PDA

View Full Version : Enough Already!


gigarange
04-12-2006, 8:33 PM
I really can't believe all these gun owners are pushing for stricter gun control. It's no wonder our laws here are so messed up. We as gun owners have a golden opportunity here and are pissing it away. Instead of telling everyone how evil and bad these receivers are we should be using it to our advantage. So there are supposed to be 30,000 new receivers in the state. Have you seen any crimes committed with them? Are people running around in the streets shooting other people with "off list" receivers? No, but instead of using this to our advantage you want to convince the public how bad they are. If you are afraid of pending legislation, you are doing nothing but encouraging it. Maybe not for "off list" receivers but all guns. It makes me sick to read about all these gun owners pushing so hard for this. Who are you people? Why would you do an interview and tell the reporter that banning all guns would be better? The way I see it, you are taking a huge gamble here instead of being patient. Maybe you get newly registered receivers so what, you are going to end up paying the price in the long run. Be patient and think about your gun owning future.

yiha
04-12-2006, 8:34 PM
you have missed the point.

Jeff Rambo
04-12-2006, 8:34 PM
Thanks for venting. Just remember next time that "enter" is your friend.

marklbucla
04-12-2006, 8:44 PM
I think he's saying that it's better to fight the AW law and gun control in general, rather than try to get a short term victory in getting the fixed mag ARs converted to regular ones.

Creeping Incrementalism
04-12-2006, 9:02 PM
I agree with the original poster. Gun-owners trying to make assault weapons look even more evil hurts the cause when everything is considered. It hurts a lot more than the benefit <30,000 people might get if their receiver is listed. And you know it will take a court case, which might not succeed, to get the DOJ to reverse its position of the Feb. 1 memo. And what if they don't list your specific make and model of receiver?

You still have a very effective tool with a Mini series or M-14 series, or any tube-fed auto shotgun with a pistolgrip. Do you want your logic on the lowers to be turned around to get these banned as well?

Meanwhile, my lower is gathering dust in a DOJ safe, and if it is added to the list before I get it back, I have a feeling the DOJ will just send it along with the 218 others to be melted down.

blacklisted
04-12-2006, 9:03 PM
Where have you been? Assault weapons were banned years ago. Ever since then, we have only been able to have various overpriced permanently fixed mag receivers. Now we can have cheaper good quality receivers, but are still subject to the law. Please explain how a bunch of fixed mag guns are a "golden opportunity"?

By the way, the guy that did the interview was an idiot and not affiliated with us.

I respect your opinion, but you have to look at the big picture. Nothing can be done about the current laws with this legislature.

I really can't believe all these gun owners are pushing for stricter gun control. It's no wonder our laws here are so messed up. We as gun owners have a golden opportunity here and are pissing it away. Instead of telling everyone how evil and bad these receivers are we should be using it to our advantage. So there are supposed to be 30,000 new receivers in the state. Have you seen any crimes committed with them? Are people running around in the streets shooting other people with "off list" receivers? No, but instead of using this to our advantage you want to convince the public how bad they are. If you are afraid of pending legislation, you are doing nothing but encouraging it. Maybe not for "off list" receivers but all guns. It makes me sick to read about all these gun owners pushing so hard for this. Who are you people? Why would you do an interview and tell the reporter that banning all guns would be better? The way I see it, you are taking a huge gamble here instead of being patient. Maybe you get newly registered receivers so what, you are going to end up paying the price in the long run. Be patient and think about your gun owning future.

6172crew
04-12-2006, 9:19 PM
I really can't believe all these gun owners are pushing for stricter gun control. It's no wonder our laws here are so messed up. We as gun owners have a golden opportunity here and are pissing it away. Instead of telling everyone how evil and bad these receivers are we should be using it to our advantage. So there are supposed to be 30,000 new receivers in the state. Have you seen any crimes committed with them? Are people running around in the streets shooting other people with "off list" receivers? No, but instead of using this to our advantage you want to convince the public how bad they are. If you are afraid of pending legislation, you are doing nothing but encouraging it. Maybe not for "off list" receivers but all guns. It makes me sick to read about all these gun owners pushing so hard for this. Who are you people? Why would you do an interview and tell the reporter that banning all guns would be better? The way I see it, you are taking a huge gamble here instead of being patient. Maybe you get newly registered receivers so what, you are going to end up paying the price in the long run. Be patient and think about your gun owning future.\


So what would you do? Should we ask the NRA for help? Should we ask the elected for help? Should we keep quiet and get as many in CA before the AG bans them?

Its all been done and we are trying every dirty trick in the book to get what we need. The laws/law makers are against the whole idea of armed citizens and when we make a move you better be ready to grab whats ours.
Its going to get worst and if you want to know when it going down you better post before 4 moths after the fact to be taken seriously.:(

filefish
04-12-2006, 9:44 PM
I agree with the original poster, we need to pressure to get rid of the the aw bann, geting the off list lowers banned is short term selfish

xenophobe
04-12-2006, 9:46 PM
*whooosh*
^^^^^^^ The sound of something totally flying over gigarange's head...

Some people just don't have a clue...

*shrug*

kenc9
04-12-2006, 9:53 PM
This isn't going to be popular with some of you guys but there were to many letters and calls to DOJ. That guy that put Calguns on that news article was definately somebody from here trying to make a wave.

DOJ is going to take the same stance if they list as their Feb. memo said, that being no assault feature of a removable mag.

Legal or not they will not budge from that and then no more new lowers.
We'll have what we have now, no worse and no better except new ones will be banned.

Somebody will get caught with mag unlocked and they will get to test the evil features and a unlocked mag law for all of us.

Time will only show if everyone quikened the list for good or not so good.

Personally I would have kept quite rather than the outside chance I might get an unlocked mag. If we do it will be from a court case.

-ken

kantstudien
04-12-2006, 10:04 PM
Gigarange, your post would have done some good back in 1993, or even 1999. Too bad assault weapons are already banned. Nice pep talk though.

tenpercentfirearms
04-12-2006, 10:18 PM
Be patient and think about your gun owning future.What gun owning future? Have you looked around this place? We are way out numbered. The good citizens of California don't care that you have an unalienable right to keep and bear arms. You and your guns make them scared and they would feel safer if you didn't have them. That is how we got to where we are today where a man can't go buy a semi-auto rifle with any of the evil features, a .50 BMG rifle, or a growing list of "unsafe" handguns. The time to overtake the state and win a political victory is over, we missed it.

Now, if you would stop and think for a second how confusing the AW laws are and how blantently stupid they are, you would see that we have had the California Supreme Court rule that these laws are already too confusing. If anything we want a list and we want the DOJ to fight it. Something will have to give and it just very well could be the entire assault weapons ban.

We have nothing to lose from getting firearms listed. Nothing. We have everything to lose if we wait for legislation to fix this and it is even more damaging than anything we have ever seen. If you are scared that you might wake the "sleeping giant" that is ready to take away your guns, that is fine, just say so. I am not scared of the citizens of this state or the legislature they elect. If they want to pass stricter bans, lets do it. If they have what it takes, then they have what it takes and our getting some new rifles would not have made a difference anyway. The majority of those urging caution seem to be the type that fear what right they are going to lose next. Screw em, let them try it.

