PDA

View Full Version : From the NRA's CA Attorney


Talkin2u2
03-07-2006, 10:28 PM
Has anyone seen this yet? Its titled HOW CAN THE LIST OF FIREARMS LEGALLY DESIGNATED AS "ASSAULT WEAPON" BE EXPANDED?

http://calgunlaws.com/Docs/ASSAULT%20WEAPONS/Articles/76373_1_doj_expands.pdf

I found it an interesting read.

blacklisted
03-07-2006, 10:30 PM
Yes, I've seen it and it was a fairly interesting read.

shopkeep
03-07-2006, 10:58 PM
At this point I am beginning to believe the DOJ has seen the flaws in its memo and decided not to add these firearms to the series list. Instead they will go to the legislature after election time.

SkyStorm82
03-07-2006, 11:15 PM
At this point I am beginning to believe the DOJ has seen the flaws in its memo and decided not to add these firearms to the series list. Instead they will go to the legislature after election time.

What will that mean if they go to the legislature?

blacklisted
03-07-2006, 11:16 PM
What will that mean if they go to the legislature?

It would likely mean that we have to register these and will never be able to build them up properly. That or they find some way to take them away.

TheMan
03-07-2006, 11:48 PM
Has anyone seen this yet? Its titled HOW CAN THE LIST OF FIREARMS LEGALLY DESIGNATED AS "ASSAULT WEAPON" BE EXPANDED?

http://calgunlaws.com/Docs/ASSAULT%20WEAPONS/Articles/76373_1_doj_expands.pdf

I found it an interesting read.

He seems to be under the impression that the CA Code lists different categories of assault weapons too. Are you sure he isn't a DOJ plant?:eek:

xYourLocalAR15x
03-07-2006, 11:51 PM
i highly doubt they'll take them away. all hell will break loose.

It would likely mean that we have to register these and will never be able to build them up properly. That or they find some way to take them away.

Charliegone
03-07-2006, 11:55 PM
i highly doubt they'll take them away. all hell will break loose.

+1 on that. There are some diehard dudes that won't take that kindly. :mad:

shopkeep
03-07-2006, 11:57 PM
Beyond what's in the memo it's unlikely they will try to **** with us further. They may legislate to try to enforce what's in the memo, but they will not attempt confiscation or anything else. It's really up to anybody what will happen from here.

I noticed you've got a charming new avatar yet again Blacklisted.

blacklisted
03-08-2006, 12:15 AM
This month it's John Wayne Gacy, the serial killer clown.

Ford8N
03-08-2006, 6:05 AM
This month it's John Wayne Gacy, the serial killer clown.

Man, I can't stand clowns.=(


The best thing for gun owners is to get as many lowers into this state as possible. Spread the word.

6172crew
03-08-2006, 6:22 AM
Man, I can't stand clowns.=(


The best thing for gun owners is to get as many lowers into this state as possible. Spread the word.

+1 on the damn clown.:eek:

swhatb
03-08-2006, 2:32 PM
What will that mean if they go to the legislature?
it means that they'll become paper weights!:mad:

ohsmily
03-08-2006, 2:37 PM
He seems to be under the impression that the CA Code lists different categories of assault weapons too. Are you sure he isn't a DOJ plant?:eek:

Read it carefully. The document is referring to the 3 ways that they are classified as assault weapons. This is correct. What the DOJ has said they will do is create a 4th tier of assault weapons. NOT in the law.

ohsmily
03-08-2006, 2:39 PM
it means that they'll become paper weights!:mad:

Wrong, it means that you can only build them in compliance with SB23. (presumable, but it is all speculation at this point, BUT, they can't legislate that you can't build it into a CA legal rifle if you already possessed it before the law).

xenophobe
03-08-2006, 2:39 PM
This was discussed about 3 weeks ago....

Of course, we all knew these were paperweights to begin with. ;)

swhatb
03-08-2006, 2:42 PM
This was discussed about 3 weeks ago....

Of course, we all knew these were paperweights to begin with. ;)
paper weights but with a legal action... but of course:D

double_action
03-08-2006, 2:53 PM
This was discussed about 3 weeks ago....

Of course, we all knew these were paperweights to begin with. ;)

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=198324&postcount=3

Jicko
03-08-2006, 3:18 PM
You can still use the stripped lower receiver as an "assault weapon" to throw at the head of a robber if he come into your house and threaten your life..... you better aim well and throw hard.....

gmcem50
03-08-2006, 3:40 PM
Man, I can't stand clowns.=(

+2 on the clowns!:mad:

glen avon
03-08-2006, 3:45 PM
Read it carefully. The document is referring to the 3 ways that they are classified as assault weapons. This is correct. What the DOJ has said they will do is create a 4th tier of assault weapons. NOT in the law.

who coined the "category" term? was it not a court? If a court can do it, DOJ can do it.

pilotmadrat
03-08-2006, 5:06 PM
"You can still use the stripped lower receiver as an "assault weapon" to throw at the head of a robber if he come into your house and threaten your life..... you better aim well and throw hard....."

No, you have to put a pistol grip on it! Then you have a good handle to beat them to death! With out that its a CA legal UFR (Unlisted Flying Receiver)

PMR

TheMan
03-08-2006, 6:15 PM
Read it carefully. The document is referring to the 3 ways that they are classified as assault weapons. This is correct. What the DOJ has said they will do is create a 4th tier of assault weapons. NOT in the law.

Read my post carefully. The document talks about the 3 "categories" of assault weapon, like I said in my post. I didn't mention anything beyond that. Simply that the NRA lawyer used the "category" terminology. The DOJ uses that terminology, it isn't in the law. That is in a way, agreeing with the DOJ stance that there are "categories" of assault weapon, instead of different paths to get to the same endpoint- an assault weapon, not a category of assault weapon. Merely a sarcastic observation, nothing more;)

adamsreeftank
03-09-2006, 11:05 AM
who coined the "category" term? was it not a court? If a court can do it, DOJ can do it.

Can you explain this Glen?

I thought that the courts job was to make rulings on laws. Whereas the DOJ's job was to follow the laws (and perhaps enforce them if they so choose).

bwiese
03-09-2006, 11:47 AM
I believe the "Category" term popped up sometime after both SB23 registration period and Kasler.

No court ruling I know of refers to "categories" (Kasler, Harrott, etc.)

The thing is, Category II guns are really Category I guns as they are "series" members and thus really fall back under Roberti-Roos - it's just that Harrott says they're not series members until listed. So actually, all the AR and AK clones that get listed could really be dropped into the Roberti-Roos list under the AR15 or AK groupings. (That is, CCR sec 979.11 could be dropped back into sec 979.10.)

The DOJ introduced the category terminology as a shorthand or convenient term of reference referring to when/why something became an AW. But these categories are not entities to themselves and do not assume any new magical DOJ-assigned powers.

We should not be using the phraseology "Category N" to imply or infer anything regarding post-registration differentiation assault weapons - other than the fact that they are indeed all AWs.

xenophobe
03-09-2006, 11:56 AM
There ARE 3 categories of Assault Weapons in California law.

1) 12276 definition firearms, which includes CCR 979.11 listed guns
2) 12276.1 definition firearms
3) 12278 .50 BMG caliber rifles

As far as the 'Categories' they talk about in the memo or courts, they are NOT part of CCR or PC and hold no official designation, lawful definition or enforcable statute....

bwiese
03-09-2006, 12:16 PM
There ARE 3 categories of Assault Weapons in California law.

1) 12276 definition firearms, which includes CCR 979.11 listed guns
2) 12276.1 definition firearms
3) 12278 .50 BMG caliber rifles


The 50BMG is really not an AW. It is a completely separate and distinct entity. It just happens that some of the laws for 50BMGs are similar to and commingled with AW laws.

Also, I believe that dealer/gunsmith permits for AWs are separate and independent from those for 50BMGs - one doesn't give you rights to work on the other.

There is one area of overlap where existing reg'd AWs can have 50BMG attribute without additional registration. This was likely added just to save paperwork - they figured they already got you on file, it's good enough.



As far as the 'Categories' they talk about in the memo or courts, they are NOT part of CCR or PC and hold no official designation, lawful definition or enforcable statute....

Agreed, absolutely. It's important that we realize common terms of reference bandied about don't have legal force.

xenophobe
03-09-2006, 12:31 PM
Well, the .50 BMG is not technically an assault weapon... but if you look at the definition of a .50 BMG, it falls within the code specified as "12275-12290 Assault Weapons", which is why I consider it a category of AWs. It will probably also be listed under your AW Registration Number (if you already have one issued), and will most likely be included on an updated list of Registered AW firearms that will be mailed to you once the paperwork is processed. So, regardless of what they want to call it, it's been deemed an assualt weapon just by how they are treating them and where the code was inserted into the PC.

I know this is going on a stretch, but I would be willing to assume that an AW permit would also allow the right to handle and transfer .50 BMGs, but a .50 BMG permit is specific to just the .50 BMGs.

artherd
03-09-2006, 6:36 PM
.50BMG rifles are covered under a completely seperate CPC as you listed. They ARE NOT "assault weapons"! They are ".50BMG Rifles" which is a totally seperate and prohibited class unto itself!

The fact that the 12278 PC that bans .50BMG Rifles reads like verbage was stolen wholesale from the AW ban in 12276, well, that's just a concidence :P

There is 1 (not 2, 3, or 4) AW prohibition, and 1 .50BMG rifle prohibition. They are seperate, and distinct.)

There ARE 3 categories of Assault Weapons in California law.

1) 12276 definition firearms, which includes CCR 979.11 listed guns
2) 12276.1 definition firearms
3) 12278 .50 BMG caliber rifles

artherd
03-09-2006, 6:37 PM
As far as the 'Categories' they talk about in the memo or courts, they are NOT part of CCR or PC and hold no official designation, lawful definition or enforcable statute....
This deserves repeating!

glen avon
03-09-2006, 6:55 PM
Can you explain this Glen?

I thought that the courts job was to make rulings on laws. Whereas the DOJ's job was to follow the laws (and perhaps enforce them if they so choose).

not sure what you are asking me to explain. I can't explain where the "categories" came from. :confused:

if you are asking about who makes the law, well, the legislature makes statutory law and the courts make common law.

all three may make regulations and rules as needed to carry out their duties. Not surprisingly, court rules apply almost exclusively to courts and those dealing directly with courts.

the DOJ most certainly can categorize AWs, and as far as that is pursuant to and within their statutory grant of regulation and rulemaking, the courts must abide by it. If a court creates categories, then DOJ does not have to recognize them unless they are in court. then they will have to.

if the legislature makes them, everybody is supposed to care.

it's a separation of powers thing.

xenophobe
03-09-2006, 7:24 PM
.50BMG rifles are covered under a completely seperate CPC as you listed. They ARE NOT "assault weapons"! They are ".50BMG Rifles" which is a totally seperate and prohibited class unto itself!

The fact that the 12278 PC that bans .50BMG Rifles reads like verbage was stolen wholesale from the AW ban in 12276, well, that's just a concidence :P

There is 1 (not 2, 3, or 4) AW prohibition, and 1 .50BMG rifle prohibition. They are seperate, and distinct.)

Actually, there are two distinct AW prohibitions. RR89 and SB-23.

My point is that .50 BMG banning/registration is not being conducted any differently than previous AW bans and much of the code pertaining to the .50 BMG is indeed in the Assault Weapon section of the PC as opposed to being seperate. Until I see otherwise, I assume the following: you are not receiving a unique .50 BMG registration number, and you will not receive a seperate .50 BMG registration confirmation letter, and your newly registered .50 BMG registration will appear as part of your RR89/SB-23 registration documents, and that if you have a pre-existing AW Registration number, you will indeed be receiving an updated confirmation letter showing ALL of your registered AWs and .50 BMGs.

If the above is true, then there is no difference, except with one circumstance, which would be possession/transportation of an unregistered .50 BMG which without any other criminal activity associated with this, would only be a misdemeanor, unlike unregistered AWs which could be a misdemeanor or felony.


This deserves repeating!

Yes, and they will have to acknowledge this at some point.

-aK-
03-09-2006, 7:26 PM
I'm just gonna give this all the ol +1