PDA

View Full Version : DOJ Reply to My Letter


1911_sfca
03-03-2006, 12:27 AM
http://www.kniveton.com/images/tmp/seizedlowersreply.gif

(here (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=28696&highlight=letter+doj) is the letter I wrote to them)

Here is my summary of the letter:

"Yeah, we grabbed your lowers. We thought the safe was to small. But then we decided to keep them for evidence (without giving anyone a receipt).

Well, you're probably gonna have to pay us some money to get your stuff back. It's too bad that you're gonna be inconvenienced and suffer financial loss, but it's your own damn fault because you didn't follow the law."

Ummm... what???

Henry47
03-03-2006, 12:36 AM
Henry47's summary: "We took your #(@&. You got PwN3d, now gimme some money and I'll think about giving it back to you.....whenever I feelz like it"

xenophobe
03-03-2006, 12:39 AM
Look at the good side...

You may have to pay additional fees (reDROS?), but it sounds like you'll get your product, which is definitely a good thing.

blacklisted
03-03-2006, 12:40 AM
Look at that folks, she is acknowledging that this is YOUR property.

EBWhite
03-03-2006, 1:06 AM
I would hope the FFL would pay the extra fees since they are partly at fault for breaking the law.

artherd
03-03-2006, 1:29 AM
This is very similar to a letter I just recieved.

Relivant Points: Important language acknowledging that the lowers are YOUR property, and promising eventual release.
Vauge assertions about fees (She's likely not sure if LEGR fees, or DROS fees, if any of the above, apply or not.)

"Held in course of an investigation" may mean anything at this point, it's a catch-all excuse to hang onto 'em. DOJ seems to not want you to have these lowers, even though they are quite legal.

My opinion; they wanted to derail RMB enterprises' sales effort, and errode the customers confidence to the point of accuzations and finger-pointing reminicent of nazi europe. Seems to have worked in that way on EBWhite at least a little. (though I'm not disputing that RMB was in the wrong, it dosen't help us to go after him now, it helps us to go after the DOJ for improperly and egregiously holding these recievers.)

DOJ has said in the past that they 'don't like' the fact that lower sales are taking place. They've threatened legitimate out of state manufactuars, some to the point where they stoped doing business. Then they release a cockamanie category4 memo, all are underhanded and malicious acts of questionable legality designed soley or in part to derail sales of otherwise legal longguns!

Guys, we must hang together on this, or else we will all most assuready hang seperately.

taloft
03-03-2006, 1:29 AM
You gave them the Serial numbers and the fact that you had DROS'ed them yet, they can't tell you if they have them!? :eek:

That is some special inventory control they have there. :rolleyes:
It sure takes some kind of nerve to admit that considering that they are pointing the finger at RMB for failure to properly secure the items in question. I bet RMB knew which ones were yours!

Since you're unable to pick them up prior to the DROS lapsing, you'll have to DROS them again. That sure seems like a conflict of interest to me.

This all has the makings of a class action lawsuit.

I hope you get your goods back.

EBWhite
03-03-2006, 1:57 AM
My opinion; they wanted to derail RMB enterprises' sales effort, and errode the customers confidence to the point of accuzations and finger-pointing reminicent of nazi europe. Seems to have worked in that way on EBWhite at least a little.

Guys, we must hang together on this, or else we will all most assuready hang seperately.

Nobody has fooled me :rolleyes:
I am pointing the finger at both the DOJ and the dealer. They are both at fault. The dealer did not have a big enough safe and the DOJ took the lowers. At that point it was 100% the fault of the dealer. End of story. However, problem fixed and passed reaudit. Now, the DOJ is more at fault but if the safe would have not been an issue in the first place then DOJ would have not had anything to cry about. I hate the DOJ, they are making it hard but as a consumer, the dealer is partially liable to pay any extra fees as is the DOJ is to waive the fees since they are both at fault. Dealer- safe, DOJ- holding past reaudit...

Again, the DOJ is more at fault and all we can do to piss them off for making us pay extra fees is bring more lowers into the state! :D

BigMac
03-03-2006, 6:19 AM
I would hope the FFL would pay the extra fees since they are partly at fault for breaking the law.

Your kidding right.. This guy was one of the first guys that did anyhitng for the bulk of the guys on this board..

DO me a favor... don't do me any favors.

6172crew
03-03-2006, 6:33 AM
Your kidding right.. This guy was one of the first guys that did anyhitng for the bulk of the guys on this board..

DO me a favor... don't do me any favors.

LOL! EB came on to the board complaining the FFLs are ripping people off, then finds ways to get a few lowers cheaper then sells them at twice what he paid for them. Hde bashed BSP for charging more than the state allows for bringing in PPT lowers (which I wouldnt touch if I was a dealer).

now he thinks Rob should be fined for stepping up and selling close to 1000 lowers knowing the DOJ was not going to like it.

EBW, let me let you in on somthing, if the DOJ wants to find somthing they are going to find somthing. That is a fact.:cool:

Keep in mind the safe space was good to go up until he helped everyone on this board.

SI-guru
03-03-2006, 6:33 AM
Your kidding right.. This guy was one of the first guys that did anyhitng for the bulk of the guys on this board..

DO me a favor... don't do me any favors.

Big +1. I was not in any group buy but RMB is a real stand up guy, I used him as my FFL before and will continue to do so in the future.

Harbinger
03-03-2006, 6:57 AM
Big +1. I was not in any group buy but RMB is a real stand up guy, I used him as my FFL before and will continue to do so in the future.

+EleventyBillion

If anything, we should be setting up a Paypal account to help defray the cost of his new safe. :mad:

Mistakes were made and corrected. We're all in this together. If we start turning on our own (FFLs), we're no better than the antis.

Mike

RW Dunn
03-03-2006, 7:34 AM
I would hope the FFL would pay the extra fees since they are partly at fault for breaking the law.
That reminds me of a friend i USED TO HAVE,there for the fun and games.At the first sign of trouble,starts pointing fingers at who's idea it was and gets out of trouble for turning trader.He was the kinda person that has to itemize a restaurant bill to the exact penny,amoungst friends.I really don't think EB is that kinda of person,he has some good views and post in the past and he probley did'nt mean for that to come out that way.So everybody stick together and let their(DOJ)idiotic game play its self out and go from there.Keep your tin foil hats on tight,its going to be a windy and bumpy ride till the end.

filefish
03-03-2006, 7:35 AM
[IMG]

Here is my summary of the letter:

"Yeah, we grabbed your lowers. We thought the safe was to small. But then we decided to keep them for evidence (without giving anyone a receipt).

Well, you're probably gonna have to pay us some money to get your stuff back. It's too bad that you're gonna be inconvenienced and suffer financial loss, but it's your own damn fault because you didn't follow the law."

Ummm... what???


It occurs to me that there was no strong language admonishing the ownership of these lowers…I think this communication is very telling and from what I understand Alison is one off the more anti black gun members of Lockyer’s staff

TheMan
03-03-2006, 7:38 AM
LOL! EB came on to the board complaining the FFLs are ripping people off, then finds ways to get a few lowers cheaper then sells them at twice what he paid for them. Hde bashed BSP for charging more than the state allows for bringing in PPT lowers (which I wouldnt touch if I was a dealer).



I'm glad I'm not the only one who caught that. The NDS-3 receivers he is trying to sell for $125 can be bought directly from the manufacturer for $55+shipping. The other prices.... ouch. It's a free market though, and he is welcome to try to gouge suckers for whatever he can.

Maybe HE can offer to pay the fees for everybody, since he's making so much off the info freely available on this board?:D

EBWhite
03-03-2006, 7:52 AM
LOL! EB came on to the board complaining the FFLs are ripping people off, then finds ways to get a few lowers cheaper then sells them at twice what he paid for them. Hde bashed BSP for charging more than the state allows for bringing in PPT lowers (which I wouldnt touch if I was a dealer).

now he thinks Rob should be fined for stepping up and selling close to 1000 lowers knowing the DOJ was not going to like it.

EBW, let me let you in on somthing, if the DOJ wants to find somthing they are going to find somthing. That is a fact.:cool:

Keep in mind the safe space was good to go up until he helped everyone on this board.

Yup, I did complain about BSP overcharging on those fees. Guess what, the policy changed real quick and I have visited BSP twice and Chris is prob one of my favorite dealers, no hard feelings and if I have in out of state purchases or need a gun later to be order he will be the first guy who gets my phone call.

If we are required to follow state laws, dealers need to also.
Where did I saw he should be fined for selling lowers???!!!?? :eek:

Oh course the DOJ will do anything to find something! But, he was in clear violation of the law and from a consumers standpoint he would be partially responsible for extra fees. The DOJ is too for holding these too long. I do like how their letter gives no timetable for return...

EBWhite
03-03-2006, 8:03 AM
I'm glad I'm not the only one who caught that. The NDS-3 receivers he is trying to sell for $125 can be bought directly from the manufacturer for $55+shipping. The other prices.... ouch. It's a free market though, and he is welcome to try to gouge suckers for whatever he can.

Maybe HE can offer to pay the fees for everybody, since he's making so much off the info freely available on this board?:D


We'll mister, your just being, hmm a pinhead...Lets do some math!
The receiver cost me 55, plus transfer fees at 25 plus tax of about 5 dollars. Plus gas is worth about 10.00 to me and my time at about 10 x 2 hours....
There I got about 105 bucks, I'm was asking 125, so I am making 20 bucks.
Now, can you get them for 55 plus fees, yes....So people dont want to hassle waiting and worrying if their receiver will get here in time for the DOJ list update. Its called piece of mind and people pay extra for that stuff all the time...
Next, I am asking 200 bucks for a lauer lower. Well, that is no out of line.
And last, 350 obo for an ameetec (marked LEO only), sure that is high but if you really want one, good luck finding it! You won't, I can charge whatever i feel. Noticed I sold one AK reciever, i sold the lauer local for 200+ and the ameetec is still here, maybe im asking too much for it but hey I'd rather keep it unless i get that much. If there was a law against it, then you'd have a good point but you don't :D

Now, instead of ranting about nothing, rant about something useful.