I want my lowers listed in order to protect the children. Bill Lockyer just do your job. Wanting firearms to list and working towards changing the laws are not mutually exclusive. We can do both at the same time.

6172crew
04-12-2006, 10:22 PM
What gun owning future? Have you looked around this place?
I want my lowers listed in order to protect the children. Bill Lockyer just do your job.

Ed Zachary:cool:

shopkeep
04-12-2006, 10:38 PM
The DOJ has already stated that offlist lowers are Assault Weapons and they will soon be added to the Kasler list. The DOJ continues to state this publically in news articles, in memos on their website, over the phone, and through certified mail. Yet for some reason this is just blowing over the heads of some people living in some fantasy world where you can actually fight the power of the PRK.

Allow me to explain the brilliance of what we're going here. They said "Assault Weapons" are banned and created a registration system for them. The registration cut average citizens out of the loop. After long enough, gun owners gave up fighting in various court rooms and the legislature for obvious reasons: the gun grabbers control the state, ALL OF IT.

So we learned to play by their rules, we learned how to use their obscure and vague laws to our advantage. A couple guys on a web forum who had NEVER even met in person discovered how to not only get a legal reciever into the state, but how to force the DOJ and the state to turn it into what we REALLY wanted. We beat them at their own game, and now they can't admit defeat and hide behind more vague terminology such as the February 1st memo.

Victory is at hand. The "Assault Weapons" registration is no longer closed, it's open. All you have to do is find a reciever that isn't on the list and then make sure enough come into the state to force the DOJ to identify it as an "Assault Weapon". Even if the courts uphold the Feb 1st "Category 4" memo it won't make a difference. More of these recievers will be comming in and now that people have seen how much money can be made selling these we're going to see a lot of new companies manufacturing AR-15 lowers.

xenophobe
04-12-2006, 11:01 PM
If the "series" ban wording was too confusing, imagine what a judge would say about police officers having to enforcing several different categories or teirs of assault weapons. It's not going to happen. If it does, it'll get thrown out by court ruling. Guaranteed.

DsF_Saint
04-12-2006, 11:53 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have to totally disagree with all of you that think it is ok to have a gun owner portrayed the way "Mike" was, in this article. We need as much support as we can to keep the rights we have left, and to change what we can. We do not gain public support by looking like some, pretty fly for a white guy, gangster with what looks like an assault weapon to everyone who might read the article. We (all gun owners, not just the off-list club) look like we are trying to get away with something illegal.

I personally am not trying to get away with anything, but I am trying to legally own a gun that I believe I have, and every other law abiding citizen should have, the right to own.

I do understand the point you guys are making, but to win this very small victory at the cost of losing public support for gun owners, (a lot of whom don't even have a desire to own an AR-15 style weapon, or AK style weapon) is completely irresponsible. This article has done nothing but given the anti-gun groups ammunition to use against us for our long term support. To say he wishes all guns were banned? It looks like a bold faced lie, and again gains us nothing.

As a Law Enforcement Officer I would rather go against criminals with assault weapons, rather than take away the rights of law abiding citizens. This is something I swore to when I swore to uphold the constitution of the United States and something some of the law makers have apparently decided to ignore, since they took the same oath.

Thanks for your time.

xenophobe
04-13-2006, 12:15 AM
Arnie is about as conservative as the state will allow without some sort of major event... Once a fully progressive liberal runs the state, nothing we can do or say will avoid whatever plans they may wish to legislate.

You thought Grey Davis was bad? He'll look like a middle of the road Democrat when the next progressive gets elected. All this bickering is just that...

Personally, a few more people back in 89 would have turned the tables... Everything since then is history...

CowtownBallin
04-13-2006, 12:20 AM
As mentioned above, we are outnumbered, in this state. The average coworker I speak to, here in the Bay Area, drops their jaw in shock, when they find out " I don't need a special permit to shoot handguns, at the range".

I get that at work, too. People ask me what kind of permit they need to buy a WWII-era C&R rifle :rolleyes: It's quite sad, really, that people are so used to the government intervention here that they just assume you can't do anything anymore.

kantstudien
04-13-2006, 1:50 AM
Or my favorite, "how can you own guns, I thought you were a Christian??"

Ha! We need a T-shirt that says: "Would Jesus own off-list lowers?"

Diabolus
04-13-2006, 6:49 AM
I agree with the original poster. Gun owners who are pushing for the DOJ to add these to the list so we can register is a great argument for fellow gun owners who are aware of the statistics and how ridiculous it is to ban based on the way a gun looks. However, from a liberal's point of view, which know nothing about weapons and believe all the hype from the anti-gun groups, they will see our argument from a different perspective and spin it against us.

Renron
04-13-2006, 8:03 AM
Knock, Knock........Hello?
Anyone who thinks we should just keep quiet and wait just needs to observe what has transpired in PRK in the past.
Thats what has got us into the non-gun position we are in now. If we wait the DOJ will have time to make it WORSE than it is now. Does anyone see the gun laws getting more open in this state???
People used to know how to clean a fish or slaughter an animal for food, now its pre-packaged for us. Its not a dead cow, its hamburger! People have been removed from the natural process of eat or be eaten, most of us (Californians) have never killed anything for food and do not see the relationship between guns, the Second Amendment and food / self protection.
Its been a while since I saw anyone stalking their food in isle 17.
We have had our Right to bear arms removed because we do not "Need" guns anymore. The Ignorant "masses" only see "guns" on TV news articles or in the paper when they are used in a crime. Cripes most people don't know the difference between a revolver and a pistol!
Too many people live and die (natural causes) in the big cities of our state to ever know the fun of shooting holes in paper or steel targets that go "ping". They were never exposed as children to shooting a .22 for fun at a soda can.
As a result, people fear what they do not know / understand, or have previously been exposed to. Its human nature to fear the unknown.
We have lost the battle in PRK and if we win this skirmish it will be due to people who push us all forward and not by the "Just wait and see" attitude, like a dog waiting for the possibility to be tossed a bone.

HEY! All you people who don't want to "stir the pot", is your memory so short you don't remember what law was just passed in San Francisco?

I hope all lowers get listed soon.
We already have an AW ban.
WAKE UP UMERIKA !!!

Renron

stator
04-13-2006, 8:06 AM
Look at it this way... There is nothing to loose if the DOJ adds the current OLL names onto the list. There will be more newly minted manufacturers looking to fill the new void. It will be game-on!

The only ones at risk, really, are those with seized OLL from the groupbuys.

I've heard that our state Politicians and a few DOJ attorneys (AM chiefly) have basically settled on safety certification for long guns (just like handguns) as the only effective way to stop the OLL game.

So look for the same thing as we have for handguns. That way, the DOJ can determine if the long gun being submitted for certification is an AW or not, and ban it prior.

tenpercentfirearms
04-13-2006, 9:01 AM
I think the people who are concerned about our "image" in the public's eye must live in the free parts of the state. They clearly don't understand that in the urban areas of the state we have already lost. They seem to think all of the restrictive gun control over the last 10 years or so was just a fluke, a fluke every 2 to 3 years when they get something through. Those victories for the gun control crowd were no fluke. The only people sitting around worrying about our image are the people who think we have a chance of turning this state around. Forget about it. The dozen or so people who read that article and saw that guy wouldn't have changed their minds if Mike had been wearing a suit and shown his face. Assault weapons are evil no matter how you try and package it. Guns are evil and only used by criminals and bubba-esk red-necks that have more guns than brains.

The poster above who stated most of this state has grown up in suburban and urban utopia where guns are never seen except in gangster rap videos and on video games is 100% correct. This new generation knows nothing about guns and what they do know scares them.

If you guys who are so scared of what our image might look like and have this false pretense that it means a damn thing to the gun grabbers really want to make a difference, you will quite complaining about things you can't control. Like how the liberal media will always make us look bad. Do you think we will ever get a fair shake? For once we are using this to our advantage. Assault weapons are already illegal as has already been stated. They are not going to be un-illegal again anytime soon.

So really the only reason to be against a list and pushing for a list is if you are scared of the State and you don't want them to "punish" us for getting off list lowers. Sorry, I will chose not to live in fear.

I will also choose to run a Friends of NRA dinner in my local town. I will choose to raise that money so my local Sportsman's Club can host a Jr. pheasant hunt every year for 150 youths from all over the central valley. I will be a school teacher and I won't hide the fact I own guns, I will openly discuss it with my students. And yes they are continuation high school students. The ones most people think are losers and rejects and shouldn't own guns. They all know I own a gun shop and I sell guns. I show them what a responsible gun owner looks like. I will talk to my fellow teachers about guns as they tend to be voting citizens. I will be an agency fee payer and stop giving my money to the liberal union.

I am not going to worry about Mike and what he is doing up north, because I can't control it. You can't either. There are plenty of things you could be doing for the right to keep and bear arms in this state. Complaining about someone else's behavior and pretending that we still have the true right to keep and bear arms isn't it. Look around, we are in enemy territory. Don't pretend like if you stroke your masters they will treat you nicer than if you tell them to piss off.

Renron
04-13-2006, 9:49 AM
Don't pretend like if you stroke your masters they will treat you nicer than if you tell them to piss off.

HoooRahhh!

Renron

DsF_Saint
04-13-2006, 9:51 AM
If you think our image as gun owners does not matter, you are part of the problem. Absolutely right, we will not change what the gun grabbers think. Our image has to be clear to those who are on the moderate side, the swing vote. To recklessly say who cares this, who cares that bah.. no way to keep the rights we have. If you are referring to me, when you say must live in rural areas, try again since I live in Los Angeles. In the middle of the enemy territory as you referred to.

It is obvious no one is going to change some of your minds on what the correct course of action is. I agree sitting back waiting is not it. There "are" responsible courses of action, and this forum as well as others are a great place to organize them. Negative publicity is not one of them though, we (all gun owners), get enough already.

blacklisted
04-13-2006, 10:31 AM
Wow, you teach continuation high school? Maybe where you are people only think they are losers, but here they really are! My school used to send the gang members to the continuation school.
I think the people who are concerned about our "image" in the public's eye must live in the free parts of the state. They clearly don't understand that in the urban areas of the state we have already lost. They seem to think all of the restrictive gun control over the last 10 years or so was just a fluke, a fluke every 2 to 3 years when they get something through. Those victories for the gun control crowd were no fluke. The only people sitting around worrying about our image are the people who think we have a chance of turning this state around. Forget about it. The dozen or so people who read that article and saw that guy wouldn't have changed their minds if Mike had been wearing a suit and shown his face. Assault weapons are evil no matter how you try and package it. Guns are evil and only used by criminals and bubba-esk red-necks that have more guns than brains.

The poster above who stated most of this state has grown up in suburban and urban utopia where guns are never seen except in gangster rap videos and on video games is 100% correct. This new generation knows nothing about guns and what they do know scares them.

If you guys who are so scared of what our image might look like and have this false pretense that it means a damn thing to the gun grabbers really want to make a difference, you will quite complaining about things you can't control. Like how the liberal media will always make us look bad. Do you think we will ever get a fair shake? For once we are using this to our advantage. Assault weapons are already illegal as has already been stated. They are not going to be un-illegal again anytime soon.

So really the only reason to be against a list and pushing for a list is if you are scared of the State and you don't want them to "punish" us for getting off list lowers. Sorry, I will chose not to live in fear.

I will also choose to run a Friends of NRA dinner in my local town. I will choose to raise that money so my local Sportsman's Club can host a Jr. pheasant hunt every year for 150 youths from all over the central valley. I will be a school teacher and I won't hide the fact I own guns, I will openly discuss it with my students. And yes they are continuation high school students. The ones most people think are losers and rejects and shouldn't own guns. They all know I own a gun shop and I sell guns. I show them what a responsible gun owner looks like. I will talk to my fellow teachers about guns as they tend to be voting citizens. I will be an agency fee payer and stop giving my money to the liberal union.

I am not going to worry about Mike and what he is doing up north, because I can't control it. You can't either. There are plenty of things you could be doing for the right to keep and bear arms in this state. Complaining about someone else's behavior and pretending that we still have the true right to keep and bear arms isn't it. Look around, we are in enemy territory. Don't pretend like if you stroke your masters they will treat you nicer than if you tell them to piss off.

Jarhead4
04-13-2006, 10:55 AM
Wow, that was well said!!!

I think the people who are concerned about our "image" in the public's eye must live in the free parts of the state. They clearly don't understand that in the urban areas of the state we have already lost. They seem to think all of the restrictive gun control over the last 10 years or so was just a fluke, a fluke every 2 to 3 years when they get something through. Those victories for the gun control crowd were no fluke. The only people sitting around worrying about our image are the people who think we have a chance of turning this state around. Forget about it. The dozen or so people who read that article and saw that guy wouldn't have changed their minds if Mike had been wearing a suit and shown his face. Assault weapons are evil no matter how you try and package it. Guns are evil and only used by criminals and bubba-esk red-necks that have more guns than brains.

The poster above who stated most of this state has grown up in suburban and urban utopia where guns are never seen except in gangster rap videos and on video games is 100% correct. This new generation knows nothing about guns and what they do know scares them.

If you guys who are so scared of what our image might look like and have this false pretense that it means a damn thing to the gun grabbers really want to make a difference, you will quite complaining about things you can't control. Like how the liberal media will always make us look bad. Do you think we will ever get a fair shake? For once we are using this to our advantage. Assault weapons are already illegal as has already been stated. They are not going to be un-illegal again anytime soon.

So really the only reason to be against a list and pushing for a list is if you are scared of the State and you don't want them to "punish" us for getting off list lowers. Sorry, I will chose not to live in fear.

I will also choose to run a Friends of NRA dinner in my local town. I will choose to raise that money so my local Sportsman's Club can host a Jr. pheasant hunt every year for 150 youths from all over the central valley. I will be a school teacher and I won't hide the fact I own guns, I will openly discuss it with my students. And yes they are continuation high school students. The ones most people think are losers and rejects and shouldn't own guns. They all know I own a gun shop and I sell guns. I show them what a responsible gun owner looks like. I will talk to my fellow teachers about guns as they tend to be voting citizens. I will be an agency fee payer and stop giving my money to the liberal union.

I am not going to worry about Mike and what he is doing up north, because I can't control it. You can't either. There are plenty of things you could be doing for the right to keep and bear arms in this state. Complaining about someone else's behavior and pretending that we still have the true right to keep and bear arms isn't it. Look around, we are in enemy territory. Don't pretend like if you stroke your masters they will treat you nicer than if you tell them to piss off.

tenpercentfirearms
04-13-2006, 11:02 AM
Our image has to be clear to those who are on the moderate side, the swing vote.Ok, we agree on that. So do you think a newspaper article about assault weapons is going to change the middle people's minds? It might. You might also be able to change some minds by talking to your co-workers, talking to your neighbors, organizing some youth sporting events, and I am sure you can come up with a few others. The point is, forget about the media, news about how great guns are and how they really are good for the security of a free state does not sell newspapers or make you want to watch the news. Not to mention the media is clearly liberally biased. So don't worry about what is in the paper or on the news. You have to to go out and be living, breathing proof that gun owners are good guys and gals. It is our responsibility to do so. The media will always find a Mike, always. Lets stop worrying about it.

If you are referring to me, when you say must live in rural areas, try again since I live in Los Angeles. In the middle of the enemy territory as you referred to.Then you know how people think. You know how skewed our image is in suburban and urban California. You know some article in the paper isn't going to change any minds. You know it is up to you to change those minds in person.

If you think we are going to get positive press in any newspaper anytime soon, I think you are sadly mistaken and I would love to be wrong on this one. Positive press about guns does not happen in the main stream media. Lets get over this fact and learn to deal with it. Deal with it by working on your immediate area of influence and not worrying about Mike. We will not be changing the attitudes of California on assault weapons anytime soon so even if he had been in a shirt and tie, it is still an assault weapon in the soccer mom's mind and still a threat to her mid-fielder or goalie in the back seat of the mini-van. We have already lost assault weapons in this state. Lets get some back and make Bill Lockyer do his job. We need to convince him it isn't his fault the legislature wrote bad legislation and to just do his job. We need to convince him and everyone else that he isn't doing his job until he shuts down this pipeline of dangerous weapons capable of being spray fired from the hip with no muzzle signature due to stealth technology flash suppressors.

If we get lucky, we can have the courts decide the issue once and for all. If not, then assault weapons will be just as banned as they were before and only a disaster of epic proportions will ever change the politics in this state.

bwiese
04-13-2006, 11:12 AM
Lets get some back and make Bill Lockyer do his job. We need to convince him it isn't his fault the legislature wrote bad legislation and to just do his job.

Um, let's rephrase that: actually the perfectly fine law written by the legislature does not need updating and clearly expected Bill Lockyer to do his job.

xenophobe
04-13-2006, 11:27 AM
Our image has to be clear to those who are on the moderate side, the swing vote.

The 'Moderate' swing vote was, and still is, in favor of banning assault weapons and one of the primary reasons why they have been banned TWICE in California.

If you can't understand the fact that there is no RKBA in California, the fact that AWs have been banned twice since 1989, the fact that for the most part handguns have been severly restricted (SB-15), then you don't understand the general direction California law has moved in the past 27+ years. Things will not be better, no matter what we do. Guns or owners cannot be more villified than they already are here in California.

Don't pretend like if you stroke your masters they will treat you nicer than if you tell them to piss off.

Scope
04-13-2006, 8:22 PM
Ha! We need a T-shirt that says: "Would Jesus own off-list lowers?"

"He (Jesus) said to them 'But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have an assault weapon, sell your cloak and buy one.'"

Luke 22:36 (NIV/NRA):D

marklbucla
04-13-2006, 8:23 PM
I thought that was from the NIV/GOA translation.

bg
04-13-2006, 10:07 PM
I agree with the original poster. Gun-owners trying to make assault weapons look even more evil hurts the cause when everything is considered. It hurts a lot more than the benefit <30,000 people might get if their receiver is listed. And you know it will take a court case, which might not succeed, to get the DOJ to reverse its position of the Feb. 1 memo. And what if they don't list your specific make and model of receiver?

You still have a very effective tool with a Mini series or M-14 series, or any tube-fed auto shotgun with a pistolgrip. Do you want your logic on the lowers to be turned around to get these banned as well?

Meanwhile, my lower is gathering dust in a DOJ safe, and if it is added to the list before I get it back, I have a feeling the DOJ will just send it along with the 218 others to be melted down.
I sure don't ! My mini as well as myself haven't done
one thing wrong. Don't get me on this AW list deal..

There's every chance the next Atty Gen will be Jerry Brown, Mayor
of Oakland. All one has to see is how restrictive gun laws are
there..What do you think will happen if he gets in ? With
over 4,000,000.00 in the war chest he stands a real
good chance of winning. Remember there hasn't been
a pro gun person in any of the top spots since Wilson.

DsF_Saint
04-13-2006, 11:25 PM
"Things will not be better, no matter what we do. Guns or owners cannot be more villified than they already are here in California."

So what is it you are proposing? It is apparent my suggestion of organizing a campaign to counter what we can, is not appropriate or acceptable to you.

From your posts it appears some of you are simply venting your frustrations, and I can say, you are preaching to the choir my friends.

You have very talented folks in here from all walks of life, and depending on the numbers we are able to organize, we could do considerably well. Only if we are on the same page though. Your passion is an asset that should be used to change things by involvement and organization.

To give up hope, and believe all is lost does none of us any good. The numbers in the lower sales alone, show an idea of how many people are interested in weapons. I am sure the Admin could give us an idea of how many people have joined the forums since the lower issue came up.

You might think I just have some Polly Anna attitude, but I truly believe this forum has the ability to provide a tool necessary to change things in our favor.

jdberger
04-13-2006, 11:58 PM
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=30266&highlight=rkba

Check the above thread.

Though it appears that there are a lot of gun owners, few are willing to give up their weekends mowing the lawn to do anything. But in any event, I'm in. PM me and I'll see how I can help.

xenophobe
04-14-2006, 12:09 AM
DsF_Saint, as of now all you've done is suggest. I've been 'in the fight' to one degree or another since before Roberti Roos went into effect. I've been there and I keep fighting, though I know it's a lost cause..... letter mailing campaigns to make people aware of the implications of the Robert-Roos 89 law urging people to mail their senators and assemblymen, mailing postpaid card to people who supposedly gave a rats ***, mailed off fliers for the Recall Roberti, gathering signatures for it too... paying for hundreds in stamps out of my own pocket, trying to gather signatures anywhere I could find them...

We accomplished one thing, Senator Roberti ended up spending all the funds he was going to use to run for State Treasurer. So we didn't really accomplish a recall, but we kept him from running for another state office... I know dozens of people rallying for support.

In 89, nobody cared, and those that really did wanted them banned. In 99 nobody cared, and those who did bought a lot of firearms, in 2005 nobody cared, and the last day of .50 BMG sales in California, our store closed early and quietly. It was a very sad day. Nobody cared.... More people care now, and we're buying multiple off list lowers, and there is nothing wrong with making this public. No matter how hard we try, one school shooting would overshadow whatever we can say or do here 1000 times over. California is already a lost cause. Period.

The only people who care about these things are the people who want them listed and over and done with. In this small facet of the California gun world, this doesn't really matter, except to a very small fraction of a percentage of the population. Nobody else cares. Nothing that can happen here will change that, or worsen the situation here... As a matter of fact, making a big fuss about this can only improve things in the long run.

jdberger
04-14-2006, 12:21 AM
BTW, Xeno...either you can mail in the completed petitions you have or toss them. I tried to make it down there today, but my kids voted fish store over gun store. The leopard on the wall didn't sway them.

