PDA

View Full Version : COLT AR-15 A2


Pavel
06-16-2010, 12:05 AM
So I was siiting around the shop today with my business partner (Redneckshootist) and we were talking about taking things to new levels in the store. The ban list specifically bans; Colt AR-15 (all), Match Target (all), Sporter (all) and Law Enforcement (6920). So, after the clarifications of the list resulting after the Harrot descision, a Colt AR-15 A2 (government carbine) is clearly off-list as we see it. We have had quite a few people in the shop wanting original Colt's. What do you guys think??? I know this issue has been brought up a few times in the past, but I would like some more insight.

Farva
06-16-2010, 12:11 AM
Huh?

69Mach1
06-16-2010, 12:12 AM
I would not play that game. It still says "Colt AR15".

unusedusername
06-16-2010, 12:26 AM
What is stamped on the lower?

If it says "Colt AR15" then I wouldn't touch it.

Q
06-16-2010, 12:38 AM
How about SP1? Wishful thinking..:)
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n32/qbertquartz2/album%201/P5060078.jpg

BKinzey
06-16-2010, 12:46 AM
IS THAT RUST?:eek::eek::eek:


:taz::rofl2::D:

thayne
06-16-2010, 12:47 AM
Clean that rifle private!

Pavel
06-16-2010, 12:51 AM
What is stamped on the lower?

If it says "Colt AR15" then I wouldn't touch it.


An example of one would be AR 15 A2, with "Government Carbine" being underneath in smaller writing. We see the gun as in fact being an AR-15 A2 and not AR-15, therefore the (all) would not apply, like if the gun was an AR-15, model whatever. You also have the Colt LE6940 (among a couple other Colts) that many dealer's in CA including ourselves have been selling, which does in fact say "Colt's Law Enforcement Carbine" on the lower. The lower is even identical to the 6920, which some say could present a grey area once the upper is swapped or the box/paperwork is lost, but the 6940 has be deemed CA off-list.

bwiese
06-16-2010, 1:12 AM
WTF?? This is the 2nd question tonite about this subject that's originated from a given business.

I continue to abhor the silly fascination with what could easily be regarded as on-list receivers - esp.
when there are so many functionally identical receivers out there. Fergawdsakes, a Stag and a Colt
lower shoot the friggin' same, it's the upper that does the work.

And today there are two or three truly off-list Colt lowers anyway for those really wanting a horsey
logo.

You want your friggin' customers to have drama at every police encounter? It's still a burden to explain
OLLs to some cops anyway - imagine doing this under stress with a much more complicated situation.

There are indeed technical defenses - helped along by some logic of Iggy's approvals of certain items
sold in the past (Evan's/GBSales welded-up Colt ARs) - but these are very very edgy.


PLEASE FU*KING DON'T DO THIS - language intended (sorry Kes/mods)

POSSIBILITY OF A TECHNICAL DEFENSE DOES NOT MEAN RECOMMENDED CONDUCT.


1.) This stuff would go in front of a *California* judge, generally not gun-friendly - and can EASILY go
sideways and into appellate channel. We win on the other stuff because it's so clear and shaped by
detailed regulation. But is a Colt AR15-A2 a "Colt AR15"? Hmmm. Or is that a Colt R6000? Lotsa
opportunities to go sideways.

2.) We do NOT need to fight a Son-of-Harrott or Harrott II case. In fact, if someone were too stupid
to come close to the edge in this kinda matter my personal vote - if this were asked to become a CGF
case - would be to *not*support iit as it's a battle with baggage we don't need and it serves nobody
except the stupid-sh*t defendant. They can pay their own friggin' freight with the lawyer.

Jeezus.

We have had quite a few people in the shop wanting original Colt's

Tell them they're friggin' idiots to wanna rush it, and to wait a year. Then hand 'em a Stag, Noveske,
etc. lower.

Pavel
06-16-2010, 2:02 AM
WTF?? This is the 2nd question tonite about this subject that's originated from a given business.

I continue to abhor the silly fascination with what could easily be regarded as on-list receivers - esp.
when there are so many functionally identical receivers out there. Fergawdsakes, a Stag and a Colt
lower shoot the friggin' same, it's the upper that does the work.

And today there are two or three truly off-list Colt lowers anyway for those really wanting a horsey
logo.

You want your friggin' customers to have drama at every police encounter? It's still a burden to explain
OLLs to some cops anyway - imagine doing this under stress with a much more complicated situation.

There are indeed technical defenses - helped along by some logic of Iggy's approvals of certain items
sold in the past (Evan's/GBSales welded-up Colt ARs) - but these are very very edgy.


PLEASE FU*KING DON'T DO THIS - language intended (sorry Kes/mods)

POSSIBILITY OF A TECHNICAL DEFENSE DOES NOT MEAN RECOMMENDED CONDUCT.


1.) This stuff would go in front of a *California* judge, generally not gun-friendly - and can EASILY go
sideways and into appellate channel. We win on the other stuff because it's so clear and shaped by
detailed regulation. But is a Colt AR15-A2 a "Colt AR15"? Hmmm. Or is that a Colt R6000? Lotsa
opportunities to go sideways.