The comment i made came out short and i should have elaborated better but The DOJ is mainly at fault but the dealer does hold a little of responsibility for not following the law. I do thank him for bringing these here, but here is my question to the rude comments i have gotten, is it fair for the customers to have to pay extra fees because of a mistake that was not theirs??

`ebWhite

6172crew
03-03-2006, 8:05 AM
It wasnt that you voice an opinon on BSPs fees, you called for his head by calling the doj on him.
As far as the fine I should have said fee, you want Rob to pay for some of the cost because he should have bought a new safe or not sold us lowers because his safe was too small.

The fact is the building is secure w/ an alarm and my ffl had the same setup in his home/place of bussiness, who would have thought they would go as far as taking the lowers in the first place.

Irvington Arms was ok'd by the doj/atf until his shop was broken in to, then he was out of compliance.:eek:

The fact that these dealers even put there neck out on the table was amazing to me and pointing fingers at them or calling the doj on the few left in the state seems like biting the hand that feeds you.:(

Yup, I did complain about BSP overcharging on those fees. Guess what, the policy changed real quick and I have visited BSP twice and Chris is prob one of my favorite dealers, no hard feelings and if I have in out of state purchases or need a gun later to be order he will be the first guy who gets my phone call.

If we are required to follow state laws, dealers need to also.
Where did I saw he should be fined for selling lowers???!!!?? :eek:

Oh course the DOJ will do anything to find something! But, he was in clear violation of the law and from a consumers standpoint he would be partially responsible for extra fees. The DOJ is too for holding these too long. I do like how their letter gives no timetable for return...

TheMan
03-03-2006, 8:26 AM
We'll mister, your just being, hmm a pinhead...Lets do some math!
The receiver cost me 55, plus transfer fees at 25 plus tax of about 5 dollars. Plus gas is worth about 10.00 to me and my time at about 10 x 2 hours....
There I got about 105 bucks, I'm was asking 125, so I am making 20 bucks.
Now, can you get them for 55 plus fees, yes....So people dont want to hassle waiting and worrying if their receiver will get here in time for the DOJ list update. Its called piece of mind and people pay extra for that stuff all the time...

It's called peace of mind. Piece of mind is what you would give to someone when you were pissed at them;)

So you are making $20, PLUS the $20 for your time, PLUS the $10 that gas is worth to you, thats $50 each. Subtract a few bucks for MARKET value of gas(not what its worth to you, but what it actually costs), and THATS what you are making off them, not the $20 you claim. Maybe you should work on your math skills, pinhead :D

Just because you sold one or two, doesn't mean you aren't gouging, it just means that there are people willing to pay the price, for whatever reasons they may have. Like I said, its a free market, and charge what you want. Just don't expect anyone here to think very much of you when you do that on one hand, and complain about others doing it at the same time.

EBWhite
03-03-2006, 8:28 AM
Well, in the case of BSP, I contacted them a couple times, talked to the manager and read them the law. They did not want to listen. So i posted here maybe we could get some action and if nothing was able to be done I was planning on calling the DOJ. The policy was changed and everything was all well. I did infact at the end tell about how nice chris was when some others let him know the problem too. We joked around about it in the store and BSP is awsome. but if he would have not changed the policy, it would have been fair game to call. If im required to use a dealer to do a transfer, they should be required to follow the transfer laws, very simple...

Yes, i agree the whole safe thing was stupid!!! However, back to my question, should the customer be charged extra fees for a mistake they did not make??

EBWhite
03-03-2006, 8:32 AM
So you are making $20, PLUS the $20 for your time, PLUS the $10 that gas is worth to you, thats $50 each. Subtract a few bucks for MARKET value of gas(not what its worth to you, but what it actually costs), and THATS what you are making off them, not the $20 you claim. Maybe you should work on your math skills, pinhead :D
.

My truck gets 16mpg, 1 trip is about 35miles total....2 trips to my ffl would be 4 gallons of diesel plus going back to do the ppt would add another 2 gallons. 6 gallons total x 2.60=15.60....So now I am making a 20.00 profit and another 20 for my 2 hours of time. But for those 2 hours i could have been doing something else. So my profit was about 20 bucks, where do you get 50????

GTKrockeTT
03-03-2006, 8:40 AM
Well, in the case of BSP, I contacted them a couple times, talked to the manager and read them the law. They did not want to listen. So i posted here maybe we could get some action and if nothing was able to be done I was planning on calling the DOJ. The policy was changed and everything was all well. I did infact at the end tell about how nice chris was when some others let him know the problem too. We joked around about it in the store and BSP is awsome. but if he would have not changed the policy, it would have been fair game to call. If im required to use a dealer to do a transfer, they should be required to follow the transfer laws, very simple...

Yes, i agree the whole safe thing was stupid!!! However, back to my question, should the customer be charged extra fees for a mistake they did not make??

maybe we should report you to the DOJ for profiting on firearm sales without being a licensed dealer.

8 lowers here, 6 dci....sold a few. after the small profit from selling, im out about 1000 bucks...not bad for all that stuff....now comes the uppers lol

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=236409&postcount=11

6172crew
03-03-2006, 8:42 AM
I dont think anyone shold have to pay for a receiver tey already paid for and we might be able to get the $$ back by filling a claim.

I will be the contact for the :

Help get the Milpitas receivers home fund. Im not sure how that would work but I can start and keep a updated/on going list here for who gave how much and then split the $$ 212 ways. or if the DOJ charges per citizen we can split it up that way.

If the player on this board gave 5 bucks a peice Im sure we could help these guys out and get somthing out of it at the same time.

I think the milpitas crew should pay in pennies.:D



Well, in the case of BSP, I contacted them a couple times, talked to the manager and read them the law. They did not want to listen. So i posted here maybe we could get some action and if nothing was able to be done I was planning on calling the DOJ. The policy was changed and everything was all well. I did infact at the end tell about how nice chris was when some others let him know the problem too. We joked around about it in the store and BSP is awsome. but if he would have not changed the policy, it would have been fair game to call. If im required to use a dealer to do a transfer, they should be required to follow the transfer laws, very simple...

Yes, i agree the whole safe thing was stupid!!! However, back to my question, should the customer be charged extra fees for a mistake they did not make??

TheMan
03-03-2006, 8:48 AM
My truck gets 16mpg, 1 trip is about 35miles total....2 trips to my ffl would be 4 gallons of diesel plus going back to do the ppt would add another 2 gallons. 6 gallons total x 2.60=15.60..

But you had to go to your FFL regardless, to get your own receivers. So knock those 2 trips out of there, and you have 1 trip for the PPT. So thats 2 gallons at 2.60, for a total of $5.20


..So now I am making a 20.00 profit and another 20 for my 2 hours of time. But for those 2 hours i could have been doing something else. So my profit was about 20 bucks, where do you get 50????

I got $50 from your post, take out the $5.60 for gas, and its down to $44.80 each, on a $55 receiver. Thats a good profit margin ;) You can try to pull that extra $20 out and claim its for your time, but regardless, thats money that you are making over and above the cost of the item, so thats a profit, $20 admitted profit+ $20 paycheck to self is MORE than $20 total profit.

Personally, if I were you, I'd give myself a raise. If you charge $20/hr for your time, you can completely hide that profit from yourself, and give yourself some "piece" of mind. :p

EBWhite
03-03-2006, 8:54 AM
maybe we should report you to the DOJ for profiting on firearm sales without being a licensed dealer.



http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=236409&postcount=11


All sales done were legal done as a private party transfers at a licensed FFL...Thank you :D

filefish
03-03-2006, 9:04 AM
stags are going for from $115 to $200 plus shipping plus good luck finding a ffl. given the risks being taken I think that >$200 out the door is a fair price for a decent stripped lower.

EBWhite
03-03-2006, 9:17 AM
Again, sorry guys for not being clear in the beginning, but I will say once again DOJ in mainly at fault...But the dealer does hold a little bit of responsibility in this. No matter where who pays the fees, I don't think the consumer should be stuck with the bill..I was only looking out for the guys who bought these....No hard feels but lets try and get back on topic now...

Maybe a class action claim against the DOJ would be the best way to get these fees repaid?
Or another letter to them asking why they should have to pay twice even after the reaudit passed?

artherd
03-03-2006, 9:22 AM
Show me an FFL that's 100% in compliance, and I'll show you the tooth fairy.

I would bet my own lunch money that I could audit and find *something* on the DOJ's very own FFL!

There are enough laws in CA that everyone is a criminal and they may selectively prosecute ANYONE.

My message (which I think you can agree with) remains clear: Let's focus our attention on DOJ on this issue, and not on each other!

Nobody has fooled me :rolleyes:
I am pointing the finger at both the DOJ and the dealer. They are both at fault. The dealer did not have a big enough safe and the DOJ took the lowers. At that point it was 100% the fault of the dealer. End of story. However, problem fixed and passed reaudit. Now, the DOJ is more at fault but if the safe would have not been an issue in the first place then DOJ would have not had anything to cry about. I hate the DOJ, they are making it hard but as a consumer, the dealer is partially liable to pay any extra fees as is the DOJ is to waive the fees since they are both at fault. Dealer- safe, DOJ- holding past reaudit...

Again, the DOJ is more at fault and all we can do to piss them off for making us pay extra fees is bring more lowers into the state! :D

artherd
03-03-2006, 9:24 AM
Keep in mind the safe space was good to go up until he helped everyone on this board.
Good point, the enture facuility had also ALREADY PASSED several audits. But this time they 'found stuff'.

EBWhite
03-03-2006, 9:24 AM
Good point Art,

Now, should we get a letter back to the DOJ, asap asking about ETA of the return and why they should need to pay extra fees?

I think that is best, if nothing is returned or the letter sent back is full of BS, maybe file a suit??

artherd
03-03-2006, 9:24 AM
Hey BigMac, good to hear from you, shoot me an e-mail!
Your kidding right.. This guy was one of the first guys that did anyhitng for the bulk of the guys on this board..
DO me a favor... don't do me any favors.

artherd
03-03-2006, 9:30 AM
It wasnt that you voice an opinon on BSPs fees, you called for his head by calling the doj on him.
Nigga say WHAT?! I really hope that's not true. Get in the ffl's face in person if he's an *** about it after you show him the statute, sure. We've all got to follow the laws yes, ffls especially.
But ****ing snitch on him to doj?! No less at a time like this?!? Jesus I hope that's not what happened...

Irvington Arms was ok'd by the doj/atf until his shop was broken in to, then he was out of compliance.:eek:

The fact that these dealers even put there neck out on the table was amazing to me and pointing fingers at them or calling the doj on the few left in the state seems like biting the hand that feeds you.:(
+100million.

artherd
03-03-2006, 9:32 AM
We're already working on that angle, but I would suggest that others do so as well. Put as many letters across her desk as we can, this will help us to our mutual end of getting our property back.

Good point Art,

Now, should we get a letter back to the DOJ, asap asking about ETA of the return and why they should need to pay extra fees?

I think that is best, if nothing is returned or the letter sent back is full of BS, maybe file a suit??

EBWhite
03-03-2006, 9:35 AM
I don't have time to write a letter for this ...
but if someone wants to make a quick "form" letter that we can personalize a bit, I will gladly send one to the DOJ...

That would allow us to flood them..Again, i had no involvement in the sale of those taken but i would like to help out since it burns that those people have no product and paid money

GTKrockeTT
03-03-2006, 9:36 AM
All sales done were legal done as a private party transfers at a licensed FFL...Thank you :D

not the one you sold me in person at my house.:p ;) :eek:

EBWhite
03-03-2006, 9:39 AM
Yup, i ripped you on that one, **** why did you pay me so much for a broken 80% vulcan plastic reciever?? that 1200 bucks could have got you a cobb.. lol

shopkeep
03-03-2006, 9:42 AM
We're all going to jail aren't we :eek: !!!

Just kidding :cool: , seriously though Ben has a good point about putting as many letters as possible across Allison's desk. At the very least a large volume of letters about this subject will bump it up to a higher priority level.

And the fact that nobody has been charged with anything or even fined shows they're just as desperate to try and get an "Assault Weapons" bust out of this as they were when they put together than memo. Guys, we put one over on those state b****es! They though, "welp, AR-15s are illegal we'll never have to worry about that!". WRONG! AR-15s are not illegal, AR-15s on the series list are illegal :D!

bwiese
03-03-2006, 9:57 AM
For example, every FFL has to be available to do PPTs. That's the law. I very much doubt that the DoJ internal FFL has done any PPTs. I very much doubt that it would be possible to do a PPT there.

Let's back up for a sec.....

It's not a requirment that FFLs conduct PPTs, it's really a requirement that licensed CA gun dealers conduct PPTs (at least for longguns; if they don't sell handguns, they don't have to do handgun PPTs). It may well be possible for someone to have an FFL in CA but not able to do any gun business since other CA factors come into play. (I don't believe retail FFLs are issued now until zoning and local licensure stuff kicks in though, not sure...)

The DOJ FFL may not have a corresponding state permit to sell guns, so it's not a real CA gun dealer. The FFL was probably issued with a non-retail variance for them to conduct their governmental affairs.

TonyNorCal
03-03-2006, 10:05 AM
Well,

I'll be repeating a little of what others have already said...but this is an internet bulletin board, so won't be the first time anyone's done that .

1.) Rob Blank is a hero. Period. I think I started a thread to that effect a while back. Without guys like him willing to stand up and expose themselves to the DOJ's fire many people would have NO lowers. He was willing to put himself squarely in the DOJ's sites and transfer LEGAL receivers. As any of you who called around looking for someone to transfer lowers know, many FFLs wouldn't touch these things. He's one of the few that was willing to say...it's legal and it's the right thing to do.

2.) Rob Blank did not raise his transfer fees. Think about that. He's running a business. He easily could have asked for more and gotten it. People were gladly driving great distances and happy to pay.

3.) Rob Blank gave all of us who used him a great deal of time. He also has a reality business. What do you think he makes more money on? Doing a transfer may not seem like a lot to some of you...but being available to do paperwork with you twice, submitted paperwork to the DOJ, doing his own paperwork, entering it into a bound book, etc. It is very time consuming.

4) Rob wasn't a big time dealer. As mentioned above, he has a reality office. This is a small side business for him and I would guess he does it because he loves the hobby and his pro-second ammendment. Nevertheless, he was willing to have whole days devoted to people coming and DROSing lowers. Not many guys would have done that.

So he deserves our thanks and that idea about a fund to help him pay for the safe ain't a bad one.

bridgeport
03-03-2006, 10:08 AM
Admin, I suggest you remove this entire thread.

bwiese
03-03-2006, 10:13 AM
I am quite concerned/aggravated over folks jumping down an FFL dealer for these odd situations - an FFL who volunteered to help when many others shirked. Everyone that's been on Calguns for awhile knows this was a very aggressive and confrontational situation with the DOJ and that "business as usual" doesn't really apply, and that there was a certain gambling aspect to this. While perfectly legal, and with no one getting busted thanks to Harrott, that doesn't mean that DOJ wouldn't step over bounds and just start grabbing lowers. In fact, the fact we got so many flowing across the state by late December, during the holiday season, may well have stopped such ideas from coming to fruition.

Those few blaming the FFL or organizers for the situation are, in my mind, rude ill-mannered cheap-a**ed ingrates. Given shipping vagaries and a necessary "jump on this bunch of lowers whenever you can" outlook, that FFL was trying to get YOUR lowers on time before (1) DOJ lists them and (2) before the supplier got cold feet and wouldn't ship to CA.

It's hard enough doing regular gun business in CA as it is - esp in high-cost Bay Area. And then a few cool FFLs stepped up to the bar and tried to help people get set up with off-list lowers. Of the 700+ FFLs in CA, I'd bet only one-tenth - likely less! - have moved even one off-list lower (not counting FAB10s, etc.) Most just walk back to their duck guns shaking their heads when asked about this.

If you're that worried about a couple of hundred bucks, you've probably got far bigger problems in your life than whether or not you have an off-list lower or two. Tend to those issues first before you start playing with ARs. If not, then your question is not about $$ but about getting lowers before they are listed, in which case you go to an alternate source.

Team effort, gentlemen, team effort.

tpliquid1
03-03-2006, 10:37 AM
anyone have any templates of prewritten letter to doj w/o name. i just want to put my name on it and send it off to doj. if thats okay?\

edit: nm ben read my mind and already made one.

dwtt
03-03-2006, 10:57 AM
I bought fulton lowers from RMB and he was one of the few dealers willing to support us. If the dealer has to take a financial hit because of this, I'll chip in some money to help out. I know he spent a lot of money on a new safe after the lowers were taken by DOJ. It's sad, in a way, to see how self centered some people can be when blame was being thrown around. Let's just get past that and work on getting your lowers back from the DOJ.

bg
03-03-2006, 11:06 AM
I should know better, but I'm going to ask if anyone has
contacted their Rep of Sen ? I know some, maybe most,
have an anti-gun politico up in Sac and it wouldn't do
any good, but a few others do have Reps and Sen's who
are on the side of the 2nd Amendment. Mine are Bogh
and Dutton. Seems like mine and your's might take look
at this confiscation. I mean their is a lot of money sitting
up at the DOJ, as far as your property, and they in turn are
just sitting on this..

Be nice if a call from a Sen or Rep's office to the DOJ
would happen asking what's the hold up on the Milpitas
matter..

Maybe I better just pipe down. I didn't buy a lower
and won't be. It's not that I wouldn't like a good shooting
semi auto 223, but I really can't swing it and I rarely
am able to get out shooting anymore..Just wish you
guys could get YOUR property back.

HEUER
03-03-2006, 11:07 AM
1911_SFCA has been doing some good work here. He did an excellent job reporting (lack of a better word) on the prop H proceedings and did a good job here as well. Good job 1911_SFCA.

Roboshred
03-03-2006, 11:09 AM
All sales done were legal done as a private party transfers at a licensed FFL...Thank you :D
Your restricted by the # of transactions of buying and selling the same product in a given 12 month period by federal law. 8 is in fact considered retail and in violation. So much for that
I didn't buy any of these lowers and won't since I have some from the old days. I would suggest that you file a small claims case against the DOJ. The cost is minimal and they will string you out.However, force it to superior court where you can represent yourself and they will have to send an official to fight you. Make them sweat for it!. I was turned down in a background search by accident(Sprint had the wrong person) and was told to bad. I was told to refile and wait the 20 days all over. I refused and went on the offensive for 36 hours and beat them at their own game with no cost and an apology letter from Dan Lundgrens office for followup.
Stand up and use the system against them. Spend your time on the phone to newspapers;the ACLU ( they may help);local TV stations;Advocacy groups for minorities;your state rep; etc.. Be a doer and not a viewer it will work! RB

wangankin
03-03-2006, 11:24 AM
http://www.kniveton.com/images/tmp/seizedlowersreply.gif

(here (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=28696&highlight=letter+doj) is the letter I wrote to them)

Here is my summary of the letter:

"Yeah, we grabbed your lowers. We thought the safe was to small. But then we decided to keep them for evidence (without giving anyone a receipt).

Well, you're probably gonna have to pay us some money to get your stuff back. It's too bad that you're gonna be inconvenienced and suffer financial loss, but it's your own damn fault because you didn't follow the law."

Ummm... what???

