PDA

View Full Version : New Cali legal 50 rifle ?


bg
02-23-2005, 10:51 AM
I got this over the wire from FCSI. I think the round can be had in 510 European. Ck it out..
http://www.fiftycal.org/events.php

bg
02-23-2005, 10:51 AM
I got this over the wire from FCSI. I think the round can be had in 510 European. Ck it out..
http://www.fiftycal.org/events.php

02-23-2005, 11:30 AM
Yep, so far EDM ARMS is the only one selling it. Serbu, Barrett and Safety Harbor Firearms (UltraMag50) are working on theirs also.

bwiese
02-23-2005, 11:33 AM
Good.

Perfectly legal in CA.

The CA 50 law specifically bans guns chambered for ".50BMG", and even specifies chamber dimensions.

Any other similar rifle that CANNOT chamber a std. 50BMG cartridge is still legal.

Bill Wiese
San Jose

SI-guru
02-23-2005, 1:29 PM
How can the bore be over 50 and still not consider destructive device ? I thought only shotguns are exempted.

bwiese
02-23-2005, 2:51 PM
Because many calibers that have a given number value in their names really have another diameter/width. For example, a .44Mag round is somewhere around .42+" diam. and .38s are .357" diameter.

I'm betting this is still using a 50BMG bullet that's in a slightly tweaked/renecked cartridge.

Bill Wiese
San Jose

jnojr
02-23-2005, 3:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jjc:
How can the bore be over 50 and still not consider destructive device ? I thought only shotguns are exempted. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's .60 caliber, not .50...

kalibear
02-23-2005, 4:04 PM
More info here = http://www.edmarms.com/products/510dtc.htm

SI-guru
02-23-2005, 4:23 PM
Bill,
I dig your arguement, someone must have checked it before, right ?

Jonjr,

"A destructive device (DD) is a explosive, incendiary or poison gas weapon, or any firearm with a bore over 1/2", with exceptions for sporting shotguns, among other things (see discussion below)."

1/2" is not .60

bwiese
02-23-2005, 4:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jjc:
I dig your argument, someone must have checked it before, right ? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just read the law at the DOJ website.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">"A destructive device (DD) is a explosive, incendiary or poison gas weapon, or any firearm with a bore over 1/2", with exceptions for sporting shotguns, among other things (see discussion below)." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
1/2" is not .60 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There may be a diff. btwn Fed/ State laws on diam. for destructive devices - .50 vs .60.

Anyway a gun firing a 50BMG _bullet_ in a case different enough that the rifle's chamber dimensions thereof will NOT accept an exact complete 50BMG round is perfectly legal even in CA.

Only the specific 50BMG caliber is banned. A slightly changed gun, say, the "497 Feinstein" or the one from EDM that triggered this thread, are perfectly legal in CA.

Bill

leo@csuhayward.edu
02-24-2005, 4:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bwiese:


Only the specific 50BMG caliber is banned. A slightly changed gun, say, the "497 Feinstein" or the one from EDM that triggered this thread, are perfectly legal in CA.

Bill </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yup... another idiot who didnt learn from the first "AW" ban...

i like that .497 feinstein...

who's gonna make it first... lol.....

bg
02-24-2005, 4:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leo d.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bwiese:


Only the specific 50BMG caliber is banned. A slightly changed gun, say, the "497 Feinstein" or the one from EDM that triggered this thread, are perfectly legal in CA.

Bill </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yup... another idiot who didnt learn from the first "AW" ban...

i like that .497 feinstein...

who's gonna make it first... lol..... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Don't think anyone is in much a hurry to make
the 497. It more-n-likely end up a dud with
many misfires, and failure's to be straight
and true...

Draven
02-26-2005, 12:46 AM
naah, a .497 Fienstien would have to be able to be made in something concealable, as well as a straight-stock 10-round removable mag rifle.(with 30 rd mags in 'free states') Preferably covered in black plastic, with a collapsible stock.

