PDA

View Full Version : Bullet Button Legal?


kenagy55
05-06-2009, 9:42 AM
If I were to purchase a SIG556 in Arizona with 10 round magazines and a bullet button could I legally register it in California? I havn't done it yet I want to make sure it's legal first. DOJ say's they can't give legal advice and my local DA hasn't gotten back to me yet.

sorensen440
05-06-2009, 9:45 AM
If you were to have the dealer in AZ ship it to a dealer in CA to do the transfer and it had a bb on it prior to shipping then yes
(Or have them ship the lower to the dealer and the upper to you)

GenLee
05-06-2009, 9:47 AM
Yes a bullet button is legal.

No you can't go to Az. to buy it. You can buy it from one of the sponsoring venders of this site, They will make it Ca. compliant and ship it to your ffl here in ca. for transfer to you.

There is no registration needed for long guns. Only handguns require registration.

grahlaika
05-06-2009, 9:49 AM
First off, I'm not a lawyer, so take what I say with a grain of caution.

There's no easy answer to the legal question because it hasn't been challenged in court yet. We obviously believe the bullet button meets the criteria for making what started as an AW into a compliant fixed magazine semi-auto rifle. I'm sure some at the DOJ are of the opinion that the BB bypasses the intent of the law, and have made threats in the past about incoming prosecutions for BB-equipped rifles, although nothing's come of it.

You're obviously taking a risk of sorts, and if you're not willing to take that risk, don't do it. I doubt you'll hear much of a definitive answer from either the DOJ or from your DA. I'd say as long as your FFL is willing to import the weapon as is into the state and transfer it to you, you should be OK.

FS00008
05-06-2009, 9:52 AM
Yes a bullet button is legal.

No you can't go to Az. to buy it. You can buy it from one of the sponsoring venders of this site, They will make it Ca. compliant and ship it to your ffl here in ca. for transfer to you.

There is no registration needed for long guns. Only handguns require registration.



He technically could "buy" it in another state, he just cannot take possession of it in another state. To take possession of said rifle, you must have it shipped to a Cali FFL. Or if you're a dual resident, you could buy it there.

truthseeker
05-06-2009, 9:53 AM
I like to think of the question "Is a BB legal" as rather "Is there a law that states a BB is ILLEGAL?".

The reasoning is because if there is NO law stating that something is illegal than I assume it is LEGAL.

bwiese
05-06-2009, 10:10 AM
I like to think of the question "Is a BB legal" as rather "Is there a law that states a BB is ILLEGAL?".

The reasoning is because if there is NO law stating that something is illegal than I assume it is LEGAL.

Yup. Twisted convoluted reasoning by the Brady' Campaign's staffer working in the DOJ office is really irrelevant.

No DA has ever prosecuted a full BB case, and the few instances where drama occurred, they've been dropped before filing when attorney explains and/or 3000 pages of NRA-generated documentation about AWs is presented. Some DAs understand BBs and I expect we might see some documentation from them someday.

fairfaxjim
05-06-2009, 10:13 AM
I like to think of the question "Is a BB legal" as rather "Is there a law that states a BB is ILLEGAL?".

The reasoning is because if there is NO law stating that something is illegal than I assume it is LEGAL.

There are some laws, particularly the CA AW laws that do state some things are illegal, but you are basically correct, usually something is legal by virtue of the fact that it is not illegal.

Having said all that, the BB is a little more complex because it is part of a "system" that has to be configured so as not to have an illegal combination of features. The BB by itself is simply one component of that system that, when properly installed and used, deals with a major qualifying feature that would otherwise make the system illegal, i.e. the capacity to accept a detachable magazine. If used with a greater than 10 round magazine, then the BB provides, in itself, no relief. Also, if fitted to a system (OLL based rifle) that has other qualifying features that make it illegal, a BB provides no relief. So, since the DOJ has not make a ruling that the BB is illegal, IF USED CORRECTLY IN AN OTHERWISE NON-ILLEGAL OLL BASED RIFLE, the yes the BB is legal to use for it's intended purpose.

Sorry for all the jargon, but SB-23 creates this SYSTEM approach requirement to build a legal rifle.

fairfaxjim
05-06-2009, 10:15 AM
Yup. Twisted convoluted reasoning by the Brady' Campaign's staffer working in the DOJ office is really irrelevant.

No DA has ever prosecuted a full BB case, and the few instances where drama occurred, they've been dropped before filing when attorney explains and/or 3000 pages of NRA-generated documentation about AWs is presented. Some DAs understand BBs and I expect we might see some documentation from them someday.

Bill, I assume that with all the other 2A progress that has come our way recently that the expected DA's letter re: BB vs. Prince-50 magazine locks has all but gone away. Is this correct, or is there some life remaining in this?

Thanks

GenLee
05-06-2009, 10:18 AM
If I were to purchase a SIG556 in Arizona with 10 round magazines and a bullet button could I legally register it in California? I havn't done it yet I want to make sure it's legal first. DOJ say's they can't give legal advice and my local DA hasn't gotten back to me yet.

For your reading pleasure :thumbsup:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=150568&highlight=bullet+button+prince+50

Liberty1
05-06-2009, 10:20 AM
If I were to purchase a SIG556 in Arizona with 10 round magazines and a bullet button could I legally register it in California? I havn't done it yet I want to make sure it's legal first. DOJ say's they can't give legal advice and my local DA hasn't gotten back to me yet.

IF you can legally purchase a gun in AZ, I'm sure the CA DOJ would like all Arizonians to voluntarily register them in the CA data base. :p (JK)

bwiese
05-06-2009, 10:25 AM
Bill, I assume that with all the other 2A progress that has come our way recently that the expected DA's letter re: BB vs. Prince-50 magazine locks has all but gone away. Is this correct, or is there some life remaining in this?


You should use a BB now and not a Prince50. \

If you have a Prince50-based rifle, you should convert to a BB-style maglock.

We're still not there yet, BBs are easier to defend. We can of course defend a legit Prince50 locked-down configuration but why go there/risk things when BB rifle cases just "go away"?

For the record, we just had another SoCal BB rifle matter go away very quietly yesterday as a "no file".

bodger
05-06-2009, 10:25 AM
Just when I think I have a handle on this, I get mired in FUD.

If I took a Bushmaster Carbon 15, cut out the sealed bottom of the mag well, removed the fixed 10 round mag, installed a RADDLOCK, and now use 10 round mags only with that Raddlock, is there a DOJ type or DA that would be able to argue I have broken any laws?

fairfaxjim
05-06-2009, 10:27 AM
You should use a BB now and not a Prince50. \

If you have a Prince50-based rifle, you should convert to a BB-style maglock.

We're still not there yet, BBs are easier to defend. We can of course defend a legit Prince50 locked-down configuration but why go there/risk things when BB rifle cases just "go away"?

For the record, we just had another SoCal BB rifle matter go away very quietly yesterday as a "no file".

Been there, done that (BB's installed). Thanks for the update.

BTW, anybody interested in some P-50 mag locks, lightly used (and then only in NV!)

CavTrooper
05-06-2009, 10:27 AM
You should use a BB now and not a Prince50. \

If you have a Prince50-based rifle, you should convert to a BB-style maglock.

We're still not there yet, BBs are easier to defend. We can of course defend a legit Prince50 locked-down configuration but why go there/risk things when BB rifle cases just "go away"?

For the record, we just had another SoCal BB rifle matter go away very quietly yesterday as a "no file".

I would like to know if in these cases the firearms in question are being returned to the owner or confiscated as part of some kind of agreement or the "wash, rinse, repeat" theory that has been advocated here.

wash
05-06-2009, 10:39 AM
It wouldn't have "gone away" if the rifles were not returned.

bwiese
05-06-2009, 10:40 AM
I would like to know if in these cases the firearms in question are being returned to the owner or confiscated as part of some kind of agreement or the "wash, rinse, repeat" theory that has been advocated here.


Recent cases we dealt with involving unquestionably legal rifles have had guns returned (or are in customary LEGR release process).

Sometimes it's an extra step of work though.

[The 'lather rinse & repeat' concept was early on when things were being fought individually and not systemically.]

A legal rifle can't be seized as an AW unless it's proven to be an AW. CGF is here to show such rifles are not AWs ;) and we know what's an AW far better than a busy junior DA that doesn't have time to deal with 3000 pages of NRA analysis.

bwiese
05-06-2009, 10:47 AM
Just when I think I have a handle on this, I get mired in FUD.

If I took a Bushmaster Carbon 15, cut out the sealed bottom of the mag well, removed the fixed 10 round mag, installed a RADDLOCK, and now use 10 round mags only with that Raddlock, is there a DOJ type or DA that would be able to argue I have broken any laws?

I have never seen a Raddlock so I am presuming it's the functional equivalent of the BB: a latching device that can't come loose.

A ham sandwich can be indicted, and anything can be argued with limited facts/knowledge.

But your gun in that setup, with a fixed 10rd mag, is not an AW. And we will fight for it.

bodger
05-06-2009, 10:54 AM
I have never seen a Raddlock so I am presuming it's the functional equivalent of the BB: a latching device that can't come loose.

A ham sandwich can be indicted, and anything can be argued with limited facts/knowledge.

But your gun in that setup, with a fixed 10rd mag, is not an AW. And we will fight for it.
Thank you.
That is why I sent a donation to the CalGuns foundation this morning and will continue to do so.
:thumbsup:

CavTrooper
05-06-2009, 10:55 AM
Recent cases we dealt with involving unquestionably legal rifles have had guns returned (or are in customary LEGR release process).

Sometimes it's an extra step of work though.

[The 'lather rinse & repeat' concept was early on when things were being fought individually and not systemically.]

A legal rifle can't be seized as an AW unless it's proven to be an AW. CGF is here to show such rifles are not AWs ;) and we know what's an AW far better than a busy junior DA that doesn't have time to deal with 3000 pages of NRA analysis.

Outstanding.

The "lather, rinse, repeat" process is defenitly something that I see as harmful to the individual if they are in fact innocent of whatever they are being accused of. To voluntarily forfit your firearm(s) is basically an admission of guilt, or an "adverse disposition" in your case and could negatively effect your career plans, etc.

bwiese
05-06-2009, 11:08 AM
Outstanding.
The "lather, rinse, repeat" process is defenitly something that I see as harmful to the individual if they are in fact innocent of whatever they are being accused of. To voluntarily forfit your firearm(s) is basically an admission of guilt, or an "adverse disposition" in your case and could negatively effect your career plans, etc.

When there was no real organized legal support pre-CGF (other than Gene & me on the phones backing an attorney and/or getting some helpful Right People gun lawyer time dropped onto a non-gun attorney) it would be a rational decision to not fight for a rifle if it's $2+K or more in attorney's fees vs a $500 rifle.

Until DAs/cops started learning - in part due to BWO situation + lotsa pushback - that there are weird rifles that aren't AWs out there, that was 'best possible' rational outcome without spending $$$ or having risk of a bad judge going sideways".

In those few early matters it made sense to let the DA have a 'consolation prize'; there was no 'adverse disposition': charges filed and were dropped, or weren't filed at all. Yes, it was not good but it was the right expedient path at the time. Arrests can't be used against you, it's convictions. And the informal loss of the rifle for dropped charges is not gonna show up on someone's record: it'll at best just show arrest/no charge filed, or arrest/charges filed but dropped.

An AB2728 resolution is a completely separate thing. It really requires the gun to be found as an AW, and is a handy 'out' for some yayhoo who had a loose Prince50 or who can't read and put a hicap on a fixed mag rifle. It is below an infraction, it's a civil nuisance: it's at the same legal priority level as a ticket for not mowing your lawn, or parking your powerboat in your front yard. Not a bad deal, esp compared to felony risk.

CavTrooper
05-06-2009, 11:37 AM
When there was no real organized legal support pre-CGF (other than Gene & me on the phones backing an attorney and/or getting some helpful Right People gun lawyer time dropped onto a non-gun attorney) it would be a rational decision to not fight for a rifle if it's $2+K or more in attorney's fees vs a $500 rifle.

Until DAs/cops started learning - in part due to BWO situation + lotsa pushback - that there are weird rifles that aren't AWs out there, that was 'best possible' rational outcome without spending $$$ or having risk of a bad judge going sideways".

In those few early matters it made sense to let the DA have a 'consolation prize'; there was no 'adverse disposition': charges filed and were dropped, or weren't filed at all. Yes, it was not good but it was the right expedient path at the time. Arrests can't be used against you, it's convictions. And the informal loss of the rifle for dropped charges is not gonna show up on someone's record: it'll at best just show arrest/no charge filed, or arrest/charges filed but dropped.

An AB2728 resolution is a completely separate thing. It really requires the gun to be found as an AW, and is a handy 'out' for some yayhoo who had a loose Prince50 or who can't read and put a hicap on a fixed mag rifle. It is below an infraction, it's a civil nuisance: it's at the same legal priority level as a ticket for not mowing your lawn, or parking your powerboat in your front yard. Not a bad deal, esp compared to felony risk.

Thanks for that explaination, helps me to understand a little more clearly the reasoning behind the game plan.

In BWOs case, was it a "NCF" or "charges dropped" case? I recall him stating that the mess resulted in him losing an opportunity with CID which I would understand if the "adverse disposition" showed on his record.

nicki
05-06-2009, 11:38 AM
If I took a Bushmaster Carbon 15, cut out the sealed bottom of the mag well, removed the fixed 10 round mag, installed a RADDLOCK, and now use 10 round mags only with that Raddlock, is there a DOJ type or DA that would be able to argue I have broken any laws?


I would strongly discourage you from doing that.:)

I would instead just get a OLL lower with a bullet button instead.;)

In the next few years, the need for such lowers to comply with the law will disappear and I figure the market for such guns will dry up real fast.:eek:

Bushmaster and others will stop making them, as a result, they may become collector pieces. :thumbsup:

Nicki

bodger
05-06-2009, 11:48 AM
I would strongly discourage you from doing that.:)

I would instead just get a OLL lower with a bullet button instead.;)

In the next few years, the need for such lowers to comply with the law will disappear and I figure the market for such guns will dry up real fast.:eek:

Bushmaster and others will stop making them, as a result, they may become collector pieces. :thumbsup:

Nicki

Thanks, maybe I should reconsider. But the Bushie with the sealed mag well is such a eunuch, I can't stand it. And the top load thing is just not happening.
I see your point on collectibility though. And I hope you're right about the compliance in the future.
I maintain a forlorn hope regarding CA gun laws. Even so, I am looking at property in Prescott, AZ.

hoffmang
05-06-2009, 12:18 PM
All correctly configured BB rifles that I know of have come back to their owners on completion of the LEGR process.

-Gene

fairfaxjim
05-06-2009, 1:15 PM
Thanks, maybe I should reconsider. But the Bushie with the sealed mag well is such a eunuch, I can't stand it. And the top load thing is just not happening.
I see your point on collectibility though. And I hope you're right about the compliance in the future.
I maintain a forlorn hope regarding CA gun laws. Even so, I am looking at property in Prescott, AZ.

Hang onto it. I have a FAB-10 lower that has been replaced by 3 OLL's with 2 more waiting for me to get around to building them. I figure that it will someday be a museum piece, it at least has a DOJ approval letter that could end up as a museum piece, and if not no big deal. I'm certainly not going to waste time trying to make an inferior POS into something else.

CSACANNONEER
05-06-2009, 1:24 PM
FAB10s also make great lowers for bolt action uppers!