YOU BROKE THE LAW by having an FFL with a small safe... TSK TSK TSK... you have been very naughty not knowing the specifications of your FFLs safe.

OOOOOOKay...... :-/

artherd
03-03-2006, 11:56 AM
1911_SFCA has been doing some good work here. He did an excellent job reporting (lack of a better word) on the prop H proceedings and did a good job here as well. Good job 1911_SFCA.
+10, nice job!

Bling Bling 2.0
03-03-2006, 12:13 PM
Just curious what are the restrictions that are put on safe sizes? Seems that anything that can fit inside should be safe.

Confiscation with a receipt is theft. But I guess they've been stealing for years...

EBWhite
03-03-2006, 12:26 PM
Your restricted by the # of transactions of buying and selling the same product in a given 12 month period by federal law. 8 is in fact considered retail and in violation.


I have to partly disagree with this. You can buy as many long guns as you want. However, you might be restricted from selling more than 8 of the same make and model per year...Anyone have proof of this?

Omega13device
03-03-2006, 12:40 PM
The section of the Penal Code she cited only says that the firearms have to be secured, and it gives various options for how to do it.

The thing is, it's not clear to me why they have to physically have the lowers in order to have evidence that the safe was too small. Photographs and statements from the agents should suffice. So on that basis I would certainly challenge their rationale for having the lowers beyond the time RMB passed the follow-up inspection.

6172crew
03-03-2006, 12:52 PM
Unless the DOJ isnt done inspecting the FFL Id say your right. Why cant Rob just ask them to bring them back and ask for the bill owed.

Im sure they are playing games and this is a way to get back at a guy who brought alot of blackgold in the state.

The section of the Penal Code she cited only says that the firearms have to be secured, and it gives various options for how to do it.

The thing is, it's not clear to me why they have to physically have the lowers in order to have evidence that the safe was too small. Photographs and statements from the agents should suffice. So on that basis I would certainly challenge their rationale for having the lowers beyond the time RMB passed the follow-up inspection.

Choptop
03-03-2006, 12:57 PM
The section of the Penal Code she cited only says that the firearms have to be secured, and it gives various options for how to do it.

The thing is, it's not clear to me why they have to physically have the lowers in order to have evidence that the safe was too small. Photographs and statements from the agents should suffice. So on that basis I would certainly challenge their rationale for having the lowers beyond the time RMB passed the follow-up inspection.


ding, ding, ding... we have a winner.

no reason for them to still hold the lowers... if they are being held because of inadequate safe size. If they are continuing to hold them for some other reason... that is a different story.

The "needed" to secure them during the time they could not be secured by the dealer. That time has passed.


where's the lowers?

thats the crux of my letter to the DOJ asking politely for the return of my property :D

kantstudien
03-03-2006, 1:09 PM
Hey, where are those "LE" marked lowers that are so "rare?" :rolleyes:

glen avon
03-03-2006, 1:12 PM
...it's not clear to me why they have to physically have the lowers in order to have evidence that the safe was too small. Photographs and statements from the agents should suffice. So on that basis I would certainly challenge their rationale for having the lowers beyond the time RMB passed the follow-up inspection.

it's common for evidence to be tied up interminably during criminal investigations and cases. this is not specific to The Lowers or the DOJ, even if the DOJ is the Devil Incarnate and is known to cause cancer, world hunger, and flat beer.

eje
03-03-2006, 1:30 PM
I wonder whether the owners of these lowers will need to reckon with this recent law once the DOJ says the lowers are ready to be returned (assuming they are not returned before then due to litigation or whatever):

www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/03-04/bill/asm/ab_2401-2450/ab_2431_bill_20040920_chaptered.pdf

What I'd be researching is whether the rightful owners can register the lowers once they're listed if the DOJ is still holding them as evidence during the 90-day registration window. If not, seems like the DOJ could just say, sorry these are banned weapons now and you can't have them back.

EBWhite
03-03-2006, 1:42 PM
Hey, where are those "LE" marked lowers that are so "rare?" :rolleyes:

Gun runners got a bunch in only 2 that came were stamped that. They are not made anymore and nobody has them, hence the rarity...If you don't like um, don't buy um :eek: :p

FreedomIsNotFree
03-03-2006, 1:56 PM
it's common for evidence to be tied up interminably during criminal investigations and cases. this is not specific to The Lowers or the DOJ, even if the DOJ is the Devil Incarnate and is known to cause cancer, world hunger, and flat beer.

Yes...and I am not sure of the time frame, but just that the DOJ says they are "under investigation" gives them a lot of leeway as far as the courts are concerned. I think this would also prevent any small claims suit at the current time.

Roboshred
03-03-2006, 2:01 PM
Yes...and I am not sure of the time frame, but just that the DOJ says they are "under investigation" gives them a lot of leeway as far as the courts are concerned. I think this would also prevent any small claims suit at the current time.
You file the case against them as a means to force their hands and qualify their
decisions. Granted it's a slow process but you have to fight them or you will be left to their whim. If they get 50-100 lawsuits filed they will be forced to move. You can probably have them changed to a class later but I'd have filed one by now if they took my property and I was in the right. Just my .02.. I fought them on their turf and won. So can you. RB

glen avon
03-03-2006, 2:31 PM
small claims suits will not "force" DOJ to do anything. who will enforce the judgment? which PD is going to search DOJ and seize the lowers?

Roboshred
03-03-2006, 6:35 PM
small claims suits will not "force" DOJ to do anything. who will enforce the judgment? which PD is going to search DOJ and seize the lowers?

The sky is falling. The sky is falling.

Juniper Kid
03-03-2006, 6:46 PM
OK, the confiscated lowers are considered rifles, why are they required to be in a safe?

I've visited tons of gun stores and all of them don't keep rifles in safes... they have it stacked up for display, even Big 5 doesn't keep it in a safe, they are all on display or in Big 5's backroom, I've been to their backroom where they keep the rifles... it's Not a safe.:rolleyes:

xenophobe
03-03-2006, 6:59 PM
OK, the confiscated lowers are considered rifles, why are they required to be in a safe?

I've visited tons of gun stores and all of them don't keep rifles in safes... they have it stacked up for display, even Big 5 doesn't keep it in a safe, they are all on display or in Big 5's backroom, I've been to their backroom where they keep the rifles... it's Not a safe.:rolleyes:

Because at a personal residence, you don't have bars preventing entry. Someone can just break a window, hop in and then leave with goods.

A retail gun store, for example, must have security bars and doors. In SJ, we must also leave the lights on 24 hours a day, handguns cannot be immediately visible from a window, but the police must be able to see into the premisis to be able to see if there is any activity, and we must have an alarm directly notifying the police knowing full well we are a gun store, as well as insurance to cover liability.

Omega13device
03-03-2006, 7:02 PM
OK, the confiscated lowers are considered rifles, why are they required to be in a safe?

I've visited tons of gun stores and all of them don't keep rifles in safes... they have it stacked up for display, even Big 5 doesn't keep it in a safe, they are all on display or in Big 5's backroom, I've been to their backroom where they keep the rifles... it's Not a safe.:rolleyes:

It doesn't have to be a safe. That is one method of securing firearms but according to the penal code there are a number of approved methods including a separate, secured room, certain kinds of locks, etc.

Juniper Kid
03-03-2006, 7:03 PM
Because at a personal residence, you don't have bars preventing entry. Someone can just break a window, hop in and then leave with goods.

A retail gun store, for example, must have security bars and doors. In SJ, we must also leave the lights on 24 hours a day, handguns cannot be immediately visible from a window, but the police must be able to see into the premisis to be able to see if there is any activity, and we must have an alarm directly notifying the police knowing full well we are a gun store, as well as insurance to cover liability.

Thanks for the information, I didn't know all the required stuff for an FFL.

:)

Juniper Kid
03-03-2006, 7:09 PM
It doesn't have to be a safe. That is one method of securing firearms but according to the penal code there are a number of approved methods including a separate, secured room, certain kinds of locks, etc.

Yeah... and Big 5 doesn't have a safe, they have flimsy gun locks though, the crappy Century locks.

My former school mate works for Big 5 and I asked her while at Big 5, if I can see that Mosin on the rack, her reply was, sure but "we have to wait for the manager for keys to the flimsy gunlock."

I was like, screw that, I have my own, needless to say, she was impressed,
little did she know that it's a generic century gunlock with a universal key... :D :D

Super_tactical
03-03-2006, 8:15 PM
People better be careful not to bash Rob. Don't be jerks. Seriously, turn on him, turn on me. I'm not arguing the fact that he was compensated monetarilly. I'm saying that he stepped up to the plate big time and came through for us when NOBODY around here would. Show some respect, he took a lot of risk in this.

I have MUCH respect for both Rob AND Ben. I think you'd better all have the same.

MOLON LABE

Omega13device
03-04-2006, 8:06 AM
I agree. Rob stuck his neck out there to help us out. Our potential losses are limited to the money we spent on the lowers and fees. He is out there risking his FFL and his livelihood just so we can have a few extra toys. If he made a mistake along the way we should cut him some slack for that.

kantstudien
03-04-2006, 8:11 AM
Gun runners got a bunch in only 2 that came were stamped that. They are not made anymore and nobody has them, hence the rarity...If you don't like um, don't buy um :eek: :p

Hey, I have a Stag lower that was pitted prior to anodizing so it looks like worms are crawling all over the receiver. I am pretty sure it is unique, hence the rarity. Wanna trade? :p

rodgster
03-04-2006, 2:00 PM
To all bashers:

United we stand. Divided we fall.

Sgt Raven
03-04-2006, 2:05 PM
To all bashers:

United we stand. Divided we fall.

"We must hang together, for surely we'll hang separately."

Charliegone
03-04-2006, 3:46 PM
Its like I said before...any other time I would question why this and that...but considering the current situation...its better not to add wood to the fire.;)