Thanks for your (and your store's) effort.

chris
04-14-2006, 1:11 AM
i agree we have lost our collective butts on the AW issue twice. in 99 there was a petition out to veto the governor. does anyone remember that? I sure do since then we have lost big and continue. the climate in the capitol is take 'em away. we know this and can argue and rant about this all day long. we need to do something. i hope the NRA is doing something. they better since we are the ones losing big. it is an uphill battle nonetheless. I can tell you this if we wait to make the AG do his job good luck he's gonna be busy running for governor. what really needs to put out that has been said before. the public needs to know that THEIR electected pfficials lied to them on getting rid of so called AW's. guys they failed the law is a complete joke. the registration period for the 99 law was and is a complete failure. they have no idea what they are doing in Sacramento at all. i can rant all day long on how lame our government. but we have the government we deserve.

i see the signs of defeat everyday in the news about Iraq and i'll tell you another thing. I'm here and we are kicking their butts. so we can win but it will take lots of time and tons of money. writing letters is good but you need to flood them and their e-mail boxes and fax machines need to jam. let us use the pool of great talent we have.
this is the end of my rant.

accordingtoome
04-14-2006, 1:19 AM
NRA?? hmm i remember reading about the first rule of holding a line of defense. If your getting your butt kicked then retreat to a safer posistion and hold it. cali is lost if not now then in ten years or so.

xenophobe
04-14-2006, 1:33 AM
BTW, Xeno...either you can mail in the completed petitions you have or toss them. I tried to make it down there today, but my kids voted fish store over gun store. The leopard on the wall didn't sway them.

Thanks for your (and your store's) effort.

No problem... You got all but the last 3 or 5 signatures, sadly those got thrown out like two or three days later when it announced it was over.

I was actually talking about Recall Roberti petition signatures in that previous post which was directed at DsF Saint, not you, just in case you were wondering. lol

gigarange
04-14-2006, 2:06 AM
I never said we should do nothing, I said we should spin it in our favor. The thing that really gets me is that gun owners are pushing for the anti's to do something.

I bought lowers, I want them listed too but telling the public Lockyer hasn't done his job looks just plain dumb to me. The whole reason this started is because he "hasn't done his job." But now that some of you have them its time to call him out? How hypocritical can you possibly look? It's ok for us to buy them up then push for them to not let us buy them?

I can't believe how stupid this looks to me, I can only imagine what they could do to really turn this. What is your rush? Like I said before it will not be a list they want to update week after week. They will take their time, so one huge comprehensive list will come out first. Look at all the people having issues with .50 registrations. Those are about as simple as it gets and people still make them more complicated than they need to be.

I can just see the off list buyer getting confused because they had to register their Noveske by July 1st but not have to register their LMT until August 1st. They are going to make it as straightforward as possible for us and them.

I guess I just see it differently than a lot of you do. I look at a surge of 30,000 plus firearms into the state that otherwise wouldn't be here and see a victory for us. There is no more crime with these receivers than there was without them. As the owner of even 1 of these how can you justify saying they are so bad and evil needing to be banned?

CA DOJ is probably sitting in their office wondering why you are trying to make it so easy for them. Even if this does get to the public with that stupid web site and garbage press releases what are they going to say? Yes these gun owners found a way around the law, was there any consequence as to the safety of the California citizens? No.

This whole topic gets me fired up to the point that I can't convey how stupid I think this make them ban them campaign really is. Good luck I give up and now see why the laws here are messed up and we can't even get enough petitions signed to get an ammendment on the ballott.

Benellishooter
04-14-2006, 4:50 AM
Yep. Pushing to have DOJ outlaw so-called off list receivers is the dumbest, most selfish thing I have seen. It is the "I have mine" mentality. Besides, they are following THEIR playbook, not OURS. Expect legislation or confiscation in the future.

Reality break - fix the 10 mag like the law says. If the SHTF, it takes 33.2 seconds to make your AR fully functional.

tenpercentfirearms
04-14-2006, 7:49 AM
You guys don't get it! If we wait forever, then there might not be a list, but legislation. Legislation is going to say "you cannot build these up". I can live with that, but I don't want to. So yes, it is selfish of me to want to see a list, there is nothing wrong with self interest. It is the motivation that makes our country what it is.

If we can get a list soon, then it will be up to the courts to decide if we can build them up or not. That is a much better course of action for everyone who bought a lower. I am sorry, but this thing has been going for 5 months now! If you haven't heard about off-list lowers, then you simply aren't paying attention and probably wouldn't want one anyway.

This for the greater collective good attitude should be just as alarming as the selfish attitude in your eyes. This is not communist Soviet Union. Not everyone is entitled to what everyone else has. Either you have the knowledge and the money to make a off-list lower happen or you don't. If you miss out, then you might want to start paying attention to the gun rights scene more often.

Sorry, it is much better for us to have fully functioning ARs than for everyone to have nuetered ARs. It really is that simple. If people wanted neutered ARs,there is nothing wrong with them buying a FAB-10, a Vulcan, or Bushmaster at anytime. We don't want nuetered ARs and for the people who think we are being selfish, sorry, I have nothing more to say to you. The idea of collective society has obviously seeped into your system and you think it is better for everyone to suffer equally like good communists instead of letting those that pay attention and work hard enjoy the fruits of their labor.

Either you get one or you don't. You can call me selfish if you want, it is partially true. I didn't sell off-list lowers because I love all of you guys. I sold them because I love all of you guys and I made lots of money. I am not selling uppers and parts because I love you guys. I do it because I love you guys and I make lots of money. Again, this whole thing is not mutually exclusive. I can want a list and tell my buddies to hurry and get one at the same time.

Time is running out. Get one while you can. Bill Lockyer do your job.

jdberger
04-14-2006, 7:59 AM
Yeah! What he said.....^^

The concept is a little complex and looks like it is selfish and hurts us, but it doesn't....

Besides, I just bought all this stuff from Magpul that is useless unless they list. :D

DsF_Saint
04-14-2006, 9:11 AM
I believe you, you do not agree with me. :) I appreciate any collecting of signatures or any funds you may have put forth out of your pocket, in the fight for our rights.

My suggestions are just that. I wish I had the opportunity or the time available to lead a fight. I am here on this forum for three reasons.

1). To educate myself on this topic. This forum has provided me with a lot of different avenues. I followed BWiese synopsis in order to research this topic. I have read several documents and had interviews with several different experts on this topic (no, not just the DOJ).

2). For my own private gain. I am also a member of the off-list club.

3). To add input into these discussions by giving my opinion.

I am a full time law enforcement officer working close to 60 hours a week (including mandatory overtime and court). This is not the only fight I am involved in. I am monitoring this discussion and several others on top of that.

Again I am asking you. If it is a lost cause, what is it you are suggesting? Is it your hope that someone will read your posts, get enraged and do something drastic, possibly illegal (so that you may benefit)?

Please do not take this as a personal attack, but on the other hand, there is no need to personally attack me or any other member, for sharing our opinions on this or any other public forum.