2.) We do NOT need to fight a Son-of-Harrott or Harrott II case. In fact, if someone were too stupid
to come close to the edge in this kinda matter my personal vote - if this were asked to become a CGF
case - would be to *not*support iit as it's a battle with baggage we don't need and it serves nobody
except the stupid-sh*t defendant. They can pay their own friggin' freight with the lawyer.

Jeezus.



Tell them they're friggin' idiots to wanna rush it, and to wait a year. Then hand 'em a Stag, Noveske,
etc. lower.





I guess I should have clarified that this is NOT something we are going to jump right into by any means, and we are totally aware of the 58 DA's seeing things differently than we do and to start selling the Colt's would be playing with fire. Our shop is known for bringing some cool stuff into the state, and we of coarse do so while obeying CA law to the T.

At the shop, we of coarse inform the customer's that a Spike's, a Stag, or any other flavor of our fine black rifles will go bang just like the Colt's do. However, being a Colt collector myself, I completely undestand the unjustifiable craving for the jumping pony logo and we do sell the 6940's like hot cakes.

Mr. Wiese, I appreciate your response. The Colt idea, just like some other's we have had recently has been something we were just kicking around and we wanted to see what the CG community thought about them.

I guess I should clarify my question a bit more, maybe you could help me; Would Colt AR-15 A2 be the make and "government carbine" be the model, or is AR-15 A2 considered the model? And I know of the Colt factory going by R-6700 or what not, which even further confuses things. I still see the AR-15 A2 gov't carbine as being off-list :confused:

Pavel
06-16-2010, 11:27 PM
fredieusa, that is exactly what I was thinking. I did not really consider the sp-1 argument until now, and I agree with your logic. This type of thinking is what got the bullet button and the whole featureless/mmg thing started and I am sure there was a bunch of nay-sayers. For now I agree that the idea of BB/featureless Colt's would not be something worth putting tremendous legal efforts in, espescially with all of the new possibilities after Mcdonald vs. Illinois.

I am still hoping to get more insight as to WHY people believe that some of the previously mentioned Colt lowers are not off-list, instead of just saying not to do it. Anyone else have some opinions/idea's? Thanks guys.

bwiese
06-16-2010, 11:44 PM
OK.

Make: Colt
Model: AR15.
What the hell is "SP1" or "Sporter"? That's a submodel or variant and irrelevant.

Also, what happens if you make the argument that a Match Target is not listed and you insist it's a Colt MT6400 - but you've put a CMMG upper on it? The latter really can queer any chance of the other-than-marked designator.

And it all doesn't matter. You're in a busy courtroom with an antigun judge. Things easily go sideways. Unlike a BulletButton where we have regulatory law and DOJ memos and DOJ approved fixed-mag guns, we have Harrott which works fine with clear situations but this is so close to the line it's a coin-toss.

Remember that any gun marked "AK-47" is banned regardless of make due to footnote in Harrott. That logic could be mentally carried over to "Colt AR15".

Please do NOT expect courts to be logical in these matters.

Anyone trying this - please accept felony risk and have $30K for appeals process. Make arrangements to transfer your guns to friends if you're convicted of a felony.

Most of all, why NOW? When things are sooo close?

30rdMag
06-17-2010, 12:10 AM
I kinda side with above. We have something that works now. Why push? Did you not read the whole open carry thread? What happens when the fine line gets pushed. They make a new law. We dont have any gun law writers on our side, Yes we have Lawyers to try and fix the aftermath. But why? Why run the risk of everyone loosing their black rife over something stupid. All lowers work. If you really want to collect. Go get one. hide it away in a safe and dont talk about it. Then when times and laws change. Then bring it out to show.

But to play with fine details, your just putting all of us at risk of loosing everything. :mad:

Lead-Thrower
06-17-2010, 12:16 AM
If you really want to collect. Go get one. hide it away in a safe and dont talk about it.

This is not good advice... :eek:

30rdMag
06-17-2010, 12:39 AM
This is not good advice... :eek:

Well if you must have it. I know its not good to say. But if its not heard, seen or known.... you good. If you like to show n tell. then well.. bad idea...

I know a lot of people that follow that rule and well dont have a problem. Its the show n tell guys that well hurt them selfs after a while.

Some people want it just to say they have it and well put on to the state and ha ha ha... Thats a bad idea that will only bring more bad laws... But if you the quiet guy, you should have no problems...

30rdMag
06-17-2010, 12:40 AM
I still think if you legaly own what ever before moving into the state. It should be legal when you move here.

bwiese
06-17-2010, 1:10 AM
I still think if you legaly own what ever before moving into the state. It should be legal when you move here.

But it's not.

You don't know how many crying soon-to-be-felons have called me.

Many had multiple AWs and had escalator penalties, and also did not go get a gun lawyer or tried to do things themselves "on the cheap".

They thought if they kept the gun 'quiet' they'd be safe.

Lawyer Don Kilmer tells me 75% of the non-OLL AW cases he's handled involved *domestic* situations - and this doesn't mean wife-beating. There are a variety of totally innocent exigent circumstances in which LEOs can enter your dwelling.

Also, folks dumb enough to illegally possess unregistered AWs in CA are usually stupid enough to consent to a search and/or not be familiar with their 4th Amendment rights and talk themselves into jail.

thayne
06-17-2010, 1:18 AM
Listen to Bill and just dont do it. Before you know it the AW ban will be just a bad memory and you can get your Colts then :D

adamsreeftank
06-17-2010, 1:24 AM
If the list says "Colt AR 15" and the gun says "Colt AR 15" I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole. I don't care what it says after that. It's not like the jury is going to be a bunch of Calguns members. You will have to convince people who have already made up their mind, and you are hanging on a very thin thread with very big consequences for everyone involved.

Pavel
06-17-2010, 1:47 AM
OK.

Make: Colt
Model: AR15.
What the hell is "SP1" or "Sporter"? That's a submodel or variant and irrelevant.

Also, what happens if you make the argument that a Match Target is not listed and you insist it's a Colt MT6400 - but you've put a CMMG upper on it? The latter really can queer any chance of the other-than-marked designator.

And it all doesn't matter. You're in a busy courtroom with an antigun judge. Things easily go sideways. Unlike a BulletButton where we have regulatory law and DOJ memos and DOJ approved fixed-mag guns, we have Harrott which works fine with clear situations but this is so close to the line it's a coin-toss.

Remember that any gun marked "AK-47" is banned regardless of make due to footnote in Harrott. That logic could be mentally carried over to "Colt AR15".

Please do NOT expect courts to be logical in these matters.

Anyone trying this - please accept felony risk and have $30K for appeals process. Make arrangements to transfer your guns to friends if you're convicted of a felony.

Most of all, why NOW? When things are sooo close?

This is all I wanted to hear:

"What the hell is "SP1" or "Sporter"? That's a submodel or variant and irrelevant."

I am not trying to play in the grey area at all, I just believed it was clear as day that if sp1 or gov't carbine or whatever is the model than the rifle is off-list. If sp1/lightweight/others are IRRELEVANT markings, then case closed.

Pavel
06-17-2010, 1:53 AM
If the list says "Colt AR 15" and the gun says "Colt AR 15" I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole. I don't care what it says after that. It's not like the jury is going to be a bunch of Calguns members. You will have to convince people who have already made up their mind, and you are hanging on a very thin thread with very big consequences for everyone involved.


Appreciate your concern, but I don't need any more "the jury is not a bunch of calguns members" answers. I am quite aware of this, and I tell my customer's that they shouldn't mess around with new schemes unless they have 40k to burn, and don't mind losing their gun right's. Just looking for on or off-list opinions regarding make and model.

tenpercentfirearms
06-17-2010, 7:24 AM
The Kasler List actually says, "Colt AR-15 (all)". I would think that this one could be argued to be a Colt AR-15 Model SP1 which is part of the all category of the Colt AR-15.

Now can they just list guns as "all" or is that more of the same nonsense that got them in trouble in the first place when they said all AKs and AR15s were illegal?

I would feel more comfortable doing a 6940 than anything that said Colt AR-15 on it. That "all" is what would make me hesitant as that seems pretty clear, anything with those items on it, would make it that model since all models with those words on it are listed.

That seems like an easy case to make.

Now although I agree with Bill that these guns are all the same, I think Bill should still address the fact that the nature of human beings is to push the envelope and they seek to do what authority doesn't like. Bill comes off as slightly elitist because we know he already has his listed AWs. I would tune down the attitude a bit Bill as you could be lumped in with the same authorities that don't want me to do this and that makes it all the more exciting.

So yes, we understand you want a Colt because darn it, they are nice rifles. However, trying to defend a gun that could be considered "all" at this time is not financially wise. In the near future, court cases might invalidate all of SB23 and you soon might be able to have your Colts again. Do not count on a CGF defense of your "all" case and if you wish to push this envelope, be prepared to not only foot the bill, but to also possibly lose and also effect more people's rights than just your own.

Be patient and you will have your Pony's again. Now is not the time to go after the state on an "all" case or even take the risk.

IGOTDIRT4U
06-17-2010, 7:31 AM
I would not play that game. It still says "Colt AR15".

Yep. This has been hashed out here already for you. IIRC, the DOJ has a letter out to thsi effect. If it's stamped Colt AR-15, it's illegal.

CHS
06-17-2010, 8:00 AM
I approve Bill's message.

SgtDinosaur
06-17-2010, 10:33 AM
I don't even want a Colt until I can have one with 30 round mags and no bullet button. Besides, I already have a nice Colt upper on a Spike's lower. I doubt a Colt lower would shoot any better even though I want it anyway.

adamsreeftank
06-17-2010, 10:36 AM
Appreciate your concern, but I don't need any more "the jury is not a bunch of calguns members" answers...

Hey, you asked.

tiki
06-17-2010, 11:31 AM
What part of (all) do you not understand. :)

Hey fredieusa,
Why did you obscure the serial number on one rifle but not the other?

Untamed1972
06-17-2010, 11:38 AM
To me "Colt AR-15 (all)" means all variations of models that start with AR-15. So AR-15 A2 is a variation of the said model number.

I'm suprised none of these companies that make lowers that are banned by name haven't sued yet for being discriminated against since now there is 100 other companies making lowers that can be sold here.

It's kinda like banning Budweiser by name but then saying another company can make beer from the exact same recipe and sell under a different name and it's ok.

Eagle50
06-17-2010, 11:41 AM
Newbie question on PC12200(b)...........

Untamed1972
06-17-2010, 11:46 AM
Appreciate your concern, but I don't need any more "the jury is not a bunch of calguns members" answers. I am quite aware of this, and I tell my customer's that they shouldn't mess around with new schemes unless they have 40k to burn, and don't mind losing their gun right's. Just looking for on or off-list opinions regarding make and model.


You should also tell them it's not smart to jabbing a sleeping bear in the *** with a pointed stick or messing with Sasquach....even if you are eating Jack Links.

OleCuss
06-17-2010, 12:30 PM
One other thing if I may? Please forgive me if my information is in error. . .

I believe Colt lowers are machined by CMT? I think they also do the machining for Stag and several other companies.

So when Bill said that a Stag and a Colt shoot the same - not only was he telling the truth but the fact is that they were machined by the same company! Other the markings they're the same gun.

Untamed1972
06-17-2010, 12:47 PM
And just because a customer is willing to take the risk....dont forget that selling someone what could/would be considered an AW that does not have a valid AW permit would likely land you as the dealer in some pretty hot water too. So the risk of such a venture would not just totally be on them.

stix213
06-17-2010, 12:55 PM
This sounds like worse jail bait than a 16 year old showing more skin than clothes you just met at 1:00am while she was pounding beers at the local bar using a fake ID she just forgot to mention to you before she asked if she could crash at your place.

How does "Colt AR-15 A2" not qualify as the banned "Colt: AR-15 (all)" by the way?

bjl333
06-17-2010, 1:13 PM
I find myself explaining the differences of an OLL and a listed lower to my father. Mind you, he is and has been a shooter for 40 years. He is definately pro-gun. But he pisses me off to a point when we talk about AW. He just don't get the difference between a Spike, Colt or what have you. To this day he thinks I have illegal guns.
With that said, I wouldn't wanna go to court and explain all the OLL stuff to a bunch of retired jurors that don't know anyting about AW. Sure a good attorney will probably get you off, but I think I would like to spend the $30-$40K buying LOTS of legal guns. But that .0001% that he don't get you off ... I just don't wanna chance it !!!

bjl333
06-17-2010, 1:27 PM
[QUOTE=stix213;4470498]This sounds like worse jail bait than a 16 year old showing more skin than clothes you just met at 1:00am while she was pounding beers at the local bar using a fake ID she just forgot to mention to you before she asked if she could crash at your place.




Thats not Legal ?!?!? LOL ...

Mstrty
06-17-2010, 1:42 PM
[LEFT]WTF?? This is the 2nd question tonite about this subject that's originated from a given business.



PLEASE FU*KING DON'T DO THIS - language intended (sorry Kes/mods)

POSSIBILITY OF A TECHNICAL DEFENSE DOES NOT MEAN RECOMMENDED CONDUCT.



Really??? It this the advice of a CG boardmember? Really? Calm down quit yelling and gather yourself. If you cant contain yourself you should really stay on different topics.

OlderThanDirt
06-17-2010, 1:45 PM
It depends on what the meaning of the word 'all' is.

all(a): quantifier; used with either mass or count nouns to indicate the whole number or amount of or every one of a class.

I would not want to hang my freedom on "A2" somehow escaping the definition of "all". Logic, even though it is sorely lacking in California, would seem to indicate that if the receiver is marked with "Colt" and "AR-15", it had better be on a RAW or you will be having a life changing experience.

bwiese
06-17-2010, 1:49 PM
Really??? It this the advice of a CG boardmember? Really? Calm down quit yelling and gather yourself. If you cant contain yourself you should really stay on different topics.

I'm gathered. And I'm not a CG board member, I'm a CGF board member.

The people wanting to even get near this situation waste time, efforts and funds (well, not CGF's!) that can be best placed elsewhere (or not expended).

What's especially bad is this is so friggin' trivial and is merely a fight for a horsey logo instead of a deer's head. Jeezus.

Bad ideas need to be derided immediately, repeatedly, and with emphasis.

Somebody cruising by this thread and not reading the whole thing might think there was some allowable conduct. At least the invective might get their attention.

I've just had too many crying folks, with felony charges, calling me at 10PM - and I have to say "sorry" and/or try to tell his PD at the last minute how to try and to get an AB2728 resolution (which can be a fight).

bwiese
06-17-2010, 1:51 PM
It depends on what the meaning of the word 'all' is.

I would not want to hang my freedom on "A2" somehow escaping the definition of "all". Logic, even though it is sorely lacking in California, would seem to indicate that if the receiver is marked with "Colt" and "AR-15", it had better be on a RAW or you will be having a life changing experience.

BINGO, good sir!

While there is perhaps a defense via unclarity on use of "all" in the Kasler list - creating a possibly vague subseries - when it has the exemplar model "AR15" on it's just too radioactive.

Untamed1972
06-17-2010, 1:56 PM
Untamed - with your user name and sig. line, its a whole mess of contradiction. (sorry could not help but notice)


Being untamed is one thing.....be just plain stupid is another. There is needless risk and calculated risk. I agree with Bill that taking that risk simply for the engraved logo on the side of a piece of metal falls into the "just plain stupid" category.

I could also take all the money I have to my name to Vegas this weekend and put it all down on one spin of the roulette wheel.....not a risk I'm willing to take, but at least there is a potnetial payoff. What's the potential payoff for playing the name game with a Colt lower? If no one ever catches it, all you have is the rifle you paid money for. If you get caught, you spend alot of money and then end up in jail anyway, or you spend alot of money and beat the charge, but now you're out alot of money. So that colt rifle ends up costing you $30-40k and many months of pain and stress. Or you could just go with a known OLL, you still have what is functionally the same rifle with virtually none of the above mentioned risk.

Trying the play the "what does 'all' really mean" game is just plain stupid. Putting you arse on the line for someone else who wants to play that stupid game is just plain stupid too.

I would like to remain free and untamed as my name and sig lines would indicate. Doing plainly stupid things that would land me in a jail cell kinda go against that notion don't yuh think? I feel no great need to be a martyr at the moment.

JSilvoso
06-17-2010, 2:12 PM
So I was siiting around the shop today with my business partner (Redneckshootist) and we were talking about taking things to new levels in the store. The ban list specifically bans; Colt AR-15 (all), Match Target (all), Sporter (all) and Law Enforcement (6920). So, after the clarifications of the list resulting after the Harrot descision, a Colt AR-15 A2 (government carbine) is clearly off-list as we see it. We have had quite a few people in the shop wanting original Colt's. What do you guys think??? I know this issue has been brought up a few times in the past, but I would like some more insight.

I would strongly caution against this. Not only are you talking about certain possession charges for these firearms but possession for sales or importation as well. The latter are straight felonies under PC 12280(a).

OleCuss
06-17-2010, 2:18 PM
I think the point is that we really need to stay with clearly legal behavior. When you play games with areas of the law which are gray or open to interpretation - you're just begging for pain which we'd rather we didn't have to share.

So stick to OLL's which are clearly legal. Don't play games with odd ways of getting magazines with a capacity greater than 10 rounds. Don't carry a weapon when it is not clearly legal to do so.

Vote for legislators, governors, AG's, congresspersons, and such who clearly understand your rights and will defend them. If a candidate has not made their position clear through either words or (preferably) deeds - vote for the one who has. Those who don't have clear positions will be happy with laws and legal states which are not clear.

Mstrty
06-17-2010, 4:33 PM
I'm gathered. And I'm not a CG board member, I'm a CGF board member.

The people wanting to even get near this situation waste time, efforts and funds (well, not CGF's!) that can be best placed elsewhere (or not expended).

What's especially bad is this is so friggin' trivial and is merely a fight for a horsey logo instead of a deer's head. Jeezus.

Bad ideas need to be derided immediately, repeatedly, and with emphasis.

Somebody cruising by this thread and not reading the whole thing might think there was some allowable conduct. At least the invective might get their attention.

I've just had too many crying folks, with felony charges, calling me at 10PM - and I have to say "sorry" and/or try to tell his PD at the last minute how to try and to get an AB2728 resolution (which can be a fight).

Point taken. Just cant get a grasp on the tactics. Last thing I want is my donated money going to support foolish behavior, however legal it may or may not be. On that we agree.

tiki
06-17-2010, 7:03 PM
The photos are not mine! They are off GB, randomly selected for this thread. I mention it in that post.

Damn! I missed that. I read fast while at work. ;-)

SKSer
06-17-2010, 7:05 PM
seriously, why even push the envelope just for a freaking name when it could turn into bad news for all of us. This is just like the OC movement, they pushed the envelope and look where that got us, another step back.

Lagduf
06-17-2010, 8:48 PM
The day the AWB is struck down I'm going to buy a Colt AR-15.

I hope to add a Colt to my collection in the foreseeable future.

jb7706
06-17-2010, 9:26 PM
Really??? It this the advice of a CG boardmember? Really? Calm down quit yelling and gather yourself. If you cant contain yourself you should really stay on different topics.

The same jokers that would play with Colt lowers are of the same ilk that went UOC despite the pleas of smarter men than myself. I want my rights to both as much as anyone, but we have to remember that this is not a matter of just his rights or mine, they also belong to my sons. We MUST do everything we can to conserve what we have and grow wisely or all our firearms will be doomed to never see a range again. If I have to suck it up so my kids can have that right then so be it, it's my job as a father.

Just because the OP gets it does not mean that someone else won't follow behind and dive in anyway.

Honestly I think Bill should have used a larger font and made it red. And any Richard Cranium that screws around on the edge is screwing around on my kids future. Said Richard deserves to be soundly and roundly beaten with the objects of his desire until he either sees reason or is unconscious and can do no further harm.

I'm not advocating that, but it would be deserved.

DB2
06-17-2010, 10:38 PM
^^^

you need to back up a bit. It was playing on the edge that got AR/AK patterned rifles back in Ca in the first place.

Gray Peterson
06-17-2010, 10:53 PM
Please do NOT expect courts to be logical in these matters.

Anyone trying this - please accept felony risk and have $30K for appeals process. Make arrangements to transfer your guns to friends if you're convicted of a felony.

Most of all, why NOW? When things are sooo close?

Let me sum up this entire post that you made:

"Do not be felony stupid".

Works?

jb7706
06-18-2010, 12:11 AM
^^^

you need to back up a bit. It was playing on the edge that got AR/AK patterned rifles back in Ca in the first place.

The difference there was not playing on the edge, it was working on it. That was a well orchestrated and thought out plan that had smart people with the guts, legal brains and cash to backup their bravado.

That is a world away from throwing oneself on the ground, kicking and screaming about ones rights with no thought, strategy or assistance from people that have a clue, then hoping everyone will come help when things go south.

jb7706
06-18-2010, 3:13 PM
Please check your facts. Dont deny Harrott his due!

All this came about from a defense of a felony conviction that reached out the the CA supreme court - granted we got a decent hearing, which is uncommon here in CA.. That is what got the ball rolling..

I don't think I was denying Harrott anything. If I understand the case correctly Harrott was due a rifle and other guns that was given to him by a client as payment for his legal services. LE refused to give the rifle back claiming it was banned and it was game on. Ultimately he prevailed and got his guns, and we eventually got the OLL movement.

Again, an attorney with access to tactically and legally smart people in possession of sufficient cash and intestinal fortitude to execute a well thought out legal action that resulted in the eventual OLL movement. Not some guy off the street that demands a lower with a particular picture or an openly carried gun or SBS or <insert whatever desire here> without the benefit of the above.

Pavel
06-22-2010, 1:01 AM
^^^

you need to back up a bit. It was playing on the edge that got AR/AK patterned rifles back in Ca in the first place.

Exactly my point....

This is the the whole point of this thread. To the people saying things like; "What part of (all) don't you understand" or "why even bother" answers: The items available for sale at our shop would have most certainly had their legality in CA questioned just a couple of years ago.

When one enters the shop, they see things like AK's/AR's/FAL's, Mac-type pistols that have standard mag releases, MP5 clones, AK/AR pistols, UZI's and many other pistols that can be dros'd as single shot. Oh yeah, and as many magazine rebuild kits as your heart desires..if they make the mags, we will get them to you as rebuilds.

Our customer's seem to love us, and we are growing. It is a beautiful thing. A business BASED on thinking outside the box, with regular DOJ visits being the norm. While the Colt situation has been ruled out for the time being, we would love to have them in stock as we do believe there is still a strong argument as to there off-list status. Again, we are NOT going to start selling them just yet, however, this issue MIGHT be a special project of mine in the future. Thanks to everyone for their input on the off/on list opinions regarding the Colt's.:D

bwiese
06-22-2010, 1:36 AM
Our customer's seem to love us, and we are growing. It is a beautiful thing. A business BASED on thinking outside the box, with regular DOJ visits being the norm. While the Colt situation has been ruled out for the time being, we would love to have them in stock as we do believe there is still a strong argument as to there off-list status.

Thinking outside the box only goes so far.

Please do not spread misinformation. It will give some bonehead some thought that he can do this. And I also worry you might end up being the bonehead.

You already saw ABOVE what a CA gun lawyer (Joe Silvoso, who works for Chuck Michel's firm that represents NRA in CA) posted above - and he also mentioned it's not just an AW possession charge at risk but multiple charges of import and transfer, which are guaranteed felonies. And that involves YOU, YOUR PARTNERS, and YOUR CUSTOMERS.

There is NO strong argument to remotely consider off-list status of "Colt AR15 A2", etc. Certainly not one that can reliably stand up to a judge


AGAIN:


Roberti-Roos list bans "Colt AR15 series"
the Kasler list echo of Roberti Roos (11 CCR 5495) bans "Colt AR15 (all)"
the Kasler list of 'series' guns also bans "Colt Law Enforcement (6920)", "Colt Match Target (all)", and "Colt Sporter (all)"


Yes, an argument could be made that 'all' creates a subseries. Whether or not Harrott bans such subseries, or whether 'all' is sufficient identification to minor model variances is wide open. You're also gonna be in a busy overburdened California court system with likely somewhat antigun judge.

An argument could be formulated that a Colt AR15 A2 is really an R6600.
However, it's not marked on the gun and that will be the key thing.

YOU HAVE TO PASS THE SMELL TEST FIRST! You're dealing with minutiae here.


Again, we are NOT going to start selling them just yet,
PLEASE DON'T FRIGGIN' DO IT. HOW MANY TIMES MUST WE TELL YOU?

YOU WILL:

NOT have ANY CHANCE OF BEING DEFENDED BY CGF: hell, we might use you for PR example of 'how to fail the Big IQ test'!!
YOU WILL, *GUARANTEED*, LOSE FFL.
SOME/ALL PARTNERS WILL HAVE MULTIPLE FELONY CHARGES.
YOU'LL HAVE SUBSTANTIAL LIABILITY IF YOUR CUSTOMERS GET POPPED: YOUR ARSES WILL BE SUED FOR MORE MONEY THAN
YOU HAVE. YOU ARE THE LEGAL FACE OF DOJ TO THE CUSTOMER.


however, this issue MIGHT be a special project of mine in the future.Jeezus Keerist III Jr.

I thought RedneckShootist would pick wiser business partners.

WE DO NOT NEED MARTYRS OR SELF-GENERATED TEST CASES.

The AW ban in part or whole will come down or be radically reshaped faster that worrying about fixing trivialities of listing criteria for idiots that want a prancing horse on their receiver.

Fergawdsakes, yes, I know Colt makes nice uppers. Your customers can have a Colt upper on a Stag lower and get Colt performance.

What part of Stag lower == Colt lower don't you understand??????

Also, there are 2 or 3 truly off-list Colt lowers out there already.

If you say there's "demand" by unthinking customers, those are customers you don't want. (Or they're trying work off some felonies and trying to entrap you.)

The whole OLL thing and other campaigns were based off of long term thinking-before-acting, lotsa good legal information from our side, and in combination with some paperwork generated by various vary talkative DOJ staff, all in combo with staying on the 'bright side of the line' - even though aggressive it was still way on the 'bright side of the line'.

CalNRA
06-22-2010, 2:18 AM
If you say there's "demand" by unthinking customers, those are customers you don't want. (Or they're trying work off some felonies and trying to entrap you.)

if someone has been told all the info available and still insists on the FFL ordering a Colt AR15 A2 because he is a "collector", I just don't know what's the most forceful way to say "no."

Pavel
06-22-2010, 3:13 AM
TO ANYONE NOT CLEAR ON THIS ISSUE: THE LEGALITY OF ANY COLT AR-TYPE RIFLE ROLLMARKED ANYTHING [U]OTHER[U] THAN: COLT CARBINE, CAR A-3 HBAR ELITE, LAW ENFORCEMENT CARBINE (6940) OR M4LE LAW ENFORCEMENT CARBINE, HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED AND HE/SHE RISKS VERY EXPENSIVE LEGAL FEES AND LOSS OF THEIR GUN RIGHTS AS WELL AS A FELONY CHARGE IF THE RIFLE IS MARKED ANYTHING ELSE AT THIS TIME.

When I say "MIGHT be a special project of mine", I am in NO way referring to myself or espescially any customers. If you must know, it would involve an individual (AGAIN------>NOT MYSELF OR ANY CUSTOMERS)that collects Colt's, is quite financially secure, and doesn't mind being a test-case for something they strongly believe in. You meet some pretty passionate individuals that share the firearm hobby.

I wish I had the cahones (and money,time,business to lose,etc..) to be a test-case....but I don't. While the risk may not be worth the "horsey logo" to some, that may not be the case for all.

To MR. B.WIESE: While I respected your opinion in the beginning, you continue to bash me FOR ASKING QUESTIONS and now you are questioning my intelligence and ability to run a business, even after I clarified that I would not invlolve the business in this project? ...lol Common now. How do you think we have the type of things we do in our store at this time?

bwiese
06-22-2010, 3:47 AM
When I say "MIGHT be a special project of mine", I am in NO way referring to myself or espescially any customers. If you must know, it would involve an individual (AGAIN----->NOT MYSELF OR ANY CUSTOMERS) that collects Colt's, is quite financially secure, and doesn't mind being a test-case for something they strongly believe in. You meet some pretty passionate individuals that share the firearm hobby.

That individual would need a cooperative and felonious FFL. Usually the insane are loners; I'm working out the probabilities of insane FFL and insane customer colliding.

[The individual actually has a chance of faring just slightly better than the FFL who'd have multiple charges risked.]

=To MR. B.WIESE: While I respected your opinion in the beginning, you continue to bash me FOR ASKING QUESTIONS and now you are questioning my intelligence and ability to run a business,The fact that you were even continuing to say or hint it was a possible option was something worthy of IMMEDIATE and COMPLETE derision. There is a risk of someone seeing this thread and not getting the right idea.

Those questions were answered and claimes were well-refuted in my and others' initial replies, and further put completely
to bed by Michel & Assoc. Joe Silvoso. Joe's a real gun lawyer, OK?


even after I clarified that I would not invlolve the business in this project? ...lol Common now. If so, your writing skills need great improvement. When you said "there is a strong argument" someone might assume
you had additional special knowledge outside the California gun community. You do not.

And it's "C'mon", not "common".


