PDA

View Full Version : Utterly confused with legality of this sale


Tho_Sun
01-10-2010, 12:11 PM
Hey guys,

So I've always thought the taurus thunderbolt to be illegal because it's a "pump" action firearm that has a magazine that can fit 14 shots. Then I stop by turners and they say that it's legal because the pump mechanism is considered a lever and hence makes this rifle legal. He continued to assure me that it was legal as turners verifies with their lawyers before they put anything in shop... So I just wanted to check to make sure I'm not buying a assault weapon, is it legal?

A large capacity magazine means any ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more
than 10 rounds, but shall not be construed to include a feeding device that has been permanently
altered so that it cannot accommodate more than 10 rounds, a tubular magazine that is contained in
a lever-action firearm, or a .22 caliber tube ammunition feeding device. (Penal Code
12020(c)(25).)

FastFinger
01-10-2010, 12:28 PM
Can't help you with the answer, but I hope it's legal, that's a pretty rifle!

http://www.taurususa.com/main/images/thunderbolts.jpg

bwiese
01-10-2010, 1:03 PM
Turner's is extending the law in the wrong way. They're thinking "cowboy gun" when they should be thinking "lever action" vs. "not a lever action".

Broadly, situations like this can have two concerns:
- is the gun an illegal AW?
- is the mag an illegal hicap?

Firstly, this is a pump-action rifle. Like a lever-action, it's also not *semiautomatic*, and thus falls completely out of scope of CA AW laws.

Secondly, the over-10 magazine capacity exemption applies only to tubular magazines in lever actions or 22 caliber (or both). Note the latter exemption does not specify 22LR, 22Short, etc. and thus does not require rimfire status!

No mention of pump-actions was made in exemption (in centerfire, they're relatively less common than lever actions, and the exemption was put in for cowboy shooters' typical Win 94s and Marlins). I have not found a definition for "lever action" or "pump action" in statute or regulations, so common/ordinary "terms of the trade" would be applicable and I don't think anyone would say the two are equivalent. In addition, this appears to be a big-bore centerfire rifle.

Given 12020(c)(25), and
- not a pump action
- not "22 caliber"

.... I conclude that Turner's is indeed selling an illegal hicap magazine with the gun. The gun itself is no problem if separated from the tube mag (i.e., nonoperational) and mag were not "22 caliber".

If a blocking device were introduced that could permanently restrict capacity to 10rds, then it'd be OK - but in such a design, it would render the rifle difficult if not near impossible to clean, service, or unjam in some situations.

Plan B would be for Taurus or intervening mfgr to shorten the tube to 10rds and make whatever machining changes are necessary at the fron of the tube (new threading etc.)

Turner's I believe, has a hicap mag permit. This assembled gun is legal to be on their shelf, but IMHO not legal to sell to Joe Blow. It could be sold to an LEO since they're hicap-mag exempt.

And while the DOJ may actually not get too upset about this situation, you ARE in LA with the LAPD Gun Unit. These arseholes attacked a shop for selling snubnose/pocket gun HOLSTERS - no kidding.

Tho_Sun
01-10-2010, 1:46 PM
Thank you very much B for the clarification. Your presence is very much appreciated.

tgriffin
01-10-2010, 1:51 PM
Bill, just had a naughty thought... Is tubular codified somewhere? Looking as I ask.

Meplat
01-10-2010, 2:07 PM
I doubt it would be much trouble to permanently reduce the capacity to 10 rounds in that thing. Neat little rifle.:)


Turner's is extending the law in the wrong way. They're thinking "cowboy gun" when they should be thinking "lever action" vs. "not a lever action".

Broadly, situations like this can have two concerns:
- is the gun an illegal AW?
- is the mag an illegal hicap?

Firstly, this is a pump-action rifle. Like a lever-action, it's also not *semiautomatic*, and thus falls completely out of scope of CA AW laws.

Secondly, the over-10 magazine capacity exemption applies only to tubular magazines in lever actions or 22 caliber (or both). Note the latter exemption does not specify 22LR, 22Short, etc. and thus does not require rimfire status!

No mention of pump-actions was made in exemption (in centerfire, they're relatively less common than lever actions, and the exemption was put in for cowboy shooters' typical Win 94s and Marlins). I have not found a definition for "lever action" or "pump action" in statute or regulations, so common/ordinary "terms of the trade" would be applicable and I don't think anyone would say the two are equivalent. In addition, this appears to be a big-bore centerfire rifle.

Given 12020(c)(25), and
- not a pump action
- not "22 caliber"

.... I conclude that Turner's is indeed selling an illegal hicap magazine with the gun. The gun itself is no problem if separated from the tube mag (i.e., nonoperational) and mag were not "22 caliber".

If a blocking device were introduced that could permanently restrict capacity to 10rds, then it'd be OK - but in such a design, it would render the rifle difficult if not near impossible to clean, service, or unjam in some situations.

Plan B would be for Taurus or intervening mfgr to shorten the tube to 10rds and make whatever machining changes are necessary at the fron of the tube (new threading etc.)

Turner's I believe, has a hicap mag permit. This assembled gun is legal to be on their shelf, but IMHO not legal to sell to Joe Blow. It could be sold to an LEO since they're hicap-mag exempt.

And while the DOJ may actually not get too upset about this situation, you ARE in LA with the LAPD Gun Unit. These arseholes attacked a shop for selling snubnose/pocket gun HOLSTERS - no kidding.

zhyla
01-10-2010, 3:26 PM
Secondly, the over-10 magazine capacity exemption applies only to tubular magazines in lever actions or 22 caliber (or both). Note the latter exemption does not specify 22LR, 22Short, etc. and thus does not require rimfire status!

This is a detail that had escaped me previously. This is probably asking for trouble, but could a mag-locked P90 (5.7mm = .224") be considered to have a tubular magazine?

I guess what I'm asking is, how is "tubular magazine" defined?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dd/US4905394_FN_Herstal_-_Magazin_P90.png/420px-US4905394_FN_Herstal_-_Magazin_P90.png

383green
01-10-2010, 3:35 PM
I don't see how a P90 magazine could possibly be considered to be a tubular magazine.

kermit315
01-10-2010, 4:24 PM
doesnt turners have a presence on the board now? if so, and somebody knows who they are, they should get a link of this thread PM'd to them for review.

JMO.

Shotgun Man
01-10-2010, 6:11 PM
Are they sold at all Turners? There's no liability on the buyer is there?

DedEye
01-10-2010, 6:25 PM
I don't see how a P90 magazine could possibly be considered to be a tubular magazine.

Nor can I, under the most lenient of definitions, begin to fathom the logic necessary to see a P90 magazine as tubular.

However, an argument could be made that some of the Calico magazines are tubular. It may be a stretch, but the mental gymnastics necessary are far smaller than required for the P90.

Here's a layman's definition of a tubular magazine: A tube that holds ammunition and allows it to be loaded into a position to be fired.

A P90 magazine isn't a tube.

383green
01-10-2010, 6:39 PM
In a tubular magazine, the cartridges are lined up coaxially in a single row, all pointing in the same direction, with each bullet/shell tip touching the case head of the following cartridge. Like this:

<<<<<<<<<<<

(oh, no, it's a large-capacity tubular magazine! :p)

I don't think a Calico magazine could be considered tubular any more than a P90 magazine or an M16 magazine. In all of them, the cartridges are not arranged tip-to-tail on a single axis, as they would be in a tubular magazine. It's not the cylindrical shape of the magazine that makes it a tubular magazine, but the arrangement of the cartridges. IMHO, anyway.

Now, I don't know if tubular magazines have been given a legal definition or not, but I'd bet good money that if they were, neither a Calico magazine nor a P90 magazine would fit in that definition, and the sort of mental gymnastics needed to make either of them fit would be likely to cause a paralyzing injury. ;)

DedEye
01-10-2010, 6:43 PM
I don't think a Calico magazine could be considered tubular any more than a P90 magazine or an M16 magazine. In all of them, the cartridges are not arranged tip-to-tail on a single axis, as they would be in a tubular magazine. It's not the cylindrical shape of the magazine that makes it a tubular magazine, but the arrangement of the cartridges. IMHO, anyway.

Now, I don't know if tubular magazines have been given a legal definition or not, but I'd bet good money that if they were, neither a Calico magazine nor a P90 magazine would fit in that definition, and the sort of mental gymnastics needed to make either of them fit would be likely to cause a paralyzing injury. ;)

I agree with you on all counts, but figured it was some food for thought and certainly made more sense than claiming that a "sideways magazine" (P90) was somehow tubular.

Either way, your definition is far more accurate.

383green
01-10-2010, 6:46 PM
So, who wants to design a lever-action AR lower that uses a tubular magazine? And is there any rule rule that says a tubular magazine can't be detachable? :D