Librarian
02-26-2005, 2:08 PM
A"497 Feinstein" would also likely shoot hard to the left, and never hit the right target.

Number 6
02-27-2005, 2:28 AM
Just out of curiosity, would a rifle chambered in the Russian 12.7x108 be legal then?

02-27-2005, 3:02 PM
Number six,
It should be as they didn't name it but I would check with the Cal DOJ. Trying to find ammo and a rifle to fire it will be the hardest part.

fastmanusa
02-27-2005, 8:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Librarian:
A"497 Feinstein" would also likely shoot hard to the left, and never hit the right target. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Great Post!

Draven
02-27-2005, 8:48 PM
Naah... .497 Feinstein would only be able to hit other guns and your wallet.

bwiese
02-27-2005, 9:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Number6 wrote:
Just out of curiosity, would a rifle chambered in the Russian 12.7x108 be legal then? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">50_shooter replied:
Number six,
It should be as they didn't name it but I would check with the Cal DOJ. Trying to find ammo and a rifle to fire it will be the hardest part.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>


No! No! No! Illegal!

This was specifically commented upon in a series of 50BMG-related Q&As with Randy Rossi and Tim Riegert of Calif. DOJ Firearms Div. at a recent NRA Members Council meeting.

When the discussion got to 'how close to the line can you safely be' with almost-50BMG chamberings, the bottom line was ability to chamber a 50BMG round. This Russian round was used as a specific example because a 50BMG round CAN chamber in a 12.7mm chambered rifle (maybe not well, but works - apparently a WWII Russian design goal).

So while the 'specs' in the law exactly describe 50BMG dimensions, the ability or lack of ability to chamber a standard 50BMG round is the key to whether or not it's illegal.

A very short chambered 50-cal round where a bolt could not close/lock/fire (even with major applied force) on a standard 50BMG round, will be the operative test.

The 50BMG _bullet_ itself is not banned, nor are guns shooting the 50BMG _bullet_ - just the guns shooting the complete 50BMG round are banned.


Bill Wiese
San Jose

02-28-2005, 8:34 AM
Not sure how they could come to this conclusion on the Russian round/rifle. It's dimensions are almost 3/8ths of an inch longer, while you could chamber the .50 round there's no way it would fire. I suppose some idiot would find a way to get the extractor to hold it on the bolt and fire it but the resulting explosion would probably remove his head.

I guess they haven't got a clue as to what would happen with that much extra space in the chamber. Hopefully they'll figure out a way to do it and either Koretz or Auhnuld will be the ones to pull the trigger. http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

bwiese
02-28-2005, 10:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by 50_Shooter:
Not sure how they could come to this conclusion on the Russian round/rifle. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Doesn't matter. Just don't have a 'long' chamber that can take 50BMG, have a rifle w/short chamber that CANNOT chamber 50BMG.

Bill Wiese
San Jose

HEWA195@CS.COM
03-05-2005, 7:45 AM
Even though CA states a destructive device here is .60" or bigger ,you would still run afoul of the fed dimension of.50". I also found it interesting that in CA the length requirement is 30" not 26" like the feds. I think the M1a1 carbine would be too short then when folded. And wouldn't it be an aw since it has a pistol grip and folding stock?

Draven
03-05-2005, 11:28 AM
Yes, the pistol grip and folding stock make it an AW.

Draven
03-05-2005, 4:03 PM
He was asking about the M1A1 Carbine...

here's 'da rulez'

'assault weapon' characteristics (http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/genchar.htm)

Of course, according to these ludicrous rules, a Mauser made to accept removable mags is an 'assault weapon'

Draven
03-05-2005, 4:54 PM
I meant a Mauser 'broomhandle'

03-05-2005, 5:49 PM
I'm still looking for a manufacturer to produce a forward handgrip and partially, not the "full evil" completely, encircling barrel shroud for my 1914 Mauser pocket pistol.
http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif