty damn simple to me.

To the OP:

Why on earth did you buy and install a bullet-button without first understanding the law and the function of the device? The entire POINT of the bullet-button is to free you from having to top-load, based upon the California definition of a detachable magazine. A bullet-button equipped rifle CANNOT accept a detachable magazine.

When I go to the range with my AR, I load up a whole bunch of 10 round magazines. Then I start shooting. When I run out of ammo, I use a tool to pop the magazine out and slap another one home, hit the bolt catch, and start shooting again. If I wanted to top-load... Wait, I hate top-loading. So nevermind :)

2c5s
04-09-2009, 6:25 AM
[QUOTE=bdsmchs;2292101]

To the OP:

Why on earth did you buy and install a bullet-button without first understanding the law and the function of the device? The entire POINT of the bullet-button is to free you from having to top-load, based upon the California definition of a detachable magazine. A bullet-button equipped rifle CANNOT accept a detachable magazine.

QUOTE]

Do you feel better now asserting your superiority? :sleeping::sleeping::sleeping:

DDT
04-09-2009, 7:21 AM
To the OP:

Why on earth did you buy and install a bullet-button without first understanding the law and the function of the device?

Why be so harsh on someone? It is quite possible that he saw the gun at a gun store and purchased it with the BB already installed with the assumption that a California gun store would only sell California legal firearms. Went to the range and some a-hole who feels the need to tell others what the law is and how they should read law books to buy a gun tells him he has to top load. So, being a good and smart guy he looks into the actual facts instead of taking the word of some self-appointed range police busy body.

Do you really think that people should be required to do legal research before buying a legal firearm from a gun store? Cut the guy some slack. We are all gun-dorks around here and it can be easy to forget that not everyone feels the need to quote statute when exercising their legal rights.

CHS
04-09-2009, 8:06 AM
Why be so harsh on someone? It is quite possible that he saw the gun at a gun store and purchased it with the BB already installed with the assumption that a California gun store would only sell California legal firearms. Went to the range and some a-hole who feels the need to tell others what the law is and how they should read law books to buy a gun tells him he has to top load. So, being a good and smart guy he looks into the actual facts instead of taking the word of some self-appointed range police busy body.

Do you really think that people should be required to do legal research before buying a legal firearm from a gun store?

Yes. Absolutely.

If you are building/buying/using an AR in this state, you HAVE to know why it's legal. You HAVE to be able to quote the law when ignorant LEO's try to bust you with an AW.

If you're not comfortable with that, then stick to mini-14's and kel-tec's.

There's too much FUD still going around regarding AR's and AW law's. People still think that an empty magwell on a bullet-button equipped AR makes it an illegal AW. This shows a clear misunderstanding of the law.

A misunderstanding of the law regarding these firearms can result in *FELONY* charges of manufacturing or transporting an AW, preventing you from owning guns for the rest of your life.

Do you get how serious that is?

That is why you need to know exactly why your guns are legal, and why you need to be able to quote law to show why they are legal.

sd_shooter
04-09-2009, 8:28 AM
If you are building/buying/using an AR in this state, you HAVE to know why it's legal. You HAVE to be able to quote the law when ignorant LEO's try to bust you with an AW.

(snip)

That is why you need to know exactly why your guns are legal, and why you need to be able to quote law to show why they are legal.

It's not very easy to figure out why a BB is legal. If you look at the OLL FAQ at the top of Calguns it really sounds like swapping mags with the BB is illegal, see here:

http://www.calguns.net/copmemo2.pdf


"To be legally safe in California, an off-list AR15-type lower receiver should never have a pistol grip or telestock, etc. attached unless and until a nondetachable (fixed) 10-rd magazine is already affixed. When repairing or dismantling such a rifle, features such as pistol grips, telestocks, etc. must first be removed before removing the fixed 10-rd magazine."


And now a few people are going to chime in and say all that is so last week. Why even post obsolete articles as a permanent reference? Where is all the up to date info?

If you can justify why you can swaps mags at the range with your BB please provide the references. I can see where the OP is coming from.

oddball
04-09-2009, 8:54 AM
Yes. And make sure you use 10 round magazines also.

rkt88edmo
04-09-2009, 8:55 AM
IMO being "harsh" is not out of place - the penalties for getting caught are quite high.

People who own OLLs without understanding the laws put themselves at great risk.

In this case OP wasn't breaking the law and was being overly cautious (yay!), but there are too many stories of people going the other way.

hill billy
04-09-2009, 9:04 AM
A properly configured Bullet Button equipped AR never has the capacity to accept a magazine that can be removed without a tool - even when the magwell is empty.

-Gene

Just a thought, but the way you say this might lead a new user to think there are specific magazines that will only go in bb equipped rifles, rather than any 10 round mag being able to be used, as long as a bullet button is present.

rtlltj
04-09-2009, 9:17 AM
The growing trend seems to be people who build OLL rifles first then ask about the legality after. What ever happened to doing your research and educating yourself first. People need to know the laws off the top of their head and be able to explain it clearly and not have to reference some sheet of paper.

DDT
04-09-2009, 10:40 AM
Yes. Absolutely.

If you are building/buying/using an AR in this state, you HAVE to know why it's legal. You HAVE to be able to quote the law when ignorant LEO's try to bust you with an AW.

If you're not comfortable with that, then stick to mini-14's and kel-tec's.


How is an everyday Joe off the street supposed to know that? There should be no expectation for the average citizen to have to learn the law. Do you expect them to know that the semi-auto they bought at the local gun shop is legal only because it is on a special list of firearms? Should they know that it has to have a magazine disconnect to be certified for sale in CA? These are all things that are common knowledge in this forum but surely you don't actually expect someone walking in off the street to know that. They don't know that a mini14 is a gun less likely to cause trouble with LEO unless they are educated. Education is done best when not done down the bridge of your nose.

To emphasize how important it is to learn while recognizing the fact that they took the first steps in coming here is quite reasonable but belittling them because they believed an FFL who legally sold them the weapon is nothing more than being an a-hole because you have more knowledge than the next guy. It is counter productive to the goals of teaching people to be safe, lawful gun owners.

Are the stakes high? Yes, it is a felony to improperly use a BB equipped AR and it is easy to do so, as someone mentioned simply putting in a magazine with a capacity for more than 10 rds is a felony.

But your approach of belittling someone asking a perfectly legitimate question is damaging our cause of creating an educated and active gun culture in CA. If you can't see that there is something significantly wrong.

DDT
04-09-2009, 10:43 AM
The growing trend seems to be people who build OLL rifles first then ask about the legality after. What ever happened to doing your research and educating yourself first. People need to know the laws off the top of their head and be able to explain it clearly and not have to reference some sheet of paper.

Why do you assume that he built his OLL rather than simply bought it at a gun show or a gun shop? You and I may know how important it is to understand the risks of owning an OLL but if someone just walks into a gun shop and sees a nice shiny black rifle there is no reason they would know the legal risks of owning it. A nice polite response and welcome will get us a lot more friends than condescension.

IGOTDIRT4U
04-09-2009, 11:04 AM
I disagree, DDT.

Gun ownership, on it's own, carries much more responsibility for the average person than a non-owner. I feel that the proper mindset for being a good gun owner is to know the laws well enough to keep you out of jail and home asleep at night. That is why so many posters will bring up Machtinger's book.

Go one step further. You would have to be living in a vacuum to not know that OLL's and AR's are a touchy subject in CA. I feel a responsible AR owner needs to know enough about the applicable laws to protect themselves, legally. It's more of a CYA and being responsible thing than anything else.

In a perfect world, other than being a safe gun owner, that should be all that is required of a gun owner, but, heck, we're talking California here, a less (lot less) than perfect world scenario. :TFH:

2c5s
04-09-2009, 11:28 AM
Again, for those that helped with an answer, greatly appreciated.

For those that feel the need to puff their chest so they feel better about themselves...very impressive:thumbsup: Forums are full of people like you.

I'm sure if a LEO is foggy on the legality of my weapon, I'm sure my preaching and explaining it's legality will convince him to leave me be, just because "I" know the law. LMAO

I'm curious "bdsmchs", how many times on the street have you been able to educate an ignorant LEO, stopping them from "busting" you because "you know the law"?

12voltguy
04-09-2009, 11:33 AM
Again, for those that helped with an answer, greatly appreciated.

For those that feel the need to puff their chest so they feel better about themselves...very impressive:thumbsup: Forums are full of people like you.

I'm sure if a LEO is foggy on the legality of my weapon, I'm sure my preaching and explaining it's legality will convince him to leave me be, just because "I" know the law. LMAO

I'm curious "bdsmchs", how many times on the street have you been able to educate an ignorant LEO, stopping them from "busting" you because "you know the law"?

I've read many threads here where people have done just that.........& gone home with there guns.

it's not chest puffing, it's info.
know the laws before you buy.
same with everything, know the rules beforehand, ignorance is no excuss;)

2c5s
04-09-2009, 11:38 AM
I've read many threads here where people have done just that.........& gone home with there guns.

it's not chest puffing, it's info.
know the laws before you buy.
same with everything, know the rules beforehand, ignorance is no excuss;)

Thanks, I forgot this is the internet. Everyone is rich, hung like a horse and shoot's in the 10 ring every shot.

hill billy
04-09-2009, 11:39 AM
Thanks, I forgot this is the internet. Everyone is rich, hung like a horse and shoot's in the 10 ring every shot.

I'm actually hung more like an elephant. He's right. You wouldn't walk in and buy a handgun without searching out the law first( I hope) Same for the AR.

sd_shooter
04-09-2009, 11:40 AM
The growing trend seems to be people who build OLL rifles first then ask about the legality after. What ever happened to doing your research and educating yourself first. People need to know the laws off the top of their head and be able to explain it clearly and not have to reference some sheet of paper.

But you must have a sheet of paper to begin with, right? You can't just say you read about something in a forum when confronting the LEO.

Anyone know of a definitive reference for the CA OLL issues? I now know the calguns OLL FAQ is obsolete - what else is there?

12voltguy
04-09-2009, 11:42 AM
Thanks, I forgot this is the internet. Everyone is rich, hung like a horse and shoot's in the 10 ring every shot.
:rolleyes:

2c5s
04-09-2009, 11:46 AM
I'm actually hung more like an elephant. He's right. You wouldn't walk in and buy a handgun without searching out the law first( I hope) Same for the AR.


So what you're saying is you KNOW every law on the books concerning owning or buying a weapon in Ca.? Wow, you guys are really smart!!

Army
04-09-2009, 11:48 AM
Huh? I'm not rich......

DDT
04-09-2009, 12:04 PM
I disagree, DDT.

Gun ownership, on it's own, carries much more responsibility for the average person than a non-owner. I feel that the proper mindset for being a good gun owner is to know the laws well enough to keep you out of jail and home asleep at night. That is why so many posters will bring up Machtinger's book.

I agree that reading Machtinger's book (How to Own a Gun & Stay Out of Jail) is a great step in the education of a new gun owner. Does his latest revision include OLL law?

There is a HUGE difference between helping to educate a newbie and putting someone down who asks a simple and perfectly reasonable question.


Go one step further. You would have to be living in a vacuum to not know that OLL's and AR's are a touchy subject in CA. I feel a responsible AR owner needs to know enough about the applicable laws to protect themselves, legally. It's more of a CYA and being responsible thing than anything else.

There are MANY MANY gun owners who have zero idea that OLLs and ARs are different than any other gun they can purchase in a gun store. I have a very good friend who I took to the Cow Palace gun show in January. He had no idea about the BB revolution, thought all ARs were illegal in CA. As a test I didn't tell him much and had him talk to the sellers. The one he talked to just told him that they have a BB which means they aren't AWs in CA and perfectly legal to own. Seems pretty reasonable. My buddy has a shotgun and a .40 handgun (HK I believe) he's not a gun nut but does shoot fairly regularly; mostly clay. This is probably quite a common scenario and there is no reason for the person to believe there is more to AR ownership than BB = Legal.


In a perfect world, other than being a safe gun owner, that should be all that is required of a gun owner, but, heck, we're talking California here, a less (lot less) than perfect world scenario. :TFH:

But you still can't expect someone to automatically know that there are special limits or convolutions for owning a particular firearm. I hope that very soon OLLs are so common that all you have to know is that BB=Legal (with 10 rd. mags.)

How much more welcome to you think the OP would have felt if the responses had been, "No, you can drop the magazine but OLLs are a very contentious area of law with a lot of cops not knowing the full law and confiscating legal guns. You should definitely search here for more about OLLs and feel free to ask more questions. You can get into REALLY SERIOUS trouble if you don't understand the laws."

DDT
04-09-2009, 12:05 PM
I'm actually hung more like an elephant. He's right. You wouldn't walk in and buy a handgun without searching out the law first( I hope) Same for the AR.

Absolutely I would. I also buy cars without first reading the safety laws.

CHS
04-09-2009, 1:07 PM
I'm curious "bdsmchs", how many times on the street have you been able to educate an ignorant LEO, stopping them from "busting" you because "you know the law"?

Every single day, actually.

I sell CA-Compliant AR's to LEO's on a daily basis. In fact, I did two of them this morning. I do not just sell someone an AR and collect my money and call it a day, however. I educate every single person who has questions about the laws as best and as thoroughly as I can. I spend extra time with the LEO's because they are the guys you will have a run-in with.

I don't just tell them that a bullet-button or a magazine lock makes everything alright. I tell them *WHY* it makes everything alright. I tell them *WHY* they can swap mags as long as they use 10rd mags only. I show them the flowchart from here at calguns, and I make sure they walk away with a pretty firm grasp of the law and how to be compliant.

ohsmily
04-09-2009, 1:13 PM
But you must have a sheet of paper to begin with, right? You can't just say you read about something in a forum when confronting the LEO.

Anyone know of a definitive reference for the CA OLL issues? I now know the calguns OLL FAQ is obsolete - what else is there?

I feel like I am reading a thread from 2005 or 2006. The Flow chart does a great job of including most of the info you need while still being dumbed down enough for most anyone to be able to follow it. In case you didn't notice, there is a link to it in one of the blue bars at the top of this forum. Here it is in case you missed it.

http://www.calguns.net/caawid/flowchart.pdf

P.S. Are you questioning the legality of BBs or are you just pointing out that the information is, in your opinion, difficult to access?

IGOTDIRT4U
04-09-2009, 1:17 PM
Thanks, I forgot this is the internet. Everyone is rich, hung like a horse and shoot's in the 10 ring every shot.

Wow, 44 posts and you are already blowing **** out your ***, insulting vendors, senior members and site originators.

Let's see how long this lasts.

Jicko
04-09-2009, 1:19 PM
And the memo that was written by a detective from Scramento PD explaining how the BB is legal helps a lot too.



Wow, 44 posts and you are already blowing **** out your ***, insulting vendors, senior members and site originators.

Let's see how long this lasts.

I don't think he even deserves to own an AR (he wouldn't have if not because of this very website and some of the people who posted on this little sh*tty thread of his).... I think at most, he deserves to just top load ....

IGOTDIRT4U
04-09-2009, 1:21 PM
Absolutely I would. I also buy cars without first reading the safety laws.


Well then, you absolutely disappoint me. There is gun ownership, and then there is responsible gun ownership. Guns kill. The added danger I would think would make the average citizen cognizant that added common sense and responsibility might be in order.

As to Machtinger's book, I was not referring to OLL's in that book. That (OLL's) were the subject of second paragraph in my post.

IGOTDIRT4U
04-09-2009, 1:22 PM
I don't think he even deserves to own an AR (he wouldn't have if not because of this very website and some of the people who posted on this little sh*tty thread of his).... I think at most, he deserves to just top load ....


Just found something to add to my sig!

2c5s
04-09-2009, 1:25 PM
Every single day, actually.

I sell CA-Compliant AR's to LEO's on a daily basis. In fact, I did two of them this morning. I do not just sell someone an AR and collect my money and call it a day, however. I educate every single person who has questions about the laws as best and as thoroughly as I can. I spend extra time with the LEO's because they are the guys you will have a run-in with.

I don't just tell them that a bullet-button or a magazine lock makes everything alright. I tell them *WHY* it makes everything alright. I tell them *WHY* they can swap mags as long as they use 10rd mags only. I show them the flowchart from here at calguns, and I make sure they walk away with a pretty firm grasp of the law and how to be compliant.

When you quote a question, try reading it before you answer.

2c5s
04-09-2009, 1:35 PM
don't think he even deserves to own an AR (he wouldn't have if not because of this very website and some of the people who posted on this little sh*tty thread of his).... I think at most, he deserves to just top load ....

Those are pretty big assumptions. Are you one of those gunguys that thinks a 10 round AR is the second coming? You guys need to get a life.

2c5s
04-09-2009, 1:37 PM
Wow, 44 posts and you are already blowing **** out your ***, insulting vendors, senior members and site originators.

Let's see how long this lasts.

I forgot, post count means something in the fairytail land of internet forums. Are you on calguns 24/7?

Jicko
04-09-2009, 1:50 PM
Those are pretty big assumptions. Are you one of those gunguys that thinks a 10 round AR is the second coming? You guys need to get a life.

No big assumptions...

Without calguns, there will be no OLL...

Without OLL, there will be no BB...

Then you wouldn't have that very OLL-AR that you have right now that is equipped with a BB....

:eek:

ohsmily
04-09-2009, 2:01 PM
Those are pretty big assumptions. Are you one of those gunguys that thinks a 10 round AR is the second coming? You guys need to get a life.

Why are you confining yourself to 10 round ARs???? Did you not acquire any high caps before the ban.....whoops.

sd_shooter
04-09-2009, 2:09 PM
P.S. Are you questioning the legality of BBs or are you just pointing out that the information is, in your opinion, difficult to access?

You got it, I'm saying the info is not easy to find. You're the only one who's posted a reference for their opinion. Most will just say "do your own research" and "you better watch out - it could be a FELONY if you don't know what you're doing!" WTH? The OP asked a simple question and everyone dogpiled on him.

Now the flowchart is helpful and it's a good example of the kind of people need. However, it still doesn't directly answer the OP's question. There is still conflicting information on calguns regarding when you're allowed to take out the magazine (ie. are you supposed take off the pistol grip first?)

Maybe people are getting ticked off because even they aren't sure!

PS. I'd like to build an OLL rifle and I'd really like to see this thread resolved, eg. someone comes up with a solid reference or precedent for swapping mags at the range when a BB is installed.

tactic101
04-09-2009, 2:10 PM
[QUOTE=bdsmchs;2292101]

To the OP:

Why on earth did you buy and install a bullet-button without first understanding the law and the function of the device? The entire POINT of the bullet-button is to free you from having to top-load, based upon the California definition of a detachable magazine. A bullet-button equipped rifle CANNOT accept a detachable magazine.

QUOTE]

Do you feel better now asserting your superiority? :sleeping::sleeping::sleeping:

I had the same question here after getting mine, due to somebody's uninformed warning about never detaching the mag. Don't feel bad.

2c5s
04-09-2009, 2:11 PM
No big assumptions...

Without calguns, there will be no OLL...

Without OLL, there will be no BB...

Then you wouldn't have that very OLL-AR that you have right now that is equipped with a BB....

:eek:

"I don't think he even deserves to own an AR (he wouldn't have if not because of this very website and some of the people who posted on this little thread of his).... I think at most, he deserves to just top load .... "

Like I said, big assumption. So you think just because I joined calguns last year that I'm new to the gun world and AR's?

Some of you guys are the same guys you complain about turning people off to the gun world. Good job!!!!:thumbsup:

Check your fragile ego's and take a good look at how you respond to people asking for information. Shame on me, I know you sr. calguns members were born with all your gun law knowledge and never asked anyone a question for clarification.

rkt88edmo
04-09-2009, 2:17 PM
Keep reading and make sure you understand each box on the flowchart - you'll get there.

PS. I'd like to build an OLL rifle and I'd really like to see this thread resolved, eg. someone comes up with a solid reference or precedent for swapping mags at the range when a BB is installed.

Sgt Raven
04-09-2009, 2:17 PM
Why do you assume that he built his OLL rather than simply bought it at a gun show or a gun shop? You and I may know how important it is to understand the risks of owning an OLL but if someone just walks into a gun shop and sees a nice shiny black rifle there is no reason they would know the legal risks of owning it. A nice polite response and welcome will get us a lot more friends than condescension.


I've worked for a few dealers when they come to local gun shows and I explain to everyone I talk to how and why a BB or MM equipped AR is legal. I make sure they understand to never put a larger than 10 round mag in a BB AR and if they have regular mags why they want a MM build. There is so much FUD out there I want them to understand why anything I sell is legal :thumbsup:

ohsmily
04-09-2009, 2:41 PM
You got it, I'm saying the info is not easy to find. You're the only one who's posted a reference for their opinion. Most will just say "do your own research" and "you better watch out - it could be a FELONY if you don't know what you're doing!" WTH? The OP asked a simple question and everyone dogpiled on him.

Now the flowchart is helpful and it's a good example of the kind of people need. However, it still doesn't directly answer the OP's question. There is still conflicting information on calguns regarding when you're allowed to take out the magazine (ie. are you supposed take off the pistol grip first?)

Maybe people are getting ticked off because even they aren't sure!

PS. I'd like to build an OLL rifle and I'd really like to see this thread resolved, eg. someone comes up with a solid reference or precedent for swapping mags at the range when a BB is installed.

You haven't read carefully. It is clear why a BB is legal to use and drop the magazines out of using a tool.

Here is the LEGAL definition that is CODIFIED of what a DETACHABLE magazine is:
CCR 11 § 5469
Detachable magazine” means any ammunition feeding
device that can be removed readily from the firearm with neither
disassembly of the firearm action nor use of a tool being required.
.
A bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool.

If it requires a tool to remove the magazine, it is NOT detachable within the law. When you reinsert the magazine, it can NOT be removed without the use of a tool, thus it is NOT detachable. That is why a rifle with a BB doesn't fall within the prohibition of 12276.1(a) and you are thus allowed to have "evil" features whether the magazine is actually inserted in the gun or not.

12276.1 (a) Notwithstanding PC section 12276, assault weapon shall also
mean the following: Rifles
(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a
detachable magazine (a) and any one of the following:
(A) A pistol grip
(B) A thumbhole stock.
(C) A folding or telescoping stock.
(D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(E) A flash suppressor.
(F) A forward pistol grip.

Get it?

Jicko
04-09-2009, 3:27 PM
Newbie thread.... follows my signature....

Justintoxicated
04-09-2009, 3:34 PM
Just ordered the book "Own a Gun & Stay Out of Jail". Thanks for the recommendation.

hoffmang
04-09-2009, 3:53 PM
I invinted the modern bullet button. I also popularized the legal explanation. Much of that legal explanation can be found here:
http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/oal/OAL-280-Suspension-Notice-2007-09-21-w-Attachments.pdf

More of it will soon be confirmed based on this petition:
http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/oal/Underground_Rulemaking_CTA-2009-02-25-01.pdf

CGF has defended multiple individuals who were stopped with a correctly configured BB AR without a magazine in the magazine well. No DA has chosen to prosecute. There are strategic reasons that are much to the benefit of gunowners that we'd prefer to not publicize the name or case details just yet.

-Gene

sd_shooter
04-09-2009, 3:56 PM
Newbie thread.... follows my signature....

Thanks.

However, this memo from the calguns home page needs to be archived:

http://www.calguns.net/copmemo2.pdf

The information in it contradicts this newer memo:
http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/Sacramento-PD-OLL_Training_Bulletin-2008-11-18.pdf

sd_shooter
04-09-2009, 4:00 PM
I invinted the modern bullet button. I also popularized the legal explanation. Much of that legal explanation can be found here:
http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/oal/OAL-280-Suspension-Notice-2007-09-21-w-Attachments.pdf

More of it will soon be confirmed based on this petition:
http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/oal/Underground_Rulemaking_CTA-2009-02-25-01.pdf

CGF has defended multiple individuals who were stopped with a correctly configured BB AR without a magazine in the magazine well. No DA has chosen to prosecute. There are strategic reasons that are much to the benefit of gunowners that we'd prefer to not publicize the name or case details just yet.

-Gene

Thanks! :thumbsup:

HavasuBum
04-09-2009, 4:21 PM
[QUOTE=bdsmchs;2292101]

To the OP:

Why on earth did you buy and install a bullet-button without first understanding the law and the function of the device? The entire POINT of the bullet-button is to free you from having to top-load, based upon the California definition of a detachable magazine. A bullet-button equipped rifle CANNOT accept a detachable magazine.

QUOTE]

Do you feel better now asserting your superiority?
:sleeping::sleeping::sleeping:


If this message board allows flamers like this it will certainly inhibit folks from asking questions for fear of this type of answer. I suggest we put an end to this so people can ask questions without fear of being made to feel like an ***. We were all new to any type of experience at one time.

ohsmily
04-09-2009, 5:55 PM
If this message board allows flamers like this it will certainly inhibit folks from asking questions for fear of this type of answer. I suggest we put an end to this so people can ask questions without fear of being made to feel like an ***. We were all new to any type of experience at one time.

Or maybe it will cause would-be new posters to use the search function and spend some time reading and researching instead of posting a thread with a question that has been asked and answered many times over.

In any case, it didn't stop you from posting a whining post.

CHS
04-09-2009, 6:33 PM
If this message board allows flamers like this it will certainly inhibit folks from asking questions for fear of this type of answer. I suggest we put an end to this so people can ask questions without fear of being made to feel like an ***. We were all new to any type of experience at one time.

My post was far from a flame. And my question still stands:

"Why on earth would anyone decide to purchase an OLL AR with a bullet button without first understanding how and why it is legal?".

rtlltj
04-09-2009, 7:10 PM
Yea I find it funny how people are getting defensive over not knowing the laws when people are basically telling them it's for their own good. You know what, build your AR and don't bother to learn the laws, because I'd rather be the person who actually knew why they were wrongfully arrested then the guy who comes on here crying about his arrest but didn't even know the law. If calguns is going to help support our members with legal trouble I'd rather they help the people who took the time to do their homework.

Seesm
04-09-2009, 8:37 PM
yes you can release the magazine if you have a properly installed and operating Bullet Button.

Those still using P50s MUST topload.

I agree... But don't you "think" if used "properly" you SHOULD be able to use the P50 since you do need a "tool" (allen key) to make it unlock the button to load your next mag...?

I have BB's but just thinking if used improperly they are illegal (p50) but is used right your still following the letter of the law.

The idea is not to have over 10 rds and not be able to load it fast.

Again if used properly the Prince 50 is just like the BB.

HavasuBum
04-09-2009, 8:37 PM
GM Trucks.com and RV.NET have the same bullies I see in this message room. After 32 years in law enforcement I fully know all about gun laws my friends. Just because I'm new here, doesn't mean I'm inexperienced. You want to keep people out of the grease, then help them through this idiotic maze of gun laws in this lousy state. Treat them like sh*t and you are hurting the cause. Does that sound defensive rtlltj?

glock_this
04-09-2009, 8:45 PM
Yea I find it funny how people are getting defensive over not knowing the laws when people are basically telling them it's for their own good.

I think your missing the point here... it is much more about the presentation than the message. I have, on several occasions, publicly been made to feel stupid here by someone who knows more, for no real sake then to make me look stupid, when seeking clarification.

often, it is the presentation of the response that makes one defensive and not the material presented. there is often a bit to much smug elitist feeling attitude that creeps through in some peoples responses that sets off this chain of banter.

but then, another guy will give the exact same answer, 10 times better presentation with no attitude and smugness and all moves forward and everyone is happy.

ohsmily
04-09-2009, 9:10 PM
I agree... But don't you "think" if used "properly" you SHOULD be able to use the P50 since you do need a "tool" (allen key) to make it unlock the button to load your next mag...?

I have BB's but just thinking if used improperly they are illegal (p50) but is used right your still following the letter of the law.

The idea is not to have over 10 rds and not be able to load it fast.

Again if used properly the Prince 50 is just like the BB.

I didn't understand any of this. What are you trying to say about the original Prince 50?????

Prowler
04-09-2009, 9:25 PM
I'm curious, why don't more CG's just use the MonsterMan Grip? It makes it much easier to solve the AR loading issue and the high cap mag issue, presuming that they're pre-ban mags. Additionally, wouldn't it be safer just to transport with a 10 round mag, even if you have pre-ban high cap mags? Saves you the additional headache of arguing your point to a LEO. More insurance, especially if it costs you nothing, is better in the long run. Just my .02.

DDT
04-09-2009, 9:55 PM
I agree... But don't you "think" if used "properly" you SHOULD be able to use the P50 since you do need a "tool" (allen key) to make it unlock the button to load your next mag...?

Doing this is a felony. Plain and simple.

Seesm
04-09-2009, 10:29 PM
Or maybe it will cause would-be new posters to use the search function and spend some time reading and researching instead of posting a thread with a question that has been asked and answered many times over.

In any case, it didn't stop you from posting a whining post.

Hey that is not fair the searchs till does NOT work as it should... So this kind of post will happen AGAIN and AGAIN until the search function works easier....

And Ohsmily and DDT what I saying is it should not be a felony if you use a P50 mag release correctly because you do use a tool to loosen it up and tighten it back down for the mag release to work like std... I do understand leaving it loose is a felony, I just think if you use it right it shoudl not be a problem... but again I use a BB so forget it... :)

fleegman
04-09-2009, 11:58 PM
Are we allowed to remove the magazine at the range to load the weapon with the bullet button? I have been loading them from the top and just read a post about a guy releasing the mag and loading in the traditional manner. I guess I feel stupid as hell if that's the case.

Last summer I took multiple firearms to "A Place to Shoot", including a BB equipped SIG556. The RO told me they don't allow dropping the mag to reload. I never went back.

IGOTDIRT4U
04-10-2009, 7:45 AM
Yea I find it funny how people are getting defensive over not knowing the laws when people are basically telling them it's for their own good. You know what, build your AR and don't bother to learn the laws, because I'd rather be the person who actually knew why they were wrongfully arrested then the guy who comes on here crying about his arrest but didn't even know the law. If calguns is going to help support our members with legal trouble I'd rather they help the people who took the time to do their homework.

What a novel concept.

IGOTDIRT4U
04-10-2009, 7:52 AM
GM Trucks.com and RV.NET have the same bullies I see in this message room. After 32 years in law enforcement I fully know all about gun laws my friends. Just because I'm new here, doesn't mean I'm inexperienced. You want to keep people out of the grease, then help them through this idiotic maze of gun laws in this lousy state. Treat them like sh*t and you are hurting the cause. Does that sound defensive rtlltj?


I call BS. RV.NET is owned by Good Sam group and is HEAVILY moderated, way more so than here. (I'm a lifetime member of Good Sam and on a GS council, as well) If you think that there are bullies on RV.NET, then your thin skinned soul would not make it ten seconds on many other forums.

Here, I got a suggestion. Log into the AR15.com forum and see how you get treated with that type of attitaude or the OP's type of question. You'll be back here in one day begging for attention.

IGOTDIRT4U
04-10-2009, 7:56 AM
Hey that is not fair the searchs till does NOT work as it should... So this kind of post will happen AGAIN and AGAIN until the search function works easier....

And Ohsmily and DDT what I saying is it should not be a felony if you use a P50 mag release correctly because you do use a tool to loosen it up and tighten it back down for the mag release to work like std... I do understand leaving it loose is a felony, I just think if you use it right it shoudl not be a problem... but again I use a BB so forget it... :)

The difference is, when you back out the set screw on the P50, the button then can be freely pushed at any time to drop the mag, essentially putting the mag release button into an illegal mode. You used a tool to get it to that point, but no further tool is required to KEEP pushing the button to release mags. A tool needs to be used to release the mag, not just free up the mechanism of the button so it can be pushed.

HavasuBum
04-10-2009, 7:58 AM
I call BS. RV.NET is owned by Good Sam group and is HEAVILY moderated, way more so than here. (I'm a lifetime member of Good Sam and on a GS council, as well) If you think that there are bullies on RV.NET, then your thin skinned soul would not make it ten seconds on many other forums.

Here, I got a suggestion. Log into the AR15.com forum and see how you get treated with that type of attitaude or the OP's type of question. You'll be back here in one day begging for attention.

Actually my friend, RV NET is owned by the Affinity group, so perhaps you need to do some homework. I don't think treating people with civility is being thinned skinned. You want to be an AH and a bully be my guest. However, you are hurting your own cause by intimidating people into not asking questions. How stupid is that?

BTW for the know-it-all's here, perhaps you could show us in writing where it is not required to breach load a fixed magazine or do you want to continue to shoot from the hip.

IGOTDIRT4U
04-10-2009, 8:08 AM
Actually my friend, RV NET is owned by the Affinity group, so perhaps you need to do some homework. I don't think treating people with civility is being thinned skinned. You want to be an AH and a bully be my guest. However, you are hurting your own cause by intimidating people into not asking questions. How stupid is that?

BTW for the know-it-all's here, perhaps you could show us in writing where it is not required to breach load a fixed magazine or do you want to continue to shoot from the hip.

Gee, and who owns the Affinity Group?!? What Affinity does not tell you is GS and Camping World are their two biggest shareholders. Funny how my posts on the GS forum appear also on RV.NET. FAIL.

bdsmach puts it best when he questions why someone wuold not know the basics of the BB BEFORE purchasing and using it. These guns are not like buying a HO electric race car set, rip open the box, slap the track together, and ten minutes later when something does not work right, you then read the directions. These are killing machines, with high legal and societal implications if used incorrectly. The obligations and self discipline of gun ownership is very high. Under the presumption you have 32 years law enforcement experience, I would think that responsible and legal gun ownership would be a paramount concern to you.

As to the second question, hit search.

CHS
04-10-2009, 8:10 AM
BTW for the know-it-all's here, perhaps you could show us in writing where it is not required to breach load a fixed magazine or do you want to continue to shoot from the hip.

The law is written in such a way to instruct us as to what we CAN'T do, not what we can do.

Since no where in the law does it say or imply that we CAN'T drop mags freely with a bullet-button device, it is therefore automatically legal.

That's not shooting from the hip, that is legal fact.

Everything you need to arrive to the same conclusion is located on the flowchart.

Vanguard
04-10-2009, 8:41 AM
Again, for those that helped with an answer, greatly appreciated.

For those that feel the need to puff their chest so they feel better about themselves...very impressive:thumbsup: Forums are full of people like you.

I'm sure if a LEO is foggy on the legality of my weapon, I'm sure my preaching and explaining it's legality will convince him to leave me be, just because "I" know the law. LMAO

I'm curious "bdsmchs", how many times on the street have you been able to educate an ignorant LEO, stopping them from "busting" you because "you know the law"?


Bingo, just ignore the internet lawyers and elitist jackholes. They're only impressing themselves. That being said, it is good to know the law, it is good to be educated. You posted here because you had a legitimate question and were actively working to find out the truth about the law. That should be enough for the know-it-all bozos.

Yes, you can drop the mags, with a tool, from the weapon if you have a properly installed BB. This is because you wouldn't be able to remove the next mag you pop in without using a tool also. As long as you have to use a tool EVERY time you remove the mag, it's not illegal. :thumbsup:

sd_shooter
04-10-2009, 8:42 AM
The law is written in such a way to instruct us as to what we CAN'T do, not what we can do.

Since no where in the law does it say or imply that we CAN'T drop mags freely with a bullet-button device, it is therefore automatically legal.

That's not shooting from the hip, that is legal fact.

Everything you need to arrive to the same conclusion is located on the flowchart.

The BB issue is not obvious from only reading the flowchart. For example, in this very thread it has been pointed out that using Prince50 will not allow you drop mags at the range. Yet the flowchart makes it seem like a Prince50 is ok: look at the big green box that mentions 5469.

One needs to read a lot more than just the flowchart before arriving at the conclusion that dropping mags with a BB is ok.

ohsmily
04-10-2009, 8:42 AM
BTW for the know-it-all's here, perhaps you could show us in writing where it is not required to breach load a fixed magazine or do you want to continue to shoot from the hip.

What???? "Breach" load (It is BREECH by the way)? We aren't talking about muzzle loaders here. What are you talking about. All of the guns we are talking about are breech loaders. If you meant TOP LOAD and why you don't have to do it, I can't understand why you don't understand it....seriously...it has already been explained twice in this thread....please see posts 47 and 50. If you don't get it, then we can't help you.

ohsmily
04-10-2009, 8:46 AM
The BB issue is not obvious from only reading the flowchart. For example, in this very thread it has been pointed out that using Prince50 will not allow you drop mags at the range. Yet the flowchart makes it seem like a Prince50 is ok: look at the big green box that mentions 5469.

One needs to read a lot more than just the flowchart before arriving at the conclusion that dropping mags with a BB is ok.

You are getting it screwed up because you don't understand that the original PRINCE 50 device is not a bullet button type device. It is plainly a magazine lock, but when you loosen it to remove the magazine, it becomes a standard magazine release. The original Prince 50 design requires that you top load the rifle if you have any evil features. The Prince 50 guy later made a BB device. That is where your confusion is. Got it????

DDT
04-10-2009, 8:51 AM
And Ohsmily and DDT what I saying is it should not be a felony if you use a P50 mag release correctly because you do use a tool to loosen it up and tighten it back down for the mag release to work like std... I do understand leaving it loose is a felony, I just think if you use it right it shoudl not be a problem... but again I use a BB so forget it... :)

I'm glad that you use a BB. What you are suggesting people do with a P50 is a FELONY. If the set screw is loosened, even for a moment while there are evil features on the rifle you have just created an AW per California law. Telling people it is OK to ever drop a mag with a P50 equipped rifle in CA is a seriously dangerous thing to do. It isn't just a matter of "leaving it loose" the mere act of dropping the magazine creates a felony. This includes at home while you are cleaning the weapon. This is why P50s are a VERY BAD idea today. It was wonderful when it was the only option but you are sliding down a razor blade using one today.

sd_shooter
04-10-2009, 8:53 AM
You are getting it screwed up because you don't understand that the original PRINCE 50 device is not a bullet button type device. It is plainly a magazine lock, but when you loosen it to remove the magazine, it becomes a standard magazine release. The original Prince 50 design requires that you top load the rifle if you have any evil features. The Prince 50 guy later made a BB device. That is where your confusion is. Got it????

Your post clearly illustrates my point - the BB issue is not clear from the flowchart alone.

After you log off, take a chill pill and take a few bites of humble pie.

Newbie out,
I changed my mind, I'm back

ohsmily
04-10-2009, 8:55 AM
Newbie out,

Finally.

IGOTDIRT4U
04-10-2009, 9:02 AM
Finally.

I was hoping for 'newbie gone'.

For those that have difficulty with reading comprehension, the 'big green box' on the AW flowchart does not describe how to use a BB versus a P50, just that if one or the other is installed, the magazine then is fixed, therefore not detachable. I just read through it again and it is very clear.

It seems like some here want the chart to read that USING the BB, Radlock, P50, etc., to release the mag is allowed. Nowhere in the AW flowchart does it say that; it only refers to having one installed. (Assuming, of course, you properly installed one, which of course would require you to research the product a bit and read the instructions, wait, that would make sense, so let's drop common sense and just go buy a BB and then figure out how to use it)

IGOTDIRT4U
04-10-2009, 9:09 AM
I'm glad that you use a BB. What you are suggesting people do with a P50 is a FELONY. If the set screw is loosened, even for a moment while there are evil features on the rifle you have just created an AW per California law. Telling people it is OK to ever drop a mag with a P50 equipped rifle in CA is a seriously dangerous thing to do. It isn't just a matter of "leaving it loose" the mere act of dropping the magazine creates a felony. This includes at home while you are cleaning the weapon. This is why P50s are a VERY BAD idea today. It was wonderful when it was the only option but you are sliding down a razor blade using one today.

Oddly enough, there were/are a few Wilson Combat fully built up AR15's imported into CA, and in order to get them here they were installed with P50's out of state. Rumor is that WC wanted them done this way as a condition of importing them. I know of one purchaser of this gun, and when he bought it he was told very clearly by the gun store never to back out the P50 set screw even to clean it as it then would be an illegal AW in CA. What a novel concept; a responsible gun store, informing the customer on the legalities of the gun he just bought. And a forum vendor, too! Needless to say, a BB was installed shortly after.

sd_shooter
04-10-2009, 9:15 AM
I was hoping for 'newbie gone'.


No one's making you read newbie posts.

Would you rather have fewer shooters and fewer calguns readers?


For those that have difficulty with reading comprehension, the 'big green box' on the AW flowchart does not describe how to use a BB versus a P50, just that if one or the other is installed, the magazine then is fixed, therefore not detachable. I just read through it again and it is very clear.


Yes it's quite clear for owning a BB equipped rifle.


Nowhere in the AW flowchart does it say that; it only refers to having one installed. (Assuming, of course, you properly installed one, which of course would require you to research the product a bit and read the instructions, wait, that would make sense, so let's drop common sense and just go buy a BB and then figure out how to use it)

At least we all agree on that. Now let's get back to the topic of answering the OP's post.

Gene has been practically the only to give a calm answer about this. :thumbsup:

Jicko
04-10-2009, 9:32 AM
For those that have difficulty with reading comprehension, the 'big green box' on the AW flowchart does not describe how to use a BB versus a P50, just that if one or the other is installed, the magazine then is fixed, therefore not detachable. I just read through it again and it is very clear.

Yes it's quite clear for owning a BB equipped rifle.


If people CARES to READ the instruction on the P50, it CLEARLY stated that how one should use the P50.

IGOTDIRT4U
04-10-2009, 9:56 AM
No one's making you read newbie posts.

Would you rather have fewer shooters and fewer calguns readers?



Yes it's quite clear for owning a BB equipped rifle.



At least we all agree on that. Now let's get back to the topic of answering the OP's post.

Gene has been practically the only to give a calm answer about this. :thumbsup:

His answer has been given half a dozen times here. What more do you want? And the flowchart is very clear. What more do you want? :beatdeadhorse5:

So far I have not seen any productive suggestions from you for either the original question nor as to how to improve the flowchart. :gene:

I'm sticking with my sig line, thanks Jicko.

HavasuBum
04-10-2009, 10:11 AM
Gee, and who owns the Affinity Group?!? What Affinity does not tell you is GS and Camping World are their two biggest shareholders. Funny how my posts on the GS forum appear also on RV.NET. FAIL.

bdsmach puts it best when he questions why someone wuold not know the basics of the BB BEFORE purchasing and using it. These guns are not like buying a HO electric race car set, rip open the box, slap the track together, and ten minutes later when something does not work right, you then read the directions. These are killing machines, with high legal and societal implications if used incorrectly. The obligations and self discipline of gun ownership is very high. Under the presumption you have 32 years law enforcement experience, I would think that responsible and legal gun ownership would be a paramount concern to you.

As to the second question, hit search.

I see clearly now. These guns are such a killing machine that it is important for you a few others to treat people with disrespect. Since you have never attended a LE academy and I have, let me fill you in. Academy's are a high stress environment that teaches students to treat people with civility and patience. The only place where the stress is relaxed is in the EVOC (driving) course and firing range. Pushing people and intimidating them while using either form of deadly instrument can and does lead to mistakes.

Your sarcastic demeanor is amazing to me. You seem to have the inability to express yourself without putting others down (e.g. FAIL). What you don't seem to like here is that someone is standing up to a bully with a superiority complex who hides behind a computer.

Responsible gun ownership is extremely important to me as well. Why on earth would you act like a bully when someone is asking a legitimate question that IS NOT written anywhere in law? Teach them my friend and encourage open discussion and people will learn. The only stupid question is one that hasn't been asked.

Read here about Affinity. http://www.affinitygroup.com/history/history2.cfm

sd_shooter
04-10-2009, 10:16 AM
So far I have not seen any productive suggestions from you for either the original question nor as to how to improve the flowchart. :gene:


Sure you have, look back at post #51 for example.

Thanks to Jicko, Gene and Ohsmily for providing input. Jicko's FAQ link is quite good.

DDT
04-10-2009, 10:20 AM
Sure you have, look back at post #51 for example.

Thanks to Jicko, Gene and Ohsmily for providing input. Jicko's FAQ link is quite good.

Hey! I give a very clear, concise, immediate answer and get no love?

LOL..... enjoy your rifle and try to stick around. It's not as bad as this particular thread seems.

IGOTDIRT4U
04-10-2009, 10:22 AM
I was waiting for you to post that. Here is what is on their history.

"1992 The Good Sam Club, Trailer Life Enterprises, Coast to Coast and The Golf Card are reorganized under the umbrella company Affinity Group, Inc."

We, those of us who volunteer for GS Councils, know that the "umbrella" company is only that; like a holding company. It's chief owners are GS and Camping World. Using the word Affinity Group is something the creators of Affinity use to describe the whole of their holdings, but it is not the company itself. In fact, there is no stock!

As to the rest, I can't help the helpless. You're on your own.

DDT
04-10-2009, 10:23 AM
Oddly enough, there were/are a few Wilson Combat fully built up AR15's imported into CA, and in order to get them here they were installed with P50's out of state. Rumor is that WC wanted them done this way as a condition of importing them. I know of one purchaser of this gun, and when he bought it he was told very clearly by the gun store never to back out the P50 set screw even to clean it as it then would be an illegal AW in CA. What a novel concept; a responsible gun store, informing the customer on the legalities of the gun he just bought. And a forum vendor, too! Needless to say, a BB was installed shortly after.

Exactly, and this is the way it SHOULD be. There really should be no need to study law to exercise your 2A rights in a middle of the road manner. Much like your 1A rights. the problem is that there are so many ARs out there now they are becoming almost mainstream again in CA (thankfully) but there is still a lot of FUD in the LE community. I think this thread shows that we are on the brink of ARs becoming very little different than a shotgun or 10/22 in CA again.

It's a "good thing."

HavasuBum
04-10-2009, 10:24 AM
I was waiting for you to post that. Here is what is on their history.

"1992 The Good Sam Club, Trailer Life Enterprises, Coast to Coast and The Golf Card are reorganized under the umbrella company Affinity Group, Inc."

We, those of us who volunteer for GS Councils, know that the "umbrella" company is only that; like a holding company. It's chief owners are GS and Camping World. Using the word Affinity Group is something the creators of Affinity use to describe the whole of their holdings, but it is not the company itself. In fact, there is no stock!

As to the rest, I can't help the helpless. You're on your own.


Whatever!

GaryPowersLives
04-10-2009, 10:29 AM
I usually just lurk here, but to some of the newer members, welcome, but please, your attitudes are every bit as bad as the ones you are complaining about. For God's sake, you are arguing about arguing! As a woman shooter, I get my share of attitude, but those with 3, or even 44 or 105 posts, almost half of them generated on this thread, please, read more before posting. I did, we all had to as newcomers, but it sure makes the learning curve much easier.

I guess some people would complain if they were hung with a new rope.

Or, as my mother would say, "Some people will gag on a gnat and swallow an elephant.

Back to lurking.

Kestryll
04-10-2009, 2:39 PM
Okay, everybody step back and chill out.

If the sniping and rude behavior continues I'm going to make sure this thread stays calm in a manner old and new will not like.

Newbies, are you asking a question or trying to get an answer that fits your preconceived ideas?

Older members, are you trying to educate or display your knowledge?

Think about what you are posting and WHY.

Kestryll
04-10-2009, 2:44 PM
To the OP:

Why on earth did you buy and install a bullet-button without first understanding the law and the function of the device? The entire POINT of the bullet-button is to free you from having to top-load, based upon the California definition of a detachable magazine. A bullet-button equipped rifle CANNOT accept a detachable magazine.



Do you feel better now asserting your superiority?
:sleeping::sleeping::sleeping:


If this message board allows flamers like this it will certainly inhibit folks from asking questions for fear of this type of answer. I suggest we put an end to this so people can ask questions without fear of being made to feel like an ***. We were all new to any type of experience at one time.

Havasu, I have a question for you.

Of the two posts above which do you consider to be the more rude and closest to a personal attack?
This one:
To the OP:
Why on earth did you buy and install a bullet-button without first understanding the law and the function of the device? The entire POINT of the bullet-button is to free you from having to top-load, based upon the California definition of a detachable magazine. A bullet-button equipped rifle CANNOT accept a detachable magazine.

Or this one:
Do you feel better now asserting your superiority?
:sleeping::sleeping::sleeping:

grahlaika
04-10-2009, 2:57 PM
Forgive my intrusion into this thread, but is there a laminated version of the AW flowchart that members can either purchase, or perhaps could be handed out at gun shows. I think having one of each of those with every questionable rifle would go a long way to answer some of the OP's concerns. That's what I'll do, so in the event I get stopped, I have the relevant portions of the law right there as a reference.

Again, don't mean to do a fly-by here. Just wondering.

IGOTDIRT4U
04-10-2009, 3:17 PM
Forgive my intrusion into this thread, but is there a laminated version of the AW flowchart that members can either purchase, or perhaps could be handed out at gun shows. I think having one of each of those with every questionable rifle would go a long way to answer some of the OP's concerns. That's what I'll do, so in the event I get stopped, I have the relevant portions of the law right there as a reference.

Again, don't mean to do a fly-by here. Just wondering.

Some people have printed it out in color and had their's laminated. Having them available for forum members would likely incur a cost, but you did ask if they can be purchased. At one time I thought that laminated ones were being discussed as a forum "gift shop" item to buy, IIRC.

It's been printed for some LEO departments, though. There was a thread with a pic of a NorCal department that had them on their cubicle walls! Good stuff.

HavasuBum
04-10-2009, 3:20 PM
Havasu, I have a question for you.

Of the two posts above which do you consider to be the more rude and closest to a personal attack?
This one:


Or this one:

Kestryll

Thank you for your attention to this thread. I think a more important question revolves around the evolution of why the OP made the reactionary comments. If I recall correctly, his question was answered and in a post he said, "Thanks Guys". Then there was a barrage of rude comments. Why would someone want to ask questions he/she seems trivial after reading this thread? I will leave the judgment as to who is the most culpable to you.

Thanks

Kestryll
04-10-2009, 3:29 PM
Kestryll

Thank you for your attention to this thread. I think a more important question revolves around the evolution of why the OP made the reactionary comments. If I recall correctly, his question was answered and in a post he said, "Thanks Guys". Then there was a barrage of rude comments. Why would someone want to ask questions he/she seems trivial after reading this thread? I will leave the judgment as to who is the most culpable to you.

Thanks

The problem is that we do not judge on who is most culpable.
Everyone on this forum is responsible for their own posts and no one else's.
By the same token no one else is responsible for what someone else types.
No one can make anyone reply or post anything, we all make the choice to type out a response and take responsibility for what we type.

If bdsmch's post was a problem rather then resorting to rude comments or now deleted insults the better course would have been to use the Report Post icon in the upper right hand corner to alert the Staff and let them deal with it. By responding as he did 2c5s escalated the issue.

So, given that both individuals, of their own accord, made a choice to post what they did which is the more rude and personal?

HavasuBum
04-10-2009, 3:52 PM
The problem is that we do not judge on who is most culpable.
Everyone on this forum is responsible for their own posts and no one else's.
By the same token no one else is responsible for what someone else types.
No one can make anyone reply or post anything, we all make the choice to type out a response and take responsibility for what we type.

If bdsmch's post was a problem rather then resorting to rude comments or now deleted insults the better course would have been to use the Report Post icon in the upper right hand corner to alert the Staff and let them deal with it. By responding as he did 2c5s escalated the issue.

So, given that both individuals, of their own accord, made a choice to post what they did which is the more rude and personal?

The first post from bdsmch, since everything was fine until then. He made a stable situation unstable by calling the OP an idiot for asking the question in so many words. As a great actor once said: "He drew first blood". Is there any reason they BOTH weren't banned?

jtippins
04-10-2009, 4:06 PM
On the issue of LE... last week there was a person who had his AR taken with the rest of his guns by LE because the officer saw him remove the mag with a .223 cartridge and said it was not a tool. It is at the discretion of the officer I think to define things. Now he is looking at mega $$ to get his firearms back. It would be nice to have things clarified for everyone's sake. LE and gun owners because both want to uphold the law.

HavasuBum
04-10-2009, 4:08 PM
On the issue of LE... last week there was a person who had his AR taken with the rest of his guns by LE because the officer saw him remove the mag with a .223 cartridge and said it was not a tool. It is at the discretion of the officer I think to define things. Now he is looking at mega $$ to get his firearms back. It would be nice to have things clarified for everyone's sake. LE and gun owners because both want to uphold the law.

Gentlemen

I rest my case. Blowing off the OP's original question was not a wise thing to do. This issue needs resolution.

elSquid
04-10-2009, 4:31 PM
On the issue of LE... last week there was a person who had his AR taken with the rest of his guns by LE because the officer saw him remove the mag with a .223 cartridge and said it was not a tool. It is at the discretion of the officer I think to define things. Now he is looking at mega $$ to get his firearms back. It would be nice to have things clarified for everyone's sake. LE and gun owners because both want to uphold the law.

Ohsmily provided a reference earlier in this thread, which can be checked.

http://ccr.oal.ca.gov/linkedslice/default.asp?SP=CCR-1000&Action=Welcome


BARCLAYS OFFICIAL CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS
TITLE 11. LAW
DIVISION 5. FIREARMS REGULATIONS
CHAPTER 39. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REGULATIONS FOR ASSAULT WEAPONS AND LARGE
CAPACITY MAGAZINES
ARTICLE 2. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED TO IDENTIFY ASSAULT WEAPONS
This database is current through 3/27/09, Register 2009, No. 13
§ 5469. Definitions.


The following definitions apply to terms used in the identification of assault weapons pursuant to Penal Code section 12276.1:
(a) "detachable magazine" means any ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with neither disassembly of the firearm action nor use of a tool being required. A bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool. Ammunition feeding device includes any belted or linked ammunition, but does not include clips, en bloc clips, or stripper clips that load cartridges into the magazine.

The officer was wrong.

-- Michael

HavasuBum
04-10-2009, 4:35 PM
Ohsmily provided a reference earlier in this thread, which can be checked.

http://ccr.oal.ca.gov/linkedslice/default.asp?SP=CCR-1000&Action=Welcome


BARCLAYS OFFICIAL CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS
TITLE 11. LAW
DIVISION 5. FIREARMS REGULATIONS
CHAPTER 39. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REGULATIONS FOR ASSAULT WEAPONS AND LARGE
CAPACITY MAGAZINES
ARTICLE 2. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED TO IDENTIFY ASSAULT WEAPONS
This database is current through 3/27/09, Register 2009, No. 13
§ 5469. Definitions.


The following definitions apply to terms used in the identification of assault weapons pursuant to Penal Code section 12276.1:
(a) "detachable magazine" means any ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with neither disassembly of the firearm action nor use of a tool being required. A bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool. Ammunition feeding device includes any belted or linked ammunition, but does not include clips, en bloc clips, or stripper clips that load cartridges into the magazine.

The officer was wrong.

-- Michael

All of these references only talk about the definition of a fixed magazine. It does not address how it is used in real life when fired.

elSquid
04-10-2009, 4:49 PM
All of these references only talk about the definition of a fixed magazine. It does not address how it is used in real life when fired.

I'm not sure how the act of firing would make a difference. The question is: at any point in time does the firearm in question satisfy the legal criteria for an AW?

12276.1. (a) Notwithstanding Section 12276, "assault weapon" shall also mean any of the following: (1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:

A BB equipped rifle with a magazine in place doesn't satisfy this criteria.

A BB equipped rifle with an empty magwell doesn't satisfy this criteria.

-- Michael

HavasuBum
04-10-2009, 5:08 PM
The problem with the definition is it addresses FIXED magazines. Anyone can interpret that when the shooter removes the magazine, tool or no tool, it no long complies with the definition of a non assault weapon. Therefore, the use of the weapon can defeat our purposes of making our AR's non assault weapons. Unfortunately, the law addresses the gun in a static state and not when it is actually used. That is why shooters are running into trouble when they do not breach load the rifle.

CHS
04-10-2009, 5:14 PM
The problem with the definition is it addresses FIXED magazines. Anyone can interpret that when the shooter removes the magazine, tool or no tool, it no long complies with the definition of a non assault weapon. Therefore, the use of the weapon can defeat our purposes of making our AR's non assault weapons. Unfortunately, the law addresses the gun in a static state and not when it is actually used. That is why shooters are running into trouble when they do not breach load the rifle.

Read the post below. It's very specific, and very accurate.


12276.1. (a) Notwithstanding Section 12276, "assault weapon" shall also mean any of the following: (1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:

A BB equipped rifle with a magazine in place doesn't satisfy this criteria.

A BB equipped rifle with an empty magwell doesn't satisfy this criteria.

elSquid
04-10-2009, 5:29 PM
The problem with the definition is it addresses FIXED magazines. Anyone can interpret that when the shooter removes the magazine, tool or no tool, it no long complies with the definition of a non assault weapon. Therefore, the use of the weapon can defeat our purposes of making our AR's non assault weapons. Unfortunately, the law addresses the gun in a static state and not when it is actually used. That is why shooters are running into trouble when they do not breach load the rifle.

If I may, I'll put the question back to you: what law does a BB equipped rifle with an empty magwell break?

12276.1 clearly states:

has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine

A BB equipped rifle - sans magazine - doesn't have "capacity" because as soon as a magazine is put in the magwell, it is locked into place. A tool is then required to remove it.

-- Michael

HavasuBum
04-10-2009, 5:29 PM
Yes it is very specific. I understand what you are saying and you're correct when the weapon is static. However, it can be argued that when a shooter removes the magazine to reload at the range, the weapon is now equipped with a detachable magazine and no longer enjoys the exclusion under the provisions of the law. I want the law to work in our favor. However, too many of us are running into trouble when we actually fire the weapon at the range. We need to fix this loophole so it is not so murky. I'm sure this is an unintended consequence of the patchwork quilt we call gun laws in our state. I suggest we address this issue in either legislation (not likely in today's climate with all the mass murders lately) or an AG's opinion.

elSquid
04-10-2009, 5:49 PM
Yes it is very specific. I understand what you are saying and you're correct when the weapon is static. However, it can be argued that when a shooter removes the magazine to reload at the range, the weapon is now equipped with a detachable magazine and no longer enjoys the exclusion under the provisions of the law.

Well, argue it then. :)

Let's take the same BB equipped rifle with an empty magwell.

Why would you argue that said rifle at the range is illegal while the same rifle in the same configuration sitting on a table at home is legal?

What does "static" mean, and where is that referenced in the AW regulations?

-- Michael

CHS
04-10-2009, 6:22 PM
However, it can be argued that when a shooter removes the magazine to reload at the range, the weapon is now equipped with a detachable magazine and no longer enjoys the exclusion under the provisions of the law.


If it can be argued, please come forward with your argument and reasoning why that would be illegal.

It has been pointed out, repeatedly, that a rifle with an empty magwell, but a bullet button installed, DOES NOT and CAN NOT have the capacity to accept a detachable magazine.

It does have the capacity to accept an ATTACHABLE magazine. Lucky for us, attachable magazines are not defined in the law, nor are they banned. Once the magazine is attached, it is no longer detachable.

Never at any time does the rifle have the capacity to accept a detachable magazine.

If you think it does, please argue why you believe that.


We need to fix this loophole so it is not so murky. I'm sure this is an unintended consequence of the patchwork quilt we call gun laws in our state. I suggest we address this issue in either legislation (not likely in today's climate with all the mass murders lately) or an AG's opinion.

What loophole? What murkiness?

The murkiness should be fixed by the flowchart. I'm still confused by the loophole you're talking about, and how it should be fixed.

Nodda Duma
04-10-2009, 6:49 PM
Yes it is very specific. I understand what you are saying and you're correct when the weapon is static. However, it can be argued that when a shooter removes the magazine to reload at the range, the weapon is now equipped with a detachable magazine and no longer enjoys the exclusion under the provisions of the law. I want the law to work in our favor. However, too many of us are running into trouble when we actually fire the weapon at the range. We need to fix this loophole so it is not so murky. I'm sure this is an unintended consequence of the patchwork quilt we call gun laws in our state. I suggest we address this issue in either legislation (not likely in today's climate with all the mass murders lately) or an AG's opinion.

Think about how the shooter removes a magazine on a Bullet Button equipped rifle. The shooter *must* use a tool to remove the magazine. That is, the shooter cannot remove the magazine using only his hand or finger as with a non-CA compliant AR. A "detachable magazine" as defined requires no tool to be removed. Therefore, the Bullet Button equipped rifle cannot accept a "detachable magazine".

Therein lies the difference.

-Jason

DDT
04-10-2009, 6:59 PM
Bum,

This topic has been beaten to death in a number of threads. L:ook for tehe thread that discussing BB being deemed legal and P50s deemed illegal by DAs across the state.

The example you posted is very unfortunate but is simply a matter of officer ignorance of the law. There are 50-something DAs in CA and I don't think any will ever try a BB case again. This is pretty well settled at this point.

THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT BB EQUIPPED ARs CAN BE USED AND MAGS DROPPED IN CA!

It may well be time that someone goes after the PD for damages on a legal AR confiscation.

hoffmang
04-10-2009, 7:51 PM
On the issue of LE... last week there was a person who had his AR taken with the rest of his guns by LE because the officer saw him remove the mag with a .223 cartridge and said it was not a tool. It is at the discretion of the officer I think to define things. Now he is looking at mega $$ to get his firearms back. It would be nice to have things clarified for everyone's sake. LE and gun owners because both want to uphold the law.

Please immediately get your "person" in touch with Bill Wiese or me immediately. We want to and will defend these cases as not a single DA involved with us has actually filed charges.

The problem with the definition is it addresses FIXED magazines. Anyone can interpret that when the shooter removes the magazine, tool or no tool, it no long complies with the definition of a non assault weapon. Therefore, the use of the weapon can defeat our purposes of making our AR's non assault weapons. Unfortunately, the law addresses the gun in a static state and not when it is actually used. That is why shooters are running into trouble when they do not breach load the rifle.

HavasuBum, It is very, very clear that you did not click on the link to the OAL petition posted earlier in this thread. The Department of Justice tried to make your argument and is about to get skewered on it. "Detachable Magazine" doesn't mean what the plain language definition means. It is a defined term under California law and at no point does a BB equipped rifle - even one without a magazine currently in it - become a rifle that has the capacity to accept any ammunition feeding device that does not require a tool to remove. Please read this (http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/oal/Underground_Rulemaking_CTA-2009-02-25-01.pdf) and think about what I'm saying.

After you've read that, I'd suggest you read one of at lest 4 threads per month where I have to explain this to people who haven't actually read California law and the CCR.

-Gene

Sgt Raven
04-10-2009, 8:03 PM
Yes it is very specific. I understand what you are saying and you're correct when the weapon is static. However, it can be argued that when a shooter removes the magazine to reload at the range, the weapon is now equipped with a detachable magazine and no longer enjoys the exclusion under the provisions of the law. I want the law to work in our favor. However, too many of us are running into trouble when we actually fire the weapon at the range. We need to fix this loophole so it is not so murky. I'm sure this is an unintended consequence of the patchwork quilt we call gun laws in our state. I suggest we address this issue in either legislation (not likely in today's climate with all the mass murders lately) or an AG's opinion.


You're wrong or a 10 round fixed mag SKS is a AW as listed on the Roberi-Roos AW list as they list a SKS w/detachable magazine. :confused:

kermit315
04-10-2009, 8:06 PM
On the issue of LE... last week there was a person who had his AR taken with the rest of his guns by LE because the officer saw him remove the mag with a .223 cartridge and said it was not a tool. It is at the discretion of the officer I think to define things. Now he is looking at mega $$ to get his firearms back. It would be nice to have things clarified for everyone's sake. LE and gun owners because both want to uphold the law.

its not at the discretion of the LEO, its written, plain as day, in the PC.

Again PC 12276.1 says you cannot have a “semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following…” The main question is what does the law say a “detachable magazine” is? CCR 978.20(a)

““detachable magazine” means any ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with neither disassembly of the firearm action nor use of a tool being required. A bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool. Ammunition feeding device includes any belted or linked ammunition, but does not include clips, en bloc clips, or stripper clips that load cartridges into the magazine.”

Summary borrowed from tenpercents website.

HavasuBum
04-11-2009, 7:49 AM
Please immediately get your "person" in touch with Bill Wiese or me immediately. We want to and will defend these cases as not a single DA involved with us has actually filed charges.



HavasuBum, It is very, very clear that you did not click on the link to the OAL petition posted earlier in this thread. The Department of Justice tried to make your argument and is about to get skewered on it. "Detachable Magazine" doesn't mean what the plain language definition means. It is a defined term under California law and at no point does a BB equipped rifle - even one without a magazine currently in it - become a rifle that has the capacity to accept any ammunition feeding device that does not require a tool to remove. Please read this (http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/oal/Underground_Rulemaking_CTA-2009-02-25-01.pdf) and think about what I'm saying.

After you've read that, I'd suggest you read one of at lest 4 threads per month where I have to explain this to people who haven't actually read California law and the CCR.

-Gene

Gene

Thank you for the information. However, I would like to take issue with your delivery. In light of the thread posted by GaffSD on 4/9/09, you were seemingly supportive of members not using acronyms, telling folks to use the search function (try searching for "range loading" and see what you get: this thread), and stop with hostility by using the forum as a teaching aid. All of these items are contained in your response. Moreover, you made assumptions about what I did or didn't do which were incorrect.

In your response you indicate that DOJ is using the argument about fixed magazines being fixed and as you put it were about to be skewered. You made my point for me. This misinformation is out there and shooters are encountering problems when detaching their magazines. Perhaps a sticky would be appropriate to provide members with how they can explain the law to range masters or would you rather continue to kill the messenger?

It seems to me that rather than insulting people about whether or not they have read the law, you could provide the information and make it easier to access. Apparently, a few folks in this forum become infuriated that people ask questions "ad nauseum". Perhaps then the forum's useful life is over and should be terminated and left as a database for folks to search.

ohsmily
04-11-2009, 7:50 AM
Yes it is very specific. I understand what you are saying and you're correct when the weapon is static. However, it can be argued that when a shooter removes the magazine to reload at the range, the weapon is now equipped with a detachable magazine and no longer enjoys the exclusion under the provisions of the law. You can argue whatever you want. You are wrong. It can't accept a DETACHABLE magazine. PERIOD. READ THE LEGAL DEFINITION OF DETACHABLE AGAIN. AND THEN ASK, CAN IT ACCEPT A DETACHABLE MAGAZINEI want the law to work in our favor. However, too many of us are running into trouble when we actually fire the weapon at the range. We need to fix this loophole so it is not so murky. I'm sure this is an unintended consequence of the patchwork quilt we call gun laws in our state. I suggest we address this issue in either legislation (not likely in today's climate with all the mass murders lately) or an AG's opinion.they aren't going to rewrite the laws for us. If they do, it will be more restrictive. Our only chance is to strike at SOME laws as unconstitutional. The Calguns Foundation goes bit by bit. In any case, the laws aren't murky to those in the know. While there is risk to doing any gun related thing, BBs and OLLs are getting less and less risky because the sheer number of people who own them now, the acceptance in retail gun stores, and law enforcement and district attorney directives that OLLs with BBs and the like are legal.

You aren't getting it and you are making stuff up (see first portion in bold). You are making the same error that countless other new people make. You are confusing ATTACHABLE with DETACHABLE.

While it is good to be cautious, your ignorance/arrogance is astounding. Do you think we are a bunch of yahoos jus testing out the law. This has been devised by people far more knowledgeable and intelligent than you or I (a group of attorneys and other experience folks). There is NO GRAY area about BBs. Once the mag is removed, the rifle STILL CAN'T ACCEPT A DETACHABLE MAGAZINE (again, reread the definition) and thus doesn't fall within 12276.1.

If you are so worried about the BB, just build a featureless rifle and use a fully detachable magazine.

If you don't get it, there is nothing more anyone can do.

HavasuBum
04-11-2009, 7:53 AM
You aren't getting it and you are makign stuff up. specifically, what is in bold. You are making the same error that countless other new people who just don't get it make. You are confusing ATTACHABLE with DETACHABLE.

While it is good to be cautious, your ignorance/arrogance is astounding. Do you think we are a bunch of yahoos jus testing out the law. This has been devised by people far more knowledgeable and intelligent than you or I (a group of attorneys and other experience folks). There is NO GRAY area about BBs. Once the mag is removed, the rifle STILL CAN'T ACCEPT A DETACHABLE MAGAZINE (again, reread the definition) and thus doesn't fall within 12276.1.

If you are so worried about the BB, just build a featureless rifle and use a fully detachable magazine.

If you don't get it, there is nothing more anyone can do.

Go to the thread by GaffSD my friend. Insulting people and treating them like sh*t will not help your cause.

If you read my posts, people are encountering problems with removing their mags at the range, which is real life and not lawbooks. Go ahead kill the messenger.

Kestryll
04-11-2009, 8:07 AM
Go to the thread by GaffSD my friend. Insulting people and treating them like sh*t will not help your cause.

If you read my posts, people are encountering problems with removing their mags at the range, which is real life and not lawbooks. Go ahead kill the messenger.

Neither will defeating the word filter help your cause, knock it off.

I'm reading the post you quoted and frankly I can not see any insult there at all.
What do you consider to be 'insulting' in the post you quoted?

Kestryll
04-11-2009, 8:10 AM
, people are encountering problems with removing their mags at the range, which is real life and not lawbooks. Go ahead kill the messenger.

Please clarify, are people being arrested or are people being given grief by ROs?

hoffmang
04-11-2009, 8:24 AM
HavasuBum,

I usually am well aware when I'm trying to insult someone and my post above is not one of those occasions.

The way that "detachable magazine" is defined actually makes the test for assault weapons quite easy. Can a rifle at any point in current configuration allow a magazine to be removed without a tool? For a BB equipped AR/AK the answer to that question is no. The current status of the magazine well doesn't matter - otherwise you would never ever be able to remove the magazine from an SKS or you'd have an SKS with detachable magazine.

I was hoping you might try the search terms "bullet button detachable magazine" which would find this thread: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=141866

-Gene

HavasuBum
04-11-2009, 9:16 AM
Neither will defeating the word filter help your cause, knock it off.

I'm reading the post you quoted and frankly I can not see any insult there at all.
What do you consider to be 'insulting' in the post you quoted?

So it's ok to tell someone they are ignorant and arrogant? If have NEVER said I agree with what I am saying, I am simply using an argument that an RO or more likely BLM, which is where I shoot, would use. I am looking for the ammo to defeat their stupidity and save me from having my "long rifles" defined as an assault weapon.

HavasuBum
04-11-2009, 9:19 AM
Please clarify, are people being arrested or are people being given grief by ROs?


If you read this thread you will see a post by someone who left a range because the RO said he had to breach load. Moreover, there are undertones all over So Cal that breach loading is required.

The behavior of some here is really counterproductive and frankly tiring.

NiteQwill
04-11-2009, 9:35 AM
If you read this thread you will see a post by someone who left a range because the RO said he had to breach load. Moreover, there are undertones all over So Cal that breach loading is required.

The behavior of some here is really counterproductive and frankly tiring.

I've never shot at a range, indoor or outdoor, that required me to top load. There are several ranges in the SoCal area that LEOs shoot at regularly and not once have I heard of any issues with BB-equipped rifles with 10 round magazines. If you or any of your acquaintances have encountered any problems [at local ranges or] with LEOs with BB-equipped 10 round rifles, feel free to contact the 'right people' on this forum.

It (ie. PC requirements for 'detachable') has already been explained to your politely numerous times on this thread, now you are just nitpicking at perceived "inconveniences and insults."

creampuff
04-11-2009, 9:40 AM
Apparently, a few folks in this forum become infuriated that people ask questions "ad nauseum". Perhaps then the forum's useful life is over and should be terminated and left as a database for folks to search.

California gun law, and particulary the OLL scenario is such a fluid situation, that I doubt one or two stickies could handle every question. While personally I believe the risks are very low for any one who builds an OLL to be California compliant, it really is the personal responsibility of the individual gun owner to read up and become knowledgeable on the aspects of CA gun law before jumping into the OLL waters.

A static database would never work for a situation that is always changing.

Have you encountered situations or personally met anyone who is being pushed into "top loading"? Up here in Nor Cal, as long as the OLL is properly configured, I haven't seen this as being a problem from the range officers.

Nodda Duma
04-11-2009, 11:35 AM
If you read this thread you will see a post by someone who left a range because the RO said he had to breach load. Moreover, there are undertones all over So Cal that breach loading is required.

The behavior of some here is really counterproductive and frankly tiring.

If you're getting your pants in a bunch about the behavior of some here, then in all honesty you need to grow some thicker skin.

The people posting here are trying to HELP YOU.

-Jason

Kestryll
04-11-2009, 8:17 PM
If you read this thread you will see a post by someone who left a range because the RO said he had to breach load. Moreover, there are undertones all over So Cal that breach loading is required.
So basically it's a case of private ranges deciding that they do not want to deal with having to understand the law and simply saying 'Not here'.
Like it or not that's what a private business can do.
That has nothing to do with legality nor imminent arrest, that is a decision made by the owners and ROs at a privately run range.

If you read this forum you will see numerous posts by people over the past two years about interacting with BLM officers and private ranges where there was either no problem or they educated them about the law.
Yes, there will be some instances of problems but the vast majority of encounters are favorable and frankly I've seen breach-loading taking a back seat to BB/Prince50s and featureless builds for those same two years.
I don't buy the 'undertones' concept, real world experience shows exactly the opposite, right down to the Assault Weapons ID Flowchart being handed out at morning briefing by several LE agencies and posted on the wall at others.



The behavior of some here is really counterproductive and frankly tiring.
Yes it is, both tiring and counter-productive.

People here have tried to explain to you both the law and NUMEROUS real world examples and your response is to ignore them and dismiss the info given.
Rather then listen and learn you decry them as an 'old boys club' and refuse to acknowledge that some here may just know the law better then you do.

In simple terms, most of what you have been told is NOT speculation nor guesswork.
It has been gone over by both the best gun rights lawyers in California AND the DOJ itself.
If there were an issue with the concepts and legal interpretations wouldn't the DOJ be all over this place and it's members to shut it down?
Think 'Conspiracy to commit..'

However, in the face of so much public information the DOJ has NOT taken action even after vetting the info given.

What does that tell you?

HavasuBum
04-11-2009, 9:32 PM
Yes it is, both tiring and counter-productive.

People here have tried to explain to you both the law and NUMEROUS real world examples and your response is to ignore them and dismiss the info given.
Rather then listen and learn you decry them as an 'old boys club' and refuse to acknowledge that some here may just know the law better then you do.

In simple terms, most of what you have been told is NOT speculation nor guesswork.
It has been gone over by both the best gun rights lawyers in California AND the DOJ itself.
If there were an issue with the concepts and legal interpretations wouldn't the DOJ be all over this place and it's members to shut it down?
Think 'Conspiracy to commit..'

However, in the face of so much public information the DOJ has NOT taken action even after vetting the info given.

What does that tell you?

Some here certainly know the law better that I. That's why I joined this forum. The good ol' boy network or cronyism is caused by you not equally enforcing the rules.

Sgt Raven
04-11-2009, 10:52 PM
Some here certainly know the law better that I. That's why I joined this forum. The good ol' boy network or cronyism is caused by you not equally enforcing the rules.

Sometimes I look back on the 'My Little Pony' days of this forum. :eek:

rkt88edmo
04-12-2009, 5:55 AM
Some here certainly know the law better that I. That's why I joined this forum. The good ol' boy network or cronyism is caused by you not equally enforcing the rules.

I suppose congratulations are in order for bdsmchs (have you heard of vowels, can I buy you one?) he has joined the CGN good ol' boy network! bdsmchs go make me a sammich or else you will lose favor with the powers that be!

HB, I'm not sure how long you've been reading CGN, but I'm assuming it has been longer than your join date, or is the cronyism so rampant it took you less than TWO WEEKS! to discover it and make that claim.

cronyism - lol

ZOMG someone on the internet said something a little bit rude! As you noted before the first 5-6 posts were all very on point for the OP and pretty cordial - yet you somehow characterize the thread based on the actions and overreactions that followed. You ask why both users weren't banned? A personal attack is quite a bit different from wondering why on earth would do something. You may feel that bds implied that the OP was "so dumb he is surprised he knows how to breathe" with his comments and should be banned, but he didn't, you are supplying your own extra weight to his comments.

As far as how things can be intereperted, at the officer and street level where the rubber meets the road, yes, you may feeel in constant danger of having your firearm mischaracterized as an AW. There is little you will be able to do for that which isn't explained in the flowchart, period (other than supplying your own charm wit and persuasion when talking to LEO and explaining the nuances of OLLdom).

We are all at risk and have to take personal responsibility for our actions. If you don't understand the nuances and can communicate them then you are more at risk. Plenty of people remain oblivious to this since there is so much OLL friendliness. If you shoot in an not-so-OLL-friendly place it is up to you to protect yourself. Everyone here is confident you can prevail with the DA/in court, but even if you do prevail the cost may be your rifle, time and thousands in $$$.

So if you aren't comfortable with that - don't do it.

rkt88edmo
04-12-2009, 5:58 AM
Some here certainly know the law better that I. That's why I joined this forum. The good ol' boy network or cronyism is caused by you not equally enforcing the rules.

Specifically state where the rules weren't equally enforced ('cus I'm hard of reading and don't want to try and guess exactly which posts you are referring to), feel free to do it in the open or via PM.

eflatminor
04-12-2009, 6:17 AM
How does a bullet button compare to a mag release that utilizes a tiny hex screw? Must the latter be top loaded in CA?

GM4spd
04-12-2009, 6:34 AM
How does a bullet button compare to a mag release that utilizes a tiny hex screw? Must the latter be top loaded in CA?

To be legal, I think it has to be top loaded but I have been wrong before.
Pete

kermit315
04-12-2009, 6:40 AM
How does a bullet button compare to a mag release that utilizes a tiny hex screw? Must the latter be top loaded in CA?

Once you back out the set screw, the button operates as normal, which creates an AW. By leaving the set screw alone, and top loading, you should be ok legally. However, the 58 DA's have/are coming to the conclusion that the P50 is being misused and is thus illegal. Too many people leaving the set screw out and just using the button.

I dont know the actual numbers of it, or how bad a problem it really is, but thats the story as I see it.

HavasuBum
04-12-2009, 7:54 AM
Specifically state where the rules weren't equally enforced ('cus I'm hard of reading and don't want to try and guess exactly which posts you are referring to), feel free to do it in the open or via PM.

My little pony days, how cute. Another simple minded comment.

I'll respond here since PM's end up here anyway. I'll let you read the posts that send the OP over the edge. If you think insults are OK and telling someone they are ignorant and arrogant is fine, then there is nothing more to talk about here. Buy allowing this behavior you wind up with the post by ohsmily in the Winchester safes at COSTCO thread where he asks if someone is an AH. The thread was fine until then. I was there shopping for a safe and now there is a pissing contest.

I'm retired so I"m here for my own reasons. However, there are plenty of young officers who may visit in order to find out more about the extremely complex laws surrounding AW's. What do you think these officers are going to do when they get treated like crap for asking a simple question or try to resolve in their mind what is or isn't legal? You just made an enemy my friend, and an uninformed one at that. And yet all I seem to read here leo's are out to get people and purposely harass gun owners.

I would venture to say that most if not all of the jerks on this board are bullies and cowards who hide behind their computers so they can stick it to someone anonymously. These folks wouldn't last 2 seconds in a LE academy or on the road during break in.

Officers are expected to be chaplains, paramedics, accident investigators, shrinks, etc, and know intimately how to serve a TRO, and the laws contained in several codes. Moreover, they often go home with brain matter and blood on their uniforms. The only luxury they have is they get to turn their heads when they puke.

This thread has a lousy reputation in the leo community, and the mods are to blame. I suggest if you regulated this small minded behavior you might win over some newbies who just might be cops. I am a member of the CHPforums site. What do you think my comments will be when the officers (mostly new kids) want to talk about AW's?

In closing I think I will start a board about commercial vehicle laws. I will then proceed to make fun of anyone who doesn't know the difference between a glad hand and a tractor protection valve.

Now I have a NASCAR race to go watch in Phoenix. There's more to life then reading rude comments here.

NiteQwill
04-12-2009, 8:57 AM
My little pony days, how cute. Another simple minded comment.

I'll respond here since PM's end up here anyway. I'll let you read the posts that send the OP over the edge. If you think insults are OK and telling someone they are ignorant and arrogant is fine, then there is nothing more to talk about here. Buy allowing this behavior you wind up with the post by ohsmily in the Winchester safes at COSTCO thread where he asks if someone is an AH. The thread was fine until then. I was there shopping for a safe and now there is a pissing contest.

I'm retired so I"m here for my own reasons. However, there are plenty of young officers who may visit in order to find out more about the extremely complex laws surrounding AW's. What do you think these officers are going to do when they get treated like crap for asking a simple question or try to resolve in their mind what is or isn't legal? You just made an enemy my friend, and an uninformed one at that. And yet all I seem to read here leo's are out to get people and purposely harass gun owners.

I would venture to say that most if not all of the jerks on this board are bullies and cowards who hide behind their computers so they can stick it to someone anonymously. These folks wouldn't last 2 seconds in a LE academy or on the road during break in.

Officers are expected to be chaplains, paramedics, accident investigators, shrinks, etc, and know intimately how to serve a TRO, and the laws contained in several codes. Moreover, they often go home with brain matter and blood on their uniforms. The only luxury they have is they get to turn their heads when they puke.

This thread has a lousy reputation in the leo community, and the mods are to blame. I suggest if you regulated this small minded behavior you might win over some newbies who just might be cops. I am a member of the CHPforums site. What do you think my comments will be when the officers (mostly new kids) want to talk about AW's?

In closing I think I will start a board about commercial vehicle laws. I will then proceed to make fun of anyone who doesn't know the difference between a glad hand and a tractor protection valve.

Now I have a NASCAR race to go watch in Phoenix. There's more to life then reading rude comments here.
Well, it's finally nice to see you come out and show your colors rather than beat around the bush for the last 17 posts.

Butthead
04-12-2009, 11:05 AM
OK The law says

'PC 12276.1 says you cannot have a “semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following…” The main question is what does the law say a “detachable magazine” is? CCR 978.20(a)

Ok the Issue: The magazine in my CA legal, OLL/BB attached rifle can be loaded into a non-compliant/legal AR and detached and attached and detached without the use of any tools. So does that imply that my magazine is detachable (albeit in a non-BB rifle). If so couldn't one argue that a rifle with a BB still has the ability to accept a detachable magazine. Or is the law only written about the rifles abaility to release a magazine (without a tool), because the verbage in the law says accept not release.

Look I am not trying start any poo here. I just dont want to end up being one of the guys who has to come here seeking legal counsel because some LEO had the above intrepritation of the law and took all my guns.

I used to think I was covered by the "right to bear arms" but it seems that there are many different interpritations of laws. You have the right to bear arms as long as.......

P.S. On a side note, earlier in this thread someone mentioned about the laminated AW flowcharts being available for sale and that one of the Law enforcement agancies had them up in their cubicles. Has anyone thought about raising enough money to have these printed up and delivered to all the agancies so that they all have a copy. It seems that ignorance is one of our biggest enimies. If CG wants to setup a fund for this purpose I would be happy to make the first donation.

CHS
04-12-2009, 11:09 AM
'PC 12276.1 says you cannot have a “semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following…” The main question is what does the law say a “detachable magazine” is? CCR 978.20(a)


Ugh.. Here we go again.

Detachable magazine, as defined by California law:

BARCLAYS OFFICIAL CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS
TITLE 11. LAW
DIVISION 5. FIREARMS REGULATIONS
CHAPTER 39. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REGULATIONS FOR ASSAULT WEAPONS AND LARGE
CAPACITY MAGAZINES
ARTICLE 2. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED TO IDENTIFY ASSAULT WEAPONS
This database is current through 3/27/09, Register 2009, No. 13
§ 5469. Definitions.

The following definitions apply to terms used in the identification of assault weapons pursuant to Penal Code section 12276.1:
(a) "detachable magazine" means any ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with neither disassembly of the firearm action nor use of a tool being required. A bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool. Ammunition feeding device includes any belted or linked ammunition, but does not include clips, en bloc clips, or stripper clips that load cartridges into the magazine.

Butthead
04-12-2009, 11:40 AM
I got it. I read the darn thing. No tool, no dissasemble... Blah Blah Blah. But isn't this a detachable magazine in a non-CA-complaint AR? It does not require a tool or for the rifle to be dissasembled. So by the quoted law above this IS a detachable magazine.

CHS
04-12-2009, 11:59 AM
I got it. I read the darn thing. No tool, no dissasemble... Blah Blah Blah. But isn't this a detachable magazine in a non-CA-complaint AR? It does not require a tool or for the rifle to be dissasembled. So by the quoted law above this IS a detachable magazine.

What are you talking about?

A bullet button makes your AR a fixed-magazine rifle, because you can only remove the mag with a tool.

Clarify your question. It sounds like the same question that's already been addressed about a dozen times in this thread alone.

hoffmang
04-12-2009, 12:23 PM
I would venture to say that most if not all of the jerks on this board are bullies and cowards who hide behind their computers so they can stick it to someone anonymously.

What I find most amusing is that most of the guys you consider jerks get out in the real world and actually do pro-gun work. Enjoy your retirement. We of the working age will get the rights back you lost.

I got it. I read the darn thing. No tool, no dissasemble... Blah Blah Blah. But isn't this a detachable magazine in a non-CA-complaint AR? It does not require a tool or for the rifle to be dissasembled. So by the quoted law above this IS a detachable magazine.

You are confusing the test. The test is a test about your rifle, not about a magazine. "Detachable magazine" means an ammunition feeding device that can be removed from the rifle in question without the using a tool. There is NO way to remove a magazine from a BB equipped rifle. When you have an empty mag well, you can attach a magazine, but that magazine is not a "detachable magazine" as that term is very specifically defined in California law.

All, please read things that are actually linked from this thread that answer your question before asking the question again in the same thread.

-Gene

creampuff
04-12-2009, 1:09 PM
In closing I think I will start a board about commercial vehicle laws. I will then proceed to make fun of anyone who doesn't know the difference between a glad hand and a tractor protection valve.


With you having referred to members here as being "simple minded" I would venture to guess it will not be long before you may indeed start making fun of the members on that hypothetical forum.

Every forum has its own corperate culture. Photography forums tend to be snobbish, and uppity. Flashlight forums, a little bit on the nerdish side. Wood workers tend to be friendly and helpful. Gun forums, well they tend to be from a very wide social economic, religious, etc backgrounds - and sometimes rough around the edges. How thick of a skin I am going to put on, really depends on the forum I am visiting.

Yes, people will say things behind a keyboard, that they will never say in person. But at work, people say things on a phone, that when I confront them in person, they completely back down. When I drive, people will gesture :) things that they never would in person, when they aren't behind thousands of pounds of steel and glass. Sadly this is the internet, and thick skin is required. Wish it weren't true..but it is.

NiteQwill
04-12-2009, 5:26 PM
Yes, people will say things behind a keyboard, that they will never say in person. But at work, people say things on a phone, that when I confront them in person, they completely back down. When I drive, people will gesture :) things that they never would in person, when they aren't behind thousands of pounds of steel and glass. Sadly this is the internet, and thick skin is required. Wish it weren't true..but it is.

Amen. +1000

I said this when I had some folks personally on a thread attack me back in the day when I joined this forum due to an opinion I had on a media event. Unfortunately, like you said, some require additional armor on top of that skin.

CnCFunFactory
04-12-2009, 9:07 PM
And the memo that was written by a detective from Scramento PD explaining how the BB is legal helps a lot too.





I don't think he even deserves to own an AR (he wouldn't have if not because of this very website and some of the people who posted on this little sh*tty thread of his).... I think at most, he deserves to just top load ....

Now that's hilarious! Kinda like purgatory for AR lovers. :rofl2:

rkt88edmo
04-12-2009, 9:25 PM
My little pony days, how cute. Another simple minded comment.
As long as you continue to stir the pot I am sure you will find playmates, not sure why you do this when it seems to be fairly similar to what you are complaining about.

I'll respond here since PM's end up here anyway.
It really isn't very often that PMs end up in threads, feel free to dig up specific examples if you'd like to support his claim

I'll let you read the posts that send the OP over the edge.
I've already skimmed or read the thread once and if you aren't going to find specifics I'm not really interested in rereading them.

If you think insults are OK and telling someone they are ignorant and arrogant is fine, then there is nothing more to talk about here. Buy allowing this behavior you wind up with the post by ohsmily in the Winchester safes at COSTCO thread where he asks if someone is an AH. So now your problem with this thread is something from another thread? I haven't read that one so I won't comment other than that, and welcome to the ohsmily fanclub, sounds like you are now a new member. PS when you said "buy" you just gave ohsmily the strength for five more posts, he lives for that stuff.

The thread was fine until then. I was there shopping for a safe and now there is a pissing contest.

I'm retired so I"m here for my own reasons. However, there are plenty of young officers who may visit in order to find out more about the extremely complex laws surrounding AW's. What do you think these officers are going to do when they get treated like crap for asking a simple question or try to resolve in their mind what is or isn't legal? The same thing everyone else does? Cry to their mommies, or get mad and start a flame war, or laugh, learn and move on?You just made an enemy my friend, and an uninformed one at that. And yet all I seem to read here leo's are out to get people and purposely harass gun owners.
We do make a concerted effort here, but "you can't please everyone all the time" as the saying goes. Again if you go back the first bunch posts were all right to the point of the OP. Again when you say "read here leos..." you seem to be talking about other threads, if you find things that you think are out of line feel free to report the post but without specifics I can't comment or help.

As far as I can tell LEO bashing exists on nearly every non LEO/Mil forum on the internet calguns is really no exception. We generally allow people to post their opinions, and this LEO bashing trend tends to be the common answer from the masses. Is it right? probably not. Am I going to try and police the internet to cure CGN of it? definitely not. Opinions differ. We're here to discuss CA firearms topics, not eliminate rudeness and force everyone to play nice-nice in the world. I think that since much of our discussion focuses around staying legal we have a higher amount of LEO related posts, which makes sense. In any case, when you find the LEO bashing free place on the internet let me know, and if you find unicorn first I wouldn't be surprised.

I would venture to say that most if not all of the jerks on this board are bullies and cowards who hide behind their computers so they can stick it to someone anonymously. Welcome to the internet, please enjoy your stay. Most if not all eh? why would you stick around?
These folks wouldn't last 2 seconds in a LE academy or on the road during break in. Many here have done exactly that or worse, cue the tiny violin

Officers are expected to be chaplains, paramedics, accident investigators, shrinks, etc, and know intimately how to serve a TRO, and the laws contained in several codes. Moreover, they often go home with brain matter and blood on their uniforms. The only luxury they have is they get to turn their heads when they puke.

This thread has a lousy reputation in the leo community, and the mods are to blame. Wow this tiny little thread among thousands of others has its own reputation in the LEO community? I have serious doubts about that. Maybe it will be as helpful as other threads that LEO agencies have cribbed for their own technical memos to officers re: the law. (Aside to the LEO community: please see the flowchart and have a nice day) I suggest if you regulated this small minded behavior you might win over some newbies who just might be cops. We've done exactly that with newbies and cops plenty of times, apparently inspite of ourselves

I am a member of the CHPforums site. What do you think my comments will be when the officers (mostly new kids) want to talk about AW's? I can't be sure but probably something along the lines of "don't go to calguns.net its full of jerks bullies and cowards"


In closing I think I will start a board about commercial vehicle laws. I will then proceed to make fun of anyone who doesn't know the difference between a glad hand and a tractor protection valve. Running a forum is fun, enjoy.

Now I have a NASCAR race to go watch in Phoenix. There's more to life then reading rude comments here.Indeed.

So anyways, Kestryll asked you a fairly straightforward question re: behavior, and you aren't giving me any specific examples to work with, but overall the common feeling I get is just that you are unhappy with the way the general internet masses tend to act in forums. I don't think we are super special in that regard. Could the mods do more to prevent it? Yes, but we've chosen not to in favor of letting people speak their minds as much as possible with the fairly straightforward set of rules we have, that what we have here, and everyone is free to take it or leave it as they please. Sometimes it is a bit distasteful, but again, welcome to the internet.

eaglemike
04-12-2009, 9:39 PM
If you read this thread you will see a post by someone who left a range because the RO said he had to breach load. Moreover, there are undertones all over So Cal that breach loading is required.

The behavior of some here is really counterproductive and frankly tiring.
I added the emphasis. I've read your posts in this thread. Your response to hoffmang was quite interesting He gave you good info and you chose to be insulted. He and bwiese have been to the well many times on this issue. IMHO their opinions in this area re to be relied upon. At this point in time the combined batting average of these gentlemen is perfect, at least as far as I know. An open mind can be a good thing.

I really don't care what some ranges require. I know FOR CERTAIN many ranges and LE personnel do not know this part of the law well. I've printed out 1000's of the flowcharts and shared them, sometimes with LEO. They always thanked me. The flowchart is supported by PC references. Works for me.

Butthead
04-12-2009, 10:51 PM
What are you talking about?

A bullet button makes your AR a fixed-magazine rifle, because you can only remove the mag with a tool.

Clarify your question. It sounds like the same question that's already been addressed about a dozen times in this thread alone.

Which part of my question is confusing you? I am asking whether or not the magazine in my rifle, when placed in a non-CA-compliant AR is a detachable magazine. I think it is a fairly straightforward question. I am trying to have a discussion regarding the law and the way it was written. If you are trying to tell me that the only thing that matters is the rifles configuration (a BB installed) then why didn't you just say so? The last line in my original post regarding "the issue" I am trying to discuss here says” Or is the law only written about the rifles ability to release a magazine (without a tool), if your answer is yes to this, a simple “yes it only has to do with the rifles configuration" would have been enough. But oddly enough you felt compelled to recite, again, the law I was trying to discuss rather than answer my question.

Hoffmang:
Please read my question before saying that it has already been answered by a link in this thread. I don't see anywhere in this thread were someone asked the question" is the magazine in my rifle, when placed in a non-CA-compliant AR a detachable magazine?" I understand that your answer to my original question is, yes, it only has to do with the rifles configuration.

I am still wondering if there is any chance a judge might find some wiggle room in the law because of the way it is written. The law says "accept a detachable magazine". I still have to wonder whether or not that might leave all of us susceptible whether we have a bullet button or not.

Remember it wasn't too long ago when most assumed that we (Californians) could not have any more black rifles. But a few people dared to look at the laws, exactly the way they were written, had discussions and debates, and discovered that if a simple device was added to these rifles(and a few other things, 10 round mags, not being on the list, etc…) they would in fact be legal again in California (in their opinion). How many people then assumed that their Prince50 satisfied this and all CA laws only to realize that if it became loose or was unscrewed that suddenly you found yourself in possession of an AW. At this point most of us realize the benefits and drawbacks of the Price50 but it didn’t happen overnight and I am sure there were many discussions and vigorous debates similar to this along the way.

Debating is good. Someone doesn't have to be right or wrong. Talking amongst our community brings us knowledge and a better understanding of the laws we must live by.

bdsmchs: I too believe that with a current BB installed on my rifle and a 10 round mag that I am compliance with the current CA laws. However just because you and I believe that we are compliant doesn't mean a judge won't rule against us and find us in violation of the AW ban. PLEASE KEEP DISCUSSING THESE ISSUES, THEY ARE IMPORTANT!!!

DigitalAmmunition
04-12-2009, 11:09 PM
I actually want to thank the posters here (most of them - hoffman, etc) who posted very lucid insight into the BB "issue". I've known for a while now, that a BB equipped AR (OLL) renders the AW law moot, as the magazine placed (or not placed) into the weapon turns the gun into a Fixed-Magazine AR (OLL).

Very recently I received my first AR (OLL, bullet button configured), so recent that I have yet to take it to a range! I am going to be (very) picky on where I take it to shoot, and as someone earlier mentioned about A Place To Shoot not allowing these legal configured ARs to reload by using the tool to detach the magazine, but instead forcing them to Top Load, I now know not to go to that range anymore.

Anyways, as someone who usually lurks, I had to chime in and say thanks for the great links provided (2 of them from hoffman) and discussion (the posts that were not full of ad hominem and instead insightful into the relevant discussion).

ke6guj
04-12-2009, 11:10 PM
Which part of my question is confusing you? I am asking whether or not the magazine in my rifle, when placed in a non-CA-compliant AR is a detachable magazine. I think it is a fairly straightforward question. I am trying to have a discussion regarding the law and the way it was written. If you are trying to tell me that the only thing that matters is the rifles configuration (a BB installed) then why didn't you just say so? The last line in my original post regarding "the issue" I am trying to discuss here says” Or is the law only written about the rifles ability to release a magazine (without a tool), if your answer is yes to this, a simple “yes it only has to do with the rifles configuration" would have been enough. But oddly enough you felt compelled to recite, again, the law I was trying to discuss rather than answer my question.

I think the important point is that the magazine is defined as it relates to that specific rifle. Yes, a magazine inserted into a rifle with a regular magazine would be a detachable magazine as it applies to that firearm. That same magazine installed into a mag-locked style of fiream would not be a detachable magazine. I don't see any PC that says "once a detachable magazine, always a detachable magazine".

Think of it this way, I could take a fixed-mag SKS and modify the firearm to allow me to detach the "fixed-mag" without tools, making it a detachable mag. Does that now mean that every fixed-mag on other SKSs is considered a detachable magazine and now all SKSs are considered AWs?

Butthead
04-12-2009, 11:11 PM
I really don't care what some ranges require. I know FOR CERTAIN many ranges and LE personnel do not know this part of the law well. I've printed out 1000's of the flowcharts and shared them, sometimes with LEO. They always thanked me. The flowchart is supported by PC references. Works for me.

Now I am putting some of these in my range bags as well. Educating others is going to be key to our success. In fact this is making me think that I need to create one of these flowcharts for the .50 cal world as well. You would not believe (OK maybe you would) how many people including LEO and RO still think that any .50 cal rifle is illegal in CA (unless registered as an AW). I try to verbally educate people regarding the use of a .50 cal DTC rifle in CA but a little flowchart that includes PC references might even be better. I can add .50 cal ammo to this as well as I have an RO that says if he sees me with any AP ammo he will call the rangers and have me arrested on the spot. I tried to explain but he insists that his 30 years of experience say otherwise. Having a card with the PC's on it probably would have helped my case. I know that they are not illegal but I did a lousy job of educating him.

Sgt Raven
04-12-2009, 11:11 PM
Which part of my question is confusing you? ............Blah, blah, blah,... SNIP........... PLEASE KEEP DISCUSSING THESE ISSUES, THEY ARE IMPORTANT!!!

You are trying to use words in a logical way, but they are words defined by California laws and regulations, they don't have to make sense when used that way. If a law said a 4 legged hay eating Horse was an automobile, then under that law a horse ia a car. :thumbsup:

Kestryll
04-12-2009, 11:19 PM
My little pony days, how cute. Another simple minded comment.
Before you wrap yourself in righteous indignation it might be a good idea to know what you are talking about. Novel concept I'm sure but try it.
A little history lesson for you.
About a year ago we had a troll show up and start harassing people, he was rude and insulting to most of the membership.
Rather then ban him I tried to talk to him and he got all blustery about how manly he was.
Well, I succumbed to my humerous side and changed his avatar to 'my little pony', his screen name to 'Princess Anastasia' and his title to 'Fairy Princess of the Mall'. Yeah it was kind of cute now that you mention it...

But feel free to assume whatever it was you were thinking, I'm sure it was just as good.. :rolleyes:

I'll respond here since PM's end up here anyway. I'll let you read the posts that send the OP over the edge. If you think insults are OK and telling someone they are ignorant and arrogant is fine, then there is nothing more to talk about here.
You do know that 'ignorant' means uninformed, right? It does NOT mean 'stupid' or 'dumb'. By presenting an argument based on incomplete or inaccurate information you are showing ignorance, it's not a slam at intelligence just a statement of fact using the English language correctly.
As for arrogance, well, that is somewhat of an opinion.
However when the people who have been DIRECTLY involved in and responsible for an event tell you what happened and you refuse to acknowledge that while claiming to know better that is a bit arrogant isn't it?


Buy allowing this behavior you wind up with the post by ohsmily in the Winchester safes at COSTCO thread where he asks if someone is an AH. The thread was fine until then. I was there shopping for a safe and now there is a pissing contest.
Did you report his post?
We can not read all of what is posted and if he did call some an AH then it would be better to report it rather then hold on to the knowledge to be used later.

I'm retired so I"m here for my own reasons. However, there are plenty of young officers who may visit in order to find out more about the extremely complex laws surrounding AW's. What do you think these officers are going to do when they get treated like crap for asking a simple question or try to resolve in their mind what is or isn't legal?
Well, provided they ask with a mind to listen and learn rather then to discount and dismiss chances are they won't have a problem.
Interesting how that works out isn't it?

You just made an enemy my friend, and an uninformed one at that.
You've made a choice to be adversarial, did you expect that things would end up any other way when you started down that road?

And yet all I seem to read here leo's are out to get people and purposely harass gun owners.

I would venture to say that most if not all of the jerks on this board are bullies and cowards who hide behind their computers so they can stick it to someone anonymously. These folks wouldn't last 2 seconds in a LE academy or on the road during break in.
Just for reference my name and address are posted on this forum in multiple locations 'HavasuBum', as is the same info on many of the people you are denigrating.
Many use their real name even. I'm not sure how you can call that 'hiding'.

Officers are expected to be chaplains, paramedics, accident investigators, shrinks, etc, and know intimately how to serve a TRO, and the laws contained in several codes. Moreover, they often go home with brain matter and blood on their uniforms. The only luxury they have is they get to turn their heads when they puke.
You really have no idea how many LEOs there are on this forum do you?

This thread has a lousy reputation in the leo community, and the mods are to blame. I suggest if you regulated this small minded behavior you might win over some newbies who just might be cops. I am a member of the CHPforums site. What do you think my comments will be when the officers (mostly new kids) want to talk about AW's?
I don't know, I guess that would come down to what kind of integrity you have wouldn't it?
Is your honesty and integrity so shallow and so meaningless that you would spread false information to your fellow LEOs to salve your ego?

In closing I think I will start a board about commercial vehicle laws. I will then proceed to make fun of anyone who doesn't know the difference between a glad hand and a tractor protection valve.
Feel free, I am quite conversant with both vBulletin software and SMF software so feel free to ask if you need any technical help.

Now I have a NASCAR race to go watch in Phoenix. There's more to life then reading rude comments here.
Apparently there's also posting them isn't there?

Butthead
04-12-2009, 11:27 PM
I think the important point is that the magazine is defined as it relates to that specific rifle. Yes, a magazine inserted into a rifle with a regular magazine would be a detachable magazine as it applies to that firearm. That same magazine installed into a mag-locked style of fiream would not be a detachable magazine. I don't see any PC that says "once a detachable magazine, always a detachable magazine".

Think of it this way, I could take a fixed-mag SKS and modify the firearm to allow me to detach the "fixed-mag" without tools, making it a detachable mag. Does that now mean that every fixed-mag on other SKSs is considered a detachable magazine and now all SKSs are considered AWs?

Sorry I dont know what a fixed SKS is so I can't answer to that. And I agree and believe the law was written to define the mag as it relates to the specific rifle. But I don't see any PC that says "once a detachable magazine, always a detachable magazine", nor does it say that it isn't. I just want to make sure that it does not really leave it open for interpritation. Just wanted to raise the question. It doesn't seem as clear cut to me as it does to others but I can be swayed.

I dont ever take my rifle to the range because I am still in fear of what might happen. I have chosen to put a 37mm flare launcher on it and that just opens a whole other can of worms for many. Maybe as more become educated.

Jicko
04-12-2009, 11:31 PM
*sigh*

A Troll....

:mad:

hoffmang
04-13-2009, 12:53 AM
Hoffmang:
Please read my question before saying that it has already been answered by a link in this thread. I don't see anywhere in this thread were someone asked the question" is the magazine in my rifle, when placed in a non-CA-compliant AR a detachable magazine?" I understand that your answer to my original question is, yes, it only has to do with the rifles configuration.


Your question has been answered. In this thread. Three times. And yes, I've linked to multiple documents that go deeply into the issues two or three times in this thread alone.

The AW law is not about your magazine. You can stick you magazine up a donkey's *** and it doesn't change the definition of the term "detachable magazine." Your manure magazine is neither attachable nor detachable. Your rifle either can or can not accept any ammunition feeding device that can be removed from the rifle without a tool. If the ammunition feeding device can be removed without a tool from the specific rifle in question you may very well have an assault weapon under California law.

How many times - in this thread - have I posted, or posted a link to a document, that made clear that the test is about the rifle - not about the magazine?

-Gene

Butthead
04-13-2009, 6:06 AM
Your question has been answered. In this thread. Three times. And yes, I've linked to multiple documents that go deeply into the issues two or three times in this thread alone.

The AW law is not about your magazine. You can stick you magazine up a donkey's *** and it doesn't change the definition of the term "detachable magazine." Your manure magazine is neither attachable nor detachable. Your rifle either can or can not accept any ammunition feeding device that can be removed from the rifle without a tool. If the ammunition feeding device can be removed without a tool from the specific rifle in question you may very well have an assault weapon under California law.

How many times - in this thread - have I posted, or posted a link to a document, that made clear that the test is about the rifle - not about the magazine?

-Gene

Gene,

My sincerest apologies. I did not do my homework but rather jumped into this thread based on response temperment in this thread. I felt some of the posters were being unfairly attacked and jumped in trying to defend them. I was wrong. After going in and reading the entire links you posted, my questions were indeed addressed within the links you provided. I must admit that when originally going through the links I turned off my brain and quit reading as soon as the legalease started and never finished reading what was put before me. I still have a few questions but I am going to read these entire links again and see if they are indeed answered within before posting them.

Again I was wrong and I do apologize. I got caught up in the moment.

edwardm
04-13-2009, 6:18 AM
Might have just created some confusion between an attachable magazing and an asstachable magazine.


The AW law is not about your magazine. You can stick you magazine up a donkey's *** and it doesn't change the definition of the term "detachable magazine." Your manure magazine is neither attachable nor detachable.

-Gene

rkt88edmo
04-13-2009, 6:54 AM
Great, now I have to go hide my donkey...

Butthead
04-13-2009, 6:58 AM
BDSMCHS: I owe you an apology as well. While it may have been the tone of your replies that prompted my responses, I was wrong and you were right and I can now see why my comments were met with such an attitude.

Maybe my choice of using Butthead as my screenname was appropriate.

Again, I apologize to you.

rkt88edmo
04-13-2009, 7:21 AM
It is all confusing and does take time, particularly the common english meets legislative definition stuff.

I remember seeing Gene's presentation before the BB was in production and the concept of something being "attachable" but not detachable made my head spin a bit.

Butthead
04-13-2009, 8:07 AM
Very confusing. I really don’t know how some people have the ability to work through this obfuscation. I could not do it. My brain tends to be more black and white and I get fixated on things like "attachable" and then become blinded by anything further. I feel that all laws need to be simple enough for the average person to comprehend. I do understand that this will never be the case but I think if you want people to follow certain rules they should be able to understand what the rules are. When those that enforce the laws can't agree on what a law means then there is a problem.

Enough ranting from the "Butthead"

glock_this
04-13-2009, 8:08 AM
wow.. I am stunned this is still going on.. 16 pages of bantering... impressive

IGOTDIRT4U
04-13-2009, 8:15 AM
Sometimes I look back on the 'My Little Pony' days of this forum. :eek:

FLMAO!

SJgunguy24
04-13-2009, 8:22 AM
Might have just created some confusion between an attachable magazing and an asstachable magazine.

That is an awsome line.

Mazilla
04-13-2009, 9:00 AM
LOL, what happened to my post?

CHS
04-13-2009, 9:02 AM
wow.. I am stunned this is still going on.. 16 pages of bantering... impressive

Change your settings, it's only 5 pages :)

hoffmang
04-13-2009, 9:15 PM
I still have a few questions but I am going to read these entire links again and see if they are indeed answered within before posting them.


If, when you're done reading the docs, please feel free to ask.

-Gene