How do you think we have the type of things we do in our
store at this time?Um, Ben Cannon, Gene Hoffman, Wes Morris and a bit of myself? plus a couple of other good folk?
On top of years of accumulated CA NRA legal team paperwork???
A few pathfinder FFLs like Ten Percent and Hector @ Cold War Shooters and Rob Blank, etc. who took intelligent risks (and faced
some attacks) so your business is now able to skate by trouble0free.

Just sayin', sonny.

Pavel
06-22-2010, 3:59 AM
BWEISE, I Think everyone understands the legal risks. Now you are talking about sanity? Where does it end? This was a reasonable discussion, with the outcome/verdict being "we need a test case", and it seems as though everyone understands this but YOU. Maybe it is your reading skills that are lacking?

And I appreciate everything that the above have done for oll movement. I play a part in that too, don't you think? We all do.

bwiese
06-22-2010, 4:09 AM
BWEISE, I Think everyone understands the legal risks. Now you are talking about sanity? Where does it end? This was a reasonable discussion, with the outcome/verdict being "we need a test case"


No it wasn't.

WE DO NOT NEED A TEST CASE: IT'S A WASTE OF RESOURCES, SHOULD NOT BE DONE, IS AT BEST FOR A TERRIBLY TRIVIAL MATTER and ties up valuable gun lawyer time best expended elsewhere. (Thus, assume maximal nonsympathetic billing rates.) And you know what's likely gonna happen with a non-gun lawyer - go straight to jail.

WE DON'T NEED TO FIGHT SON-OF-HARROTT, PERIOD - or even take the risk of having it need to be fought.


and it seems as though everyone understands this but YOU.
Maybe it is your reading skills that are lacking?I'll take an IQ or reading test with you anytime, sonny.

You were refuted multple times, and kept saying things were 'possible'.

My balls can turn into cocktail olives, but it doesn't mean I'm gonna bet on that in Vegas.

Again the reason I am so strident is that I want to ensure that anyone that reads your comments at least has a chance of encountering my severe warnings to "not even go there".

CalNRA
06-22-2010, 4:42 AM
:facepalm:

adamsreeftank
06-22-2010, 10:21 AM
BWEISE, I Think everyone understands the legal risks. Now you are talking about sanity? Where does it end? This was a reasonable discussion, with the outcome/verdict being "we need a test case", and it seems as though everyone understands this but YOU. Maybe it is your reading skills that are lacking?

And I appreciate everything that the above have done for oll movement. I play a part in that too, don't you think? We all do.

I'll stand by Bwiese any day and say his is right and you are wrong. We do NOT need a test case.

stix213
06-22-2010, 1:43 PM
With McDonald only days away, I truly don't understand the purpose of this at all. Why even consider testing the limits of Harrott when the smart money is on the AW ban going bye bye post McDonald?

Now here is a question... If you get found guilty of importing/selling a named Colt AR15 assault weapon, and then a few months later CGF gets the courts to throw out the AW ban, would you then get out of jail or still have to serve the remaining years in prison?

obeygiant
06-22-2010, 6:50 PM
My balls can turn into cocktail olives, but it doesn't mean I'm gonna bet on that in Vegas.
:rofl2:

DB2
06-22-2010, 8:00 PM
One could look at the list and see it as Colt AR15(all), the model as all. Is there a Colt model all? No. Everyone knows it refers to all models. You'd loose in court, but it could be viewed as model all.

Same as Armalite 180 which is listed. I own a Armalite 180b. Both have the Armalite 180 in the name. Just one has a B.

An AR15(all) is listed. An Ar15a2 is not. It's all semantics

tenpercentfirearms
06-22-2010, 11:29 PM
One could look at the list and see it as Colt AR15(all), the model as all. Is there a Colt model all? No. Everyone knows it refers to all models. You'd loose in court, but it could be viewed as model all.

Same as Armalite 180 which is listed. I own a Armalite 180b. Both have the Armalite 180 in the name. Just one has a B.

An AR15(all) is listed. An Ar15a2 is not. It's all semantics

That isn't going to fly as there are many guns that are listed without an (all). Clearly the (all) in parenthesis means all models not the model all. I wouldn't even attempt such a defense.

VaderSpade
06-23-2010, 8:47 AM
Now here is a question... If you get found guilty of importing/selling a named Colt AR15 assault weapon, and then a few months later CGF gets the courts to throw out the AW ban, would you then get out of jail or still have to serve the remaining years in prison?

If you are found guilty by a jury your case would get thrown out and you would go free.
If you settled you have given up your rights and will stay in jail. This is why itís important not to settle.

tenpercentfirearms
06-23-2010, 9:40 AM
If you are found guilty by a jury your case would get thrown out and you would go free.
If you settled you have given up your rights and will stay in jail. This is why itís important not to settle.

Can you link to anything like that? I guess what you say makes sense since the law is being ruled unconstitutional instead of altered legislatively. Interesting.

If the AW laws changed legislatively, you would still be stuck since it was "legitimately illegal" when you were busted is my thinking.

Mute
06-23-2010, 9:53 AM
Please, please, please......noooooooo! We don't need any more Gorskiing in this state.