Thanks for your time

bwiese
04-14-2006, 9:34 AM
Yep. Pushing to have DOJ outlaw so-called off list receivers is the dumbest, most selfish thing I have seen. It is the "I have mine" mentality. Besides, they are following THEIR playbook, not OURS. Expect legislation or confiscation in the future.

Reality break - fix the 10 mag like the law says. If the SHTF, it takes 33.2 seconds to make your AR fully functional.

Dave,

Think it thru. IMHO it'd be more selfish of those wanting to continue to acquire crippled FAB10-like contraptions to stop early adopters' 35,000+ off-list lowers from becoming AWs.

We certainly want as many lowers as possible in CA. Lord knows I've been trying - I was at the SHOT Show hounding off-list vendors to send in as many lowers as possible, explaining the CA laws to them. (CMMG finally just turned around and is shipping lowers to any CA FFL.)

We KNOW some legislation will happen. Maybe not immediately (from appearances now, though there are still risks in the next 3 months), maybe gov signature won't happen, etc. There is risk on the opposition's side too. There still may be one cycle left in the 'name game' as well.

For those happy with fixed mags, get a FAB10 or Vulcan.

If we wait too long, NO ONE will have a new assault weapon. I'd rather have 35K new AWs in CA than 100,000 fixed mag setups.

Benellishooter
04-14-2006, 9:56 AM
bwiese, I see what you are saying. But, I disagree for two reasons:

1. Having gunowners call for the gov't to take action that appears anti-gun hurts us long term. It makes us look like we support gun control and legitimizes the other side.

2. Our off list lowers are much different than the FAB-10. Mine can become a real AR15 in 33.2 seconds if the SHTF. In the mean time, it is not an assault weapon. My 13 year old and I can shoot it all day.

Bill, you have done more for this effort than I have. I respect your efforts and contribution. I just see it differently and believe it is not a good idea for us to call the DOJ out. Things have a way of screwing up everyones pre-conceived ideas whenever a gov't agency actually does something.

Dave

bwiese
04-14-2006, 10:11 AM
Dave...

1. Having gunowners call for the gov't to take action that appears anti-gun hurts us long term. It makes us look like we support gun control and legitimizes the other side.

If I thought SB23/RR had any chance of being overturned or significantly weakend, etc. and that all this off-list activity would compromise this, I'd back off.

There is ALREADY activity deep in bowels of legislature addressing semiauto rifles, and some legislators already knew of the off-list lower situation before Christmas.

Whatever we do will not stop this. The idea that if we're nice, they'll back off just doesn't fly.
We can't lick our masters' hands and they pat us on the back.

The fact that we fight back and exploit openings may in fact ultimately slow down the pace of lawmaking in this area as they might realize they can't always throw something over the wall and have it stick. Since many gun control laws are quickly-drafted feel-good measures for quick political gain, we might actually be helped.

Also, people/antigunners in general don't think of off-list rifles as much different than AWs. They're all Evil Black Rifles to them, and the laws about allowed features are all "inside baseball" to them.


2. Our off list lowers are much different than the FAB-10. Mine can become a real AR15 in 33.2 seconds if the SHTF. In the mean time, it is not an assault weapon. My 13 year old and I can shoot it all day.

Yes, this is a nice small convenience. But there are other rifles (esp w/ chance of hoped-for Beretta RX4 coming up) that fill 223 semiauto role, so those options are not closed - whereas if we move fast and right, we have a chance of having 35,000 - 60K new AWs in CA. To me, the more AWs around the more accustomed LEOs will be to seeing them, making things perhaps a bit more relaxed.

Bill, you have done more for this effort than I have. I respect your efforts and contribution. I just see it differently and believe it is not a good idea for us to call the DOJ out. Things have a way of screwing up everyones pre-conceived ideas whenever a gov't agency actually does something.


Thanks for the kind words. Our situation is actually helped by the structure/arrangement and history of AW laws and how they play against court cases, and the exact nature of how the regulatory vs statutory laws play against each other. Any other formulation would likely be worse for us.

So in some ways what the DOJ does can HELP us. Any other situation, I'd agree with you. But DOJ is rather constrained in some of these areas between the way the laws, regulations and court decisions play against each other. We could be in a far worse situation.

Benellishooter
04-14-2006, 10:29 AM
I would just like to go on record as saying that I am in no way advocating we lick anyones hand or that we cower or plead for our rights.

I am just saying that is it not smart to provoke or humiliate the DOJ. They did not do their job updating the list. We should be glad and we should take advantage of it. These public attempts to rub their nose in it causes them to loose face. People who have lost face fight harder to get even. Why would you want your enemy to fight harder?

That will not be good for us as gunowners. Fight smart.

bwiese
04-14-2006, 10:42 AM
I am just saying that is it not smart to provoke or humiliate the DOJ. They did not do their job updating the list. We should be glad and we should take advantage of it. These public attempts to rub their nose in it causes them to loose face. People who have lost face fight harder to get even. Why would you want your enemy to fight harder?

Because the leaders won't be there for that long, and we have them at a vulnerable point. Too much noise and it's "stop this sh*t, we don't need this grief". Those below will just do whatever it takes to keep the budget going.

45Auto
04-14-2006, 10:59 AM
There's every chance the next Atty Gen will be Jerry Brown, Mayor
of Oakland.
Not only that, its a good bet that Bill (I Hate Your Guns) Lockyer will be the next Treasurer. After that, he's got his sights set on the Governor's chair. And he is one bad apple when it comes to gun laws. He hates guns and he hates gun owners. And there is probably not one thing we can do to keep him out of power. The entire state is in the grip of liberal Democrats; the current Gov is what I call a "Progressive Republican" which is the nice term for damn liberal. As much as I want to see a reversal of Cal gun laws, its only so much wishful thinking on my part. No, I look to see the damn ammo serial number bill, the equally damned "pistols must stamp a serial number on every round fired" law, and a host of equally egregious laws coming down the road over the next ten years. It will be a miracle if anyone is "allowed" to own guns in Cal in 20 years.

xenophobe
04-14-2006, 11:37 AM
Think of this... possible new legislation could:

1) Deem that any new AR or AK series receivers are legal to buy, but only for replacement. Lower purchases cannot be built up into new guns, even fixed magazine firearms at all. They could qualify these as legal replacement items for registered AWs (and the reason they are legal to purchase), but that the only way to build one up is if you do so to replace worn/broken parts on an existing AW.

2) Ban the specification of the 5.56 magazine well specification stating any firearm with "external" magazine is an assault weapon. You would have a 10- round fixed AW that you may only transport in a hard, locked case and only to and from the range to your house, etc... AWs have transportation restrictions.

If you hadn't noticed the main page of Calguns.net, do you see how much anti-gun legislation is currently active? Pushing the AG or the public to pressure the AG won't make legislation more prevalent... microstamping firearms, ammo serialzation, several different ammo bans... and who knows what other stuff will be introduced next year.

Read what's going on.... AWs are banned, handguns are severely limited, and they're going after hunting rights and ammo now. There isn't much more they can do except make you pay a yearly certification fee on your house as a 'safe storage place' for firearms, or that you are required to have a gun safe and have regular inspections.....

The media needs to know about this, because Lockyer needs mud in his face for the next election... otherwise he will become Treasurer, and then probably run for Governor...

Sgt Raven
04-14-2006, 3:17 PM
Think of this... possible new legislation could:.........snip..........
The media needs to know about this, because Lockyer needs mud in his face for the next election... otherwise he will become Treasurer, and then probably run for Governor...

+1 :rolleyes: ;) :p

Wild Bill
04-14-2006, 5:22 PM
All I have to say about this is" if you keep poking the big dog with a stick, you are bound to get bitten!".:(

6172crew
04-14-2006, 7:29 PM
All I have to say about this is" if you keep poking the big dog with a stick, you are bound to get bitten!".:(

If we werent poking the dog there would be no Offlist Lowers.

Fact is the DOJ said they were going to list and didnt. Want to know why they didnt list?

1. They plan on making a new law...period.:cool:

kenc9
04-14-2006, 8:00 PM
Here is one problem they are having, and this isn't all of them. Check out this list of just AK47 types, and then you have all the AR lowers. I am not sure you could get all of these...WOW!

Link deleted, why make it easy? I doubt they are smart enough but I agree!

artherd
04-14-2006, 10:45 PM
If we werent poking the dog there would be no Offlist Lowers.
Werd. .

kantstudien
04-14-2006, 10:57 PM
All I have to say about this is" if you keep poking the big dog with a stick, you are bound to get bitten!".:(

That's right, but gun owners are the "big dog" and we need to make Lockyer and any anti-gun scumbag liberal POS our beyotch.

Benellishooter
04-15-2006, 6:57 AM
There is a difference between just pissing someone off and winning. Concentrate on winning (getting the most lowers in state) rather than making your opponent mad. Mad people fight harder.

It is about winning. Not your ego.

No matter how you look at it, when gunowners start calling for anti-gun legislation, it hurts us long term.

6172crew
04-15-2006, 7:41 AM
There is a difference between just pissing someone off and winning. Concentrate on winning (getting the most lowers in state) rather than making your opponent mad. Mad people fight harder.

It is about winning. Not your ego.

No matter how you look at it, when gunowners start calling for anti-gun legislation, it hurts us long term.

Nobody is working as harder to get guys hooked up with lowers in my area (did anyone see my flyer at Chabot?:D ) The fact is one of the guys in the DOJ changed the deal before we did anything. He suggested that they not list and start working on changing the law and that way all that was sold were paper weights.:mad:

Look beyond the "this doesnt feel right" and look at the fact that we arent going to be able to do anything with these receivers unless the receiver is declaired a AW by the AG.

How would you go about it? How many have you tried to sell? How many times have you called the gun freindly law makers this month/year? How many calls have you made to the Ed W. at the NRA and asked him what he would do? How many flyers have you printed out in your area? How many group buys have you setup for lowers? How many letters from the DOJ do you have on file that you can share with the others on this board? What has Dana M. up at the DOJ said lately about what you can do with your lower?

You need to start backing up your statments with something other than this isnt right and we shouldnt do it. The dont disturb the the beast thinking is out and its time to poke holes in all the gun laws.


Do you really think that if we kept our mouths shut they would let this go on for years? :confused:

Renron
04-15-2006, 11:06 AM
Our best hope for "listing" our lowers is that this is an election year.
The #1 thing these people (like mR. Lookiehere) fear is bad publicity. The media gets a hold of a story and it spreads like wildfire, no amount of campaign funding will overcome the spotted reputation for not doing his job of updating the list. The legislation is already in place making these AW. The gun taking politicians will not stop if we placate (sp?) them by being quiet and play by their rules. If we did we (all 30,000+ of us) would not have any lowers at all, think about that.
Point is... when given an opportunity, like the elections, we must take full advantage of the possibilities as they present themselves. Sitting quietly in the corner with our hands folded in our laps only gets our guns taken away quietly and without a fight.
Do nothing and nothing gets done!
Renron

Sgt Raven
04-15-2006, 5:27 PM
.....snip....rather than making your opponent mad. Mad people fight harder.

It is about winning...snip...

Anger is our friend, mad people make mistakes, You need a cool head in battle. ;)

alex00
04-15-2006, 7:56 PM
If new legislation is passed banning the off list lowers our current lowers would be grandfathered in. The legislature cannot retroactively make something a crime. The current lowers are legal to buy. They are legal to assemble in a way that doesn't violate existing law.

The best they could hope for with legislation is stopping the future sales or assembly of the lowers. It is the same reason that they had to allow for a registration period for AW owners during the previous bans. They did not allow registration of all the AWs out of the kindness of their heart. It was something they had to do.

The off list lowers we own, are firearms. They can be assembled and used in compliance with existing laws. There is nothing the Legislature can do to take away our lowers or stop us from assembling them today.

It is commonplace for California to enact "knee-jerk" legislation, but it has no affect on existing items. Look at little things like seatbelts in cars. There is nothing they can do to make me put a shoulder belt in my '68 Bronco. If someone drives drunk into a school and kills a bunch of kids they might make DUI a death penalty offense. The original drunk can't be charged under the new.

The real harm new legislation could have on current off list lowers are to those that are not assembled as functional weapons at the time of enactment. They can word the new law to prevent you from assembling the gun after the effective date, but they can't make you take your fully functional gun apart.

When I registered my .50BMG DOJ tried to say that although I was registering it as an AW I could not add AW features. Never mind that its bolt action, the point is the AW law does not prohibit me from doing it. If someone made a kit to convert my bolt action single shot into a magazine fed, semi auto, folding stock, pistol gripped .50BMG I could put it on. No matter how much some gun grabbing lib doesn't like the idea; it's not banned by statute.

You can only be arrested and charged for a crime, written in the code
(Penal, Vehicle, etc.) for which a punishment is prescribed, (fine of $1000, 2 years state prison, etc.)

Our fear in future legislation before they list our lowers is only that we cannot add the AW features with a detachable mag. We will still have our functioning, albeit neutered rifles and we can have fun at the range playing with our toys. Everyone knows that in a moment's notice we can turn a few screws or pop a rivet and have a gun just like someone living a few hours away in NV.

6172crew
04-15-2006, 9:02 PM
Alex1200, Your reply-fu is strong but your forgetting that our motherloving DOJ buddies believe its not legal to build our lowers into anything although a few of the folks up there slipped and said its ok.

If a Libtard judge agrees with Dana mckinnon and the boys we will have paperweights.

Do I think we have a good chance winning that case...Yes I do but that doesnt change the fact that they think a law already is on paper that says you cant add features to a AW.

12267.1 or some crap, its always the same law and the lawyers seem to think we cant do anything with the receiver.

Now Im sure you would agree that they are going to make a new law to keep the lower thing from ahppining again and if thats true Id like to have a Reg'd AW instead of a fixed 10 rounder.

If folks want to have a fixed 10 rounder then buy a Vulcan or Bushmaster 10 rounder, in the mean time Im hoping they clowns list my receiver so I can put the thing together.

Make a call to the DOJ Monday and ask Dana if what you said is what he thinks is going to happen.

alex00
04-15-2006, 9:34 PM
6172crew,
I don't disagree with you at all. My point was that just because the DOJ thinks something is illegal, does not make it illegal.

They are no more a legislative branch than the local police. They can interpret all they want, but they have no enforcement power over things that are not specifically outlined in the law.

My legally purchased lower is no more illegal than my mini 14. Until I add the evil features they are essentially in the same class.

Yes, I really want the ability to put detachable magazines through my gun at the range. I won't be terribly heartbroken if I can't.

As for calling the DOJ... I'm done with that. No one is on the same page over there. They quote law that does not exist and sound like they make things up as they go.

Pablo
04-16-2006, 1:17 AM
Nobody is working as harder to get guys hooked up with lowers in my area (did anyone see my flyer at Chabot?:D )

I went to Chabot today, damn it was cold and rainy but on my way to the bathroom I saw your flyer. You really are working hard to spread the word!;)

Thank you.

xenophobe
04-16-2006, 2:18 AM
When I registered my .50BMG DOJ tried to say that although I was registering it as an AW I could not add AW features. Never mind that its bolt action, the point is the AW law does not prohibit me from doing it. If someone made a kit to convert my bolt action single shot into a magazine fed, semi auto, folding stock, pistol gripped .50BMG I could put it on. No matter how much some gun grabbing lib doesn't like the idea; it's not banned by statute.

Yes, it is. SB-23 banned a semi-automatic .50 BMG with detachable magazine, a pistol grip, folding stock, etc... was banned on Jan 1, 2000. You would be creating an assault weapon. A .50 BMG is not an assault weapon.

Please show me anywhere in the text of AB-50 where registration exempts you from previously existing law.

alex00
04-16-2006, 10:02 AM
Please show me anywhere in the text of AB-50 where registration exempts you from previously existing law.


It's not that AB50 exempts that behavior, but I now own a registered weapon that falls under the same penalty category as an AW. The law is written to include AW's and .50BMGs in the same breath. I'm not saying I'd want to be the one to test it, I just think there is room to wiggle under the law.

And it was really late at night when I wrote that... And I was on a pro-gun, screw the gun grabbers roll...

Stan_Humphries
04-16-2006, 11:06 AM
I don't think so. You'd do well to take note that the term Assault Weapon is listed seperately from .50 BMG. You don't have a registered Assault Weapon, you have a registered .50 BMG.

Remember that one of the things people are attacking about the DOJ Feb 1st Memo is that the statutes on the books don't reference any distinction by Category, and therefore an Assault Weapon is an Assault Weapon despite features added after registration... that's not the case with your .50 BMG b/c the statutes specifically list .50 BMG apart from Assault Weapons, thus creating a seperate category.

blacklisted
04-16-2006, 12:01 PM
I don't think so. You'd do well to take note that the term Assault Weapon is listed seperately from .50 BMG. You don't have a registered Assault Weapon, you have a registered .50 BMG.

Remember that one of the things people are attacking about the DOJ Feb 1st Memo is that the statutes on the books don't reference any distinction by Category, and therefore an Assault Weapon is an Assault Weapon despite features added after registration... that's not the case with your .50 BMG b/c the statutes specifically list .50 BMG apart from Assault Weapons, thus creating a seperate category.

That's correct. .50 BMG registration specifically exempts already registered assault weapons, and when you do register a .50 BMG, it's under a seperate penal code and is still subject to the "features ban".

xenophobe
04-16-2006, 12:33 PM
It's not that AB50 exempts that behavior, but I now own a registered weapon that falls under the same penalty category as an AW. The law is written to include AW's and .50BMGs in the same breath. I'm not saying I'd want to be the one to test it, I just think there is room to wiggle under the law.

That's what I thought as well, I was schooled on this, and when people were saying that their .50BMGs were being returned seperately as registered .50BMGs and not on their AW Registration Confirmation letters.... I've since changed my mind.

Benellishooter
04-16-2006, 12:43 PM
6172crew, you are wrong on so many levels. You claim we can't do anything with our receivers. False. I have four awesome legal AR-15 style rifles with 10 round mags bolted into my receiver. They are 30 seconds away from being real ARs if I needed them to be.

How would I go about it? I would keep my mouth shut and bring in as many receivers as possible. Yes. You will be able to bring in more by not publically calling for gun control, pizza parties, and some of the other dumb things I have heard to piss them off.

It is about winning. Smart armies don't execute captured soldiers because it makes the others fight harder. Smart armies don't surround their enemies because it makes them fight harder. Smart armies understand if they are weak or strong. We are weak. They are strong. Weak fighters use stealth and wear down their opponent. I know this is over your head.

But, you would rather mouth off and cause them to loose face so that they have to act. I would rather this off list lower go on for as long as possible.

alex00
04-16-2006, 2:20 PM
That's what I thought as well, I was schooled on this, and when people were saying that their .50BMGs were being returned seperately as registered .50BMGs and not on their AW Registration Confirmation letters.... I've since changed my mind.

You are all right, I was wrong. I guess I better find a way to fill the holes I cut for a detach mag on the 50... Will Bondo work?

What will they call our new category of AW? You already have the series AW's and the feature AW's. Maybe they could call it the "we screwed up and allowed a bunch of scary, bad, ugly guns into the state AW's"

I guess it doesn't really matter if I get a detachable magazine when all is said and done. There will be plenty of Illegal aliens to load one AR while I shoot the other AR. The perfect excuse for multiple lowers.

I could have a table full of pinned magazine lowers filled with 10 rounds. When one is empty I just pop off the upper and drop in a new lower. With practice I could be just as fast as with a detachable magazine. Maybe I can get a belt clip for multiple lowers and when the SHTF I can be well prepared, and LEGAL...

Outside the box.

6172crew
04-16-2006, 9:07 PM
Hey smart guy did the DOJ say it was ok to build up a Offlist lower?, you have a letter that can back up your internet commando fu? (No?) Maybe we should all listen to you and build whatever you say is good to go.

Lay off the whiskey, write a few letters to your elected officials and dont claim to know anything unless your willing to back it up.

Ive put more lowers into CA hands than you have eatin pizzas which seems impossible to you Pizza the hut. .:cool:




6172crew, you are wrong on so many levels. You claim we can't do anything with our receivers. False. I have four awesome legal AR-15 style rifles with 10 round mags bolted into my receiver. They are 30 seconds away from being real ARs if I needed them to be.

How would I go about it? I would keep my mouth shut and bring in as many receivers as possible. Yes. You will be able to bring in more by not publically calling for gun control, pizza parties, and some of the other dumb things I have heard to piss them off.

It is about winning. Smart armies don't execute captured soldiers because it makes the others fight harder. Smart armies don't surround their enemies because it makes them fight harder. Smart armies understand if they are weak or strong. We are weak. They are strong. Weak fighters use stealth and wear down their opponent. I know this is over your head.

But, you would rather mouth off and cause them to loose face so that they have to act. I would rather this off list lower go on for as long as possible.

Sgt Raven
04-16-2006, 9:21 PM
It is about winning. Smart armies don't execute captured soldiers because it makes the others fight harder. Smart armies don't surround their enemies because it makes them fight harder. Smart armies understand if they are weak or strong. We are weak. They are strong. Weak fighters use stealth and wear down their opponent. I know this is over your head.

You don't know much about war do you. Smart Armies do surround their enemies, then if they don't surender they'll destroy them. Or they leave them a way to escape and ambush them on their way out.

chickenfried
04-16-2006, 10:03 PM
WHOAAAAH WHOAAAAH Hold on let's not go doing something rash. That we may regret later.
Lay off the